Trains.com

Airline Beats Up Doctor who wont give up seat

7291 views
68 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Rhododendron, OR
  • 1,516 posts
Posted by challenger3980 on Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:43 PM

I think that EGO, may have played a part in this, "We are NOT going to pay THAT MUCH, or charter someone ELSE'S plane, when we have one of our OWN going where we want to go"

 In the end chartering someone else's plane certainly would have been cheaper, and I am sure that the airline was concerned that if they DID pay a ridiculous buy out price on the passengers seat, it would be reported in either the main stream, or social media, and future buy outs would go to ridiculous amounts, in an increasing spiral. It could have set a precedent for the future, that would have involved much more than this one instance, and I imagine THAT is where the concern over the cost came in, in all future episodes, not this one time incident.

 It is real easy to in hindsight say they handled it HORRIBLY WRONG (Which they DID). We can certainly Hope that this Unfortunate incident will go a LOOOONG ways in preventing similar incidents in the FUTURE.

Doug

May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:30 PM

Buslist

so if that crew didn't get to Louisville and a flight the next morning was canceled, a Multimillion  $ aircraft ideled and numerous passengers missing vital meetings, you are OK with that? (And the dreading crew at the last minute doesn't necessarily reflect on issues at UAL's crew scheduling group, but could relate to flight delays (like incoming crew having insufficient time to rest) or planned flight canceled. 

You gave an excellent argument as to why there should be no caps on the compensation for denied boarding - even from the corporate profit and loss side. If the cost to the airline for the crew to miss the flight is that high, then the airline should be more than willing to pay out a good fraction of their avoided cost.

I would also wonder how much it would have cost to charter a flight to haul the crew.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:01 PM

    I've been wondering how they decide which passenger(s) to forcibly eject if there are not enough volunteers to accept the pay-off offers.   Do they put all the seat numbers in a hat and draw one out?   Do they put up a list of all passengers and throw a dart at it?

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, April 16, 2017 12:24 PM

Buslist

 

 
BaltACD

Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it.  Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count.  The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew.

Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME.  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had.  He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time.  Each of us have our own motivations.

 

 

 

so if that crew didn't get to Louisville and a flight the next morning was canceled, a Multimillion  $ aircraft ideled and numerous passengers missing vital meetings, you are OK with that? (And the dreading crew at the last minute doesn't necessarily reflect on issues at UAL's crew scheduling group, but could relate to flight delays (like incoming crew having insufficient time to rest) or planned flight canceled. 

 

You of all all people here should recognize how fluid these things are and how folks need to make split minute decisions. But all your trains ran on a strict timetable right?

 

 #1 As I understand the rules, passengers traveling together are not to be spilt up.

#2 Apparently the UAL ground person would not raise the offer (in UAL play money)above $800. Brilliant cost saving move.

#3 If you think this is the way to treat paying customers, then you had better not be in public or customer relations, or in advertising.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, April 16, 2017 7:11 AM

Buslist
Given that what is most troubling to me is the lack of understanding on members of this group how this sort of incident affects the transport network tomorrow. Hundreds delayed, lots of high value aircraft being nonproductive etc. 

Oh yeah, not really.   You do not board a full flight until you have the final manifest in hand.    Why United has to change boarding policy is beyond me, they should have had that in their boarding policy already as a security measure.    

Now if the airline screws up and that procedure is not followed.    Great then the dead-heading crew flies out on the next available flight and their original flight is either cancelled or delayed.    If that happens enough times the airline is not going to shrug it's shoulders.....it's going to find more competent employees instead.

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Sunday, April 16, 2017 2:31 AM

schlimm

 

 
CMStPnP

Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines.    Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline:  "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.

 

 

 

Agree.  What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified.  Fotunately most people were horrified.

 

 

Yes most horrified at the actions of the Cities DOA security officers ( the fact that they were told to quit wearing "Police" jackets and continued to do so ) raises significant questions about their supervision. But there are folks here that will claim UAL held guns to their head demanding the treatment the passenger got.

 

Given that what is most troubling to me is the lack of understanding on members of this group how this sort of incident affects the transport network tomorrow. Hundreds delayed, lots of high value aircraft being nonproductive etc. 

i could rant about a few that don't get it but it's not worth my time. But the folks that still think there is speed signaling on th UP West line will set us straight !

  • Member since
    November 2013
  • 1,097 posts
Posted by Buslist on Sunday, April 16, 2017 2:16 AM

BaltACD

Oscar Munoz and his minions blew it.  Forcing PAYING PASSENGERS off of a flight so the company employees can deadhead to the flights destination is wrong on too many levels to count.  The flight was not overbooked, it was fully sold and only had a seat shortage when United, through the incompetence of it's crew management department felt they needed to deadhead a crew.

Your ERROR does not create a EMERGENCY for ME.  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  A former boss of my LOVED getting bumped, and drove a hard bargin for it, most of the time round trip 1st class passage to any and all destinations that the carrier had.  He valued 'free' vacations more than getting home at the 'appointed' time.  Each of us have our own motivations.

 

so if that crew didn't get to Louisville and a flight the next morning was canceled, a Multimillion  $ aircraft ideled and numerous passengers missing vital meetings, you are OK with that? (And the dreading crew at the last minute doesn't necessarily reflect on issues at UAL's crew scheduling group, but could relate to flight delays (like incoming crew having insufficient time to rest) or planned flight canceled. 

 

You of all all people here should recognize how fluid these things are and how folks need to make split minute decisions. But all your trains ran on a strict timetable right?

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, April 15, 2017 1:43 PM

schlimm
Agree.  What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified.  Fotunately most people were horrified.

Yes it was one of the worlds most stupid decisions.  Even more stupid was not empowering local airline employees with the financial ability to handle the situation by raising the voucher payout limit.   Unfortunately, United is still kind of militaristic in this respect....everything needs approval from the top and folks are afraid to escalate to ask.     So you end up with idiotic decisions made by inexperienced low level folks with no clue.   Railroads suffer from this even today and it is no wonder they picked a former railroad executive as a perfect fit to run United.   Hand fits glove.

Does the airline have the power to remove passengers forcibly?   Yes.   Should it use it for routine or mundane purposes such as overbooking?   No.    Roughly akin to a Railroad Passenger Conductor setting out a noisy passenger in the middle of a desert.   Can it be done?  Yes.   Should it be done?   Probably not a good idea if you want to avoid manslaugher charges at some point.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Saturday, April 15, 2017 1:32 PM

Back in the days of Mad Men 1960s-1980 pre deregulation flying was much more civilised and we paid for the perks.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Saturday, April 15, 2017 10:44 AM

JPS1
However, many of them are within reasonable driving distance of a major airport. For example, Owensboro is 107 miles from Louisville. Or Johnstown, PA is 84 miles from the Pittsburgh Greater International Airport.

   Which seem like ideal distances for bus service.

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, April 15, 2017 9:23 AM

Seeing instances like this, plus business failures big and small, especially in what's supposed to be customer-centric enterprises I have to wonder just WHAT they teach in the various business schools and MBA mills around the country.

Common-sense customer relations and basic retailing sure doesn't seem to be part of the curriculum.  These people, supposedly the "best and the brightest" make mistakes the owner of a mom-and-pop corner grocery store wouldn't make.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Saturday, April 15, 2017 3:52 AM

CMStPnP

Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines.    Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline:  "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.

 

Agree.  What is surprising is there are some on here who seem to think what UAL- Republic did was justified.  Fotunately most people were horrified.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Saturday, April 15, 2017 12:38 AM

Folks it was actually a Republic Airlines flight and because the plane had United Express paint.........it was reported as United Airlines.    Still have to give TV's Cramer for the most witty anti-Munoz headline:  "Coal does not complain but Passengers sure do"..........I had a good chuckle with that for a while as a former CSX stockholder.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: KS
  • 999 posts
Posted by SFbrkmn on Friday, April 14, 2017 1:38 PM

After this I will, at all costs, try to avoid United in the future. United was deadheading crewmembers and needed psgrs to give up seats in exchange for a voucher on another flight. Freight rr crews routinlely deadhead on Amtrak. The BNSF general order, which covers deadheading procedures, states that deadhhead employees are entitled to seating on Amtrak trains. That is a policy in writing--outside of that it means nothing. If the train is packed to the nill, no psgr is going to be asked to give up their seating. It is not out of the norm for deadheads to be given an empty roomette in leiu of a coach seat.  Amtrak will not throw riders off the train for freight crews. Not happening, never will. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Altadena, CA
  • 340 posts
Posted by 081552 on Friday, April 14, 2017 1:03 PM

Would the Trains Forums moderator please move all of these postings to the "Airlines" section?

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Friday, April 14, 2017 12:42 PM

Most often a D/H crew is because the trip they are covering the previous crew ran into HOS problems.  You cannot leave an airport ( take off time ) for the next one if enroute time will run you over HOS before landing. After landing has never counted.  If unanticipated long tasi time can cause crew to return because they will exceed HOS enroute.

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Friday, April 14, 2017 9:10 AM

D.Carleton

 

 
Paul Milenkovic

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

 

 

If the frequency of this regional flight isn't all that high then why were they deadheading a crew there in the first place?

 

But seriously folks, I may have been just a tad facetious. However, the underlying point still stands: we have way too many short haul flights in this country and no realistic way of resolving it.

 

 

United flys to Chicago, Denver, Houston, DC, and Newark out of Louisville.  The crew could have been for anyone of those destinations.

 

As an aside, I have encountered far more unruly passsengers while riding trains vs planes.  

An "expensive model collector"

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: South Dakota
  • 1,592 posts
Posted by Dakguy201 on Friday, April 14, 2017 9:10 AM

A McIntosh

At the risk of veering off topic, one of the things being eliminated from the proposed Trump budget is the essential air service subsidy, as well as privatizing air traffic control. What affect, if any, would this have on regional flights such as this, as well as air service to smaller cities?

I live in a MSA of about 170,000 people.  For years, the essential air program provided about $1 million a year to Delta for 2 commuter flights a day to the Twin Cities.  A few years ago when the service came up for renewal, American offered 2 daily flights to O'Hare for the same money.  Since then, they started a trip to Dallas/Ft Worth at no cost to the Feds.  When the last program renewal rolled around, American announced they were foregoing the subsidy entirely.  

I ride those planes several times a year; they are almost always sold out.  Of course, they are smaller commuter jets with the cramped seating, etc. that is the standard these days.  It's 90 minutes of misery.

However, the rails don't leave me with a reasonable choice.  West of the Mississippi, we fly, we drive or we just don't go. 

  • Member since
    February 2016
  • From: Texas
  • 1,552 posts
Posted by PJS1 on Friday, April 14, 2017 9:08 AM

[quote user="A McIntosh"] 

At the risk of veering off topic, one of the things being eliminated from the proposed Trump budget is the essential air service subsidy, as well as privatizing air traffic control. What affect, if any, would this have on regional flights such as this, as well as air service to smaller cities? /quote]

This was not an Essential Air Service Program flight.  As of October 2016, according to the U.S. DOT, only two cities in Kentucky, Owensboro and Paducah, have Essential Air Service Program flights.

If the Trump Administration is successful in eliminating the Essential Air Service Program, which I support, most of the qualifying communities would lose their commercial airline service.  However, many of them are within reasonable driving distance of a major airport.  For example, Owensboro is 107 miles from Louisville.  Or Johnstown, PA is 84 miles from the Pittsburgh Greater International Airport.

Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII

  • Member since
    December 2012
  • 279 posts
Posted by A McIntosh on Friday, April 14, 2017 8:13 AM

D.Carleton

 

 
Paul Milenkovic

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

 

 

If the frequency of this regional flight isn't all that high then why were they deadheading a crew there in the first place?

 

But seriously folks, I may have been just a tad facetious. However, the underlying point still stands: we have way too many short haul flights in this country and no realistic way of resolving it.

 

At the risk of veering off topic, one of the things being eliminated from the proposed Trump budget is the essential air service subsidy, as well as privatizing air traffic control. What affect, if any, would this have on regional flights such as this, as well as air service to smaller cities?

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Friday, April 14, 2017 12:09 AM

Paul Milenkovic

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

If the frequency of this regional flight isn't all that high then why were they deadheading a crew there in the first place?

But seriously folks, I may have been just a tad facetious. However, the underlying point still stands: we have way too many short haul flights in this country and no realistic way of resolving it.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Thursday, April 13, 2017 8:58 PM

D.Carleton

The real issue of course (for this board) is, why was this doctor or anyone else on a plane in Chicago for Louisville? The distance is 300 miles and as a civilized society there should be fast and frequent rail service between these points, one of which doesn't have any passenger rail service whatsoever. The moral is simple: a lack of basic rail service results in gross uncivil behavior.

 

C'mon, this "civilized society" argument is overused.

The flight was a Regional Jet -- barely as many seats as a single railroad coach.  The reason there was an argument over the seat is that the frequency of those Regional Jet flights isn't all that high.

Seriously, is Chicago-Louisville on anyone's list of accelerated-speed corridors let alone HSR?  Other city pairs are much higher in priority and Chicago-Louisville will continue to be served by a Regional Jet for a long time.  Or a motorcoach bus.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 1,199 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Thursday, April 13, 2017 7:48 PM

The real issue of course (for this board) is, why was this doctor or anyone else on a plane in Chicago for Louisville? The distance is 300 miles and as a civilized society there should be fast and frequent rail service between these points, one of which doesn't have any passenger rail service whatsoever. The moral is simple: a lack of basic rail service results in gross uncivil behavior.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 5:49 PM

Seen passengers get roughed up at Greyhound Terminals all the time. Seen paying passengers left standing at the gate and then thrown out into a cold snowstorm when the bus is full. As for myself on Amtrak was phisically escorted and put out of Union Station at closing time even though I had a ticket because the destination was within commuter distance (the ticket was 15.00 but far enough not to be able to walk there.

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 5:44 PM

Thank You!

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 9:17 PM

BaltACD
 

Sometimes one needs to SHOUT!

 

Yes, I agree.  Sometimes.  Sometimes.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:17 PM

Paul Milenkovic
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded. 

If the United crew management is so incompetent that the permitted the flight to board WITHOUT having confirmed takers for 'denied boarding' then all the guilt falls to United's incompetence.

BaltACD:

All-caps in Internet ettiquette is considered shouting at someone.  Your writing has always been very clear to me and I get what you are saying in normal words.

I could study the FARs on this, but my understanding is that this passenger was at the very least guilty of "interfering with a flight crew."  There are all kinds of reasons why a crew may ask you to disembark their airplane -- maybe they are over their takeoff weight, in this case, they had to position another crew, maybe because the original crew at their destination was "dead on hours."

It might be very bad PR for United Airlines and their contracted regional airline, a cop may get disciplined, the government in China may fume, "You complain about human rights but look what kind of Fascists you are in the U.S. to one of our people."  But as far as I can tell, as an airline passenger I don't have any kind of legal right to occupy a seat, even after boarding.  Unless someone cites legal authority on this, I don't think it works that way.

Sometimes one needs to SHOUT!

Munoz was #2 in my former employer's chain of command and decided to jump ship for United.  His PR performance in the recent United problems shows why he had to leave CSX, and his board may very well ask for him to leave United.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:13 PM

BaltACD
 
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

 

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded. 

If the United crew management is so incompetent that the permitted the flight to board WITHOUT having confirmed takers for 'denied boarding' then all the guilt falls to United's incompetence.

 

BaltACD:

All-caps in Internet ettiquette is considered shouting at someone.  Your writing has always been very clear to me and I get what you are saying in normal words.

I could study the FARs on this, but my understanding is that this passenger was at the very least guilty of "interfering with a flight crew."  There are all kinds of reasons why a crew may ask you to disembark their airplane -- maybe they are over their takeoff weight, in this case, they had to position another crew, maybe because the original crew at their destination was "dead on hours."

It might be very bad PR for United Airlines and their contracted regional airline, a cop may get disciplined, the government in China may fume, "You complain about human rights but look what kind of Fascists you are in the U.S. to one of our people."  But as far as I can tell, as an airline passenger I don't have any kind of legal right to occupy a seat, even after boarding.  Unless someone cites legal authority on this, I don't think it works that way.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 8:10 PM

n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded.

Irrelevent.

$255M of irrelevant in todays stock market losses.  Remember - Perception is reality.  United has been percieved to be in the wrong.

And in the next couple of weeks, bargin hunters will drive the stock back up.

However, stock price has nothing to do with your original statement, that the price of you giving up your seat is "your decision."

With me they would be beating up a WASP! not a Chinese.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 5:50 PM

BaltACD

 

 
n012944
BaltACD
n012944
BaltACD
  If I feel that my seat on that flight is worth more to me than what the carrier is offering, that is MY DECISION, not the carriers.  

That being said, I don't understand why they needed four seats.  Unless the cockpit jumpseat was inop, one of the pilots of the deadhead crew should have been up there.  My guess was the pilots were acting like primadonnas and refused to fly in the jumpseat.  I encountered way too many pilots like that when I worked for an airline.

What airlines are required to give you when you have been IDB.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

The problem is - the passenger WAS NOT denied boarding.  He was thrown off AFTER he had occupied his assigned seat.  Laws are written in words, words have meaning.  He was removed from a flight he had lawfully boarded.

Irrelevent.

 

$255M of irrelevant in todays stock market losses.  Remember - Perception is reality.  United has been percieved to be in the wrong.

 

And in the next couple of weeks, bargin hunters will drive the stock back up.

 

However, stock price has nothing to do with your original statement, that the price of you giving up your seat is "your decision."

An "expensive model collector"

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy