Reek
Well-Known Member
It's a grey area- I see both sides of the argument. But of course one can't stop the urge of spinning it in the favor of the outrage. #FakeNews
Man Dragged off United Flight
- Thread starter Bonanzaman
- Start date
The ME3 and NAI watch and take note....
Zapphod Beblebrox
Inventor of the Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster
Pentagon hires United Airlines to forcibly remove Assad
http://ourfuturesucks.com/2017/04/1...-to-united-airlines-to-forcibly-remove-assad/
http://ourfuturesucks.com/2017/04/1...-to-united-airlines-to-forcibly-remove-assad/
This is populist anger and the meming was off the charts on Monday, especially after a post critical of United was taken down on Reddit with many alleging paid censorship on behalf of United. The news media was late to the story and probably would have preferred for it not to blow up as United pays them a good bit for ads and I don't believe the media in this country has much interest at all in biting the hand that feeds them.
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Ahh yes, the (insert your favorite local ambulance chaser) of the aviation world.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
hammerhat
Well-Known Member
JetBlue doesn't overbook, do they?
RDoug
Well-Known Member
See if you can find another attorney not on United's payroll that interprets that 45-page "contract" differently. But be careful if you do, because you make my point for me. If that "contract" can be interpreted multiple ways by different practicing attorneys, then United's clientele can't possibly be expected to interpret it correctly even if they could access it and had the time to wade through it.
RetiredATLATC
Well-Known Member
zmiller4
Well-Known Member
They'd wear twice as many if they heard about all the times the wifi stopped working. The humanity!
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
That works, but do it one way only. Don't buy a roundtrip ticket, they can cancel the return portion if you miss the flight outbound.
"I wasn't feeling well to continue, so I removed myself and just canceled my trip and stayed with some people I knew nearby...."
Avgirl
Well-Known Member
You do know that cancelling a flight because the crew wasn't able to be there to fly it is a DOT no no? Or, not giving the pilots the required rest before a flight? There are many rules that must be followed and sometimes that sucks for passengers. They just get to choose how much it sucks for them. This guy didn't choose wisely.
Most of those delays last week were due to crazy weather and crazy busy spring break travel being affected. I'm sure that mechanical issues were peppered in as well. You try taking care all of those passengers, along with the ones scheduled for the current flight and not having any disruptions.
Oh, is that why I feel the way I do about choosing who you travel on? Ha! You choose where you live, and how you live. Many routes only exist because of the needs of rural America and airlines have to provide service, if they don't, they don't receive their subsidies for those services. If one airline was lucky or unlucky enough to be assigned it so that people in those areas could travel, then it is what it is. If you choose to live away from civilization, it is only common sense that your options would be more limited. Chances are, you live there because you wanted that. I grew up in the country, but am happy to be in the middle of civilization now. To each their own, but you take responsibility for your choices and accept what limitations come with them.
I don't know why anyone is fascinated with Ayn Rand, but eww, not in my collection of favorite books. The main reason for crappy service comes from the top...but ultimately is due to the customers changing priorities. So many want the lowest price possible, but expect The Ritz-Carlton service and product offerings, with Holiday Inn Express prices. In an industry that has contracts, unions, and a myriad of other things that affect their bottom line staying in the black like thin ice, they find new ways to change things so that 2009 doesn't happen again. The problem is, they never notify the passengers. So, back in the day, Gate Agents were wonderful problem solvers. They could do just about anything to help you when in crisis, but somewhere along the line, they opted to limit what they train Gate Agents to do. So, those of us used to stellar problem solving all of a sudden were pointed to courtesy phones and 1-800 numbers to solve something that we used to be able to at the gate, and without a supervisor even. But, because customers weren't told about this, all of a sudden, GA are evil incarnate because they won't help, not because they don't want to, but because they are told not to because someone thought it was easier for everything to go through the 1-800 number. Same really went with FA's. You do something right in the customer's eyes and you face repercussions, and lectures. The problem is most of the people in the airline industry have never worked in a service industry where if things weren't illegal or immoral, you did what you could to solve problems and with a smile. On top of that, you get the passengers whose mission in life is to make everyone miserable. The fact is this, no one is loyal to any airline. Not one. Ticket price and schedule are the two most important factors for anyone who pays for their ticket or has price limitations on business travel. Business travelers, the bread and butter of the industry are loyal until they get status for life, then move to another airline and get status there...unless they happen to live at a hub where one airline dominates. I like the services DL offers...the entertainment system is nice for cross country flights, but I don't need airline food, or expect it, and am cool if they only offer it temporarily. It won't change my opinion. My hometown only has AA flying there, so I am okay with them, too. What makes me most unhappy with the flying experience is purely with the passengers. The ones that never seemed to have learned manners, and frankly do some disgusting things. It's not an issue on every flight, but it is on a lot of them. They don't follow instructions, give unrealistic demands, and just don't seem to have a lot of common sense. Neither side is perfect, but I see plenty of examples of crews working very hard to go above and beyond and never being recognized for it. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
They may have a policy not to, but look at the amount of complaints about them doing that, and it seems to suggest the opposite. No worries though, I would still fly JetBlue, too. Who can resist those blue potato chips?
learhawkerbe400
Well-Known Member
American is also offering meals in coach on certain flights (prob the exact same ones delta does it on). Pretty sure it's just NYC-LAX/SFO/SEA. Those are the big markets.
Speaking of, the 321T AA flies between those cities is pretty baller. Something like 10 first, 30 business, 30 premium economy and 40 regular economy.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Is there some particular jurisprudence or caselaw that you're deriving this opinion from?
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
- Property rights are innate and don't rely on the government to exist. Yes, in logical extension US law protecting property rights is ultimately enforced using ultimately the threat of force, but there are lots and lots and lots of legal stops on that journey before that point.
- The police neither have a "monopoly on violence" in general, nor in use in protecting property rights (see the 2A of the Constitution and multitude of state and federal jurisprudence and caselaw where deadly force may be used to protect property).
- You have the "right to curtail the use of police" as a taxpayer and voter sort of in the same way you have the right to fly on a military aircraft as a taxpayer and voter. In other words, I wholeheartedly agree with what you are saying in philosophical terms, but in the actual way we have allowed the government power to be structured, it doesn't unfortunately work that way.
Cptnchia
Dissatisfied Customer
"I wasn't feeling well to continue, so I removed myself and just canceled my trip and stayed with some people I knew nearby...."
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.usatoday.com/story/21290655/
Why airlines hate hidden-city ticketing (and maybe you should too)
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
That's actually not true - flights get cancelled all the time for crew unavailability, flight and duty, and many other reasons. I'm reaching back about 4 years for when we were working on DOT required reports.
Here's the rule for defining delays and cancellations: https://apps.bts.gov/publications/federal_register/2002/html/bts_20021125.html
Heres a list of what the DOT charts:
Air Carrier
Aircraft cleaning
Aircraft damage (except bird strikes, lightning/hail damage)
Airport curfew
Awaiting the arrival of connecting passengers or crew
Awaiting alcohol test
Awaiting gate space
Baggage loading
Cabin servicing
Cargo loading
Catering
Computer outage--carrier equipment
Crew legality (pilot or attendant rest)
Damage by hazardous goods
Engineering Inspection
Flight paperwork
Fueling
Gate congestion
Government forms not properly completed--INS, FAA, Agriculture, Public Health, etc.
Ground equipment out of service
Hot brakes restriction
Last minute passenger
Late mail from Post Office
Late crew
Lavatory servicing
Maintenance
Medical emergency
Out of service aircraft
Oversales
Positive passenger baggage match
Passenger services
Potable water servicing
Pre-flight check
Ramp congestion--blocked by another aircraft under carrier's control
Ramp service
Removal of unruly passenger
Revised weight sheet
Shortage of ramp equipment
Slow boarding or seating
Snow removal (when it is a carrier ramp service function)
Stowing carry-on baggage
Weight and balance delays
I bolded the codes associated with this whole crummy situation.
Again, it's been several years since I was looking at this stuff - but the data that is reported to the DOT is the same from all scheduled carriers. Part of that is T-100 forms. The real expert of this stuff on the form is probably @Capt. Chaos Regardless...it's not that big of a deal - around 5% of flights are cancelled due to air carrier reasons - a flight cancellation because you screwed up crew scheduling is probably a good reason to look into crew scheduling so you don't make that mistake again...
Not really - safety rules are fine - this even was caused by p-poor customer service on behalf of United because they screwed up, this would not be OK in any other industry. These contracts of carriage suck and this kind of behavior typifies the problems in the industry with customer service. United's gate agents don't care that this guy is a doctor and has patients tomorrow...BUMP THE FREAKING PILOTS AND FIGURE IT OUT or tell the customers that the flight ain't leaving until they get 4 volunteers. They'll get them eventually, it's still bad customer service but it doesn't arrange for the guy to be beaten.
I think I know a thing or two about handling unruly passengers that are delayed for multiple hours and have their flights canceled... it's not that hard - you take care of the customer, you get them on another flight and if necessary, you get them a hotel for the next morning - it's basic customer service - don't punish your customers for your errors...doesn't seem that hard.
Did you know that many people didn't chose where they were born? Or that most people can't up and leave at a moments notice? It's very easy to look through the bubble of your life and see choices everywhere up to the point where you don't have them anymore.
This isn't true. I for one, have brand loyalty to Alaskan and Hawaiian and I'm not even special. I'll pay up to $100 more to pay for service I like. I'm broke, so I can't do much better than $100, but if I had my choice, I'd pretty much only ride on Alaska and Hawaiian for west coast and Pacific flying, and Delta for much of anything else (though I am really fond of AA).
Business travelers are much more persnickety - especially those who frequently fly business class or first class. They care which airlines they ride on, and they absolutely will pay more for better service.
As for the other stuff - if you're getting a "talking to" because you're doing right by the customer, you need to find another airline to work for. That's not OK. Finally, who needs recognition for the extra stuff you do for the passengers? Why do you need that - you should be going the extra mile because it's the right thing to do not because you're waiting for someone to pat you on the back for it.
Do the right thing because it's the right thing - screw all the other stuff.
They may have a policy not to, but look at the amount of complaints about them doing that, and it seems to suggest the opposite. No worries though, I would still fly JetBlue, too. Who can resist those blue potato chips?
Mmmmmm chips.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Correct, I haven't.
I, however, am not the one complaining that those contracts are somehow unethical, immoral, or should be illegal. I know what risk I take in signing such a contract, and I am responsible for my actions as such. I, as a free man, engaged in signing those agreements and contracts of my own freewill.
hammerhat
Well-Known Member
Must be Oscar's creepy PR shop posting all those reviews.
What I'm saying is if JetBlue has 200 seats they sell no more than 200 tickets. Of course if there's a mx issues or smth then all 200 may be denied boarding, but they are not going to sell your seat 5 times period.
I don't know what's going to happen if JB had a fully booked flight and a DH crew showed up last moment. Perhaps someone from JB could shed some light. I heard they are big on the customer service aspect in general and that's pretty much the theme of the job interviews for all positions, pilots included.
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
It was just one way. I was driving back with my friend from Miami.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
I'm going to go through these one by one:
- Property rights are innate and don't rely on the government to exist.
I don't think that's remotely true at all - if the state doesn't exist, who enforces property rights? The guy with the bigger stick is basically the only way - in which case it's not really a "right" is it? It's more just "what can I hold onto with my own force of will?" Where do property rights come from if they're "innate" as you say? Are they god given? What happens in cases of imminent domain, or theft? How does this innate function of the universe fix itself? What happens when another country with tanks and guns comes in and takes over your country and collectivizes the land? Who "owns" anything then. Property is a spook - it's not real if you can't keep it. As a society we recognize it - but it's a useful tool to define who owns what, not a real thing.
- The police neither have a "monopoly on violence" in general, nor in use in protecting property rights (see the 2A of the Constitution and multitude of state and federal jurisprudence and caselaw where deadly force may be used to protect property).
The state has a monopoly on violence and it's authorization is what I should say to be more specific - in other words, the state is the only body that can authorize violence to defend property, and even then, it's inconsistently applied suggesting that there's nothing innate about what you're protecting at all. Shoot the first person walking across your "property" in California and they'll take you to jail - do it in Kansas and your mileage may vary. I should add that I'm a vigorous supporter of the 2A - I think it's incredibly important to protect individual liberty, but I'm not under any illusions that the state will authorize any or all violence I were to commit - even in self defense or in the defense of liberty.
- You have the "right to curtail the use of police" as a taxpayer and voter sort of in the same way you have the right to fly on a military aircraft as a taxpayer and voter.
I don't see it that way, pass a bill to get civilian right to fly around on military aircraft for every taxpayer and by god it should happen - unless of course our republic is a sham (in which case I'd be highly inclined to agree with you). If it doesn't work that way...then well...do you really have "own" any property? Just a thought experiment, but if the government isn't responsive to the people then it stands to reason that the government could come in and take whatever they want from you at any time. So much for property "rights" then, eh?