
United removes first-class passenger to make room for 'higher-priority' traveler - 4ad
http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-united-low-priority-passenger-20170412-story.html
======
tici_88
Travelling in the US or with US airlines is not looking very good right now.
Not just the United incident(s) but also TSA, Trump travel restrictions,
flights constantly overbooked, massively late etc.

I wonder if it will start impacting traveller and tourism numbers at some
point. I think anyone who doesn't really need to be in the US and/or is
planning travelling with kids is likely to have some second thoughts at this
point.

Recently Canada's girl guides cancelled all trips to the US:
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/canadian-girl-
gui...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/14/canadian-girl-guides-
cancel-trips-us-fears-trump-travel-restrictions/).

I wonder if this is a first step of a large trend yet to develop.

~~~
Klathmon
Anecdotally I've noticed that for like 5 years now my friends and family have
a pretty severe aversion to flying anywhere for anything.

From needing to show up hours before the flight, to the invasive screenings,
the insane restrictions on what you can and cannot bring, the sentiment that
if you check any baggage it's basically as good as gone, the ever increasing
cost, the delays, and even things like the worry about if your ticket will
actually get you on the damn plane!

If I have to choose between a 3 hour flight, and a 12 hour drive, the 12 hour
drive is what I pick almost every time now. Ignoring "disasters" (massive
accident, theft, etc...) I'm going to have all my stuff, I know i'm not going
to waste hundreds of dollars on a ticket that will get "rejected" at the last
second, i'll have a car when I get to my destination, i can bring whatever the
fuck I want, and it's a fraction of the cost.

~~~
yodsanklai
You're painting a darker picture than what it really is :) Most of the time,
things go smoothly and flights are very affordable. I find it amazing that as
a middle class person I can fly pretty much anywhere in the world. I can live
with the inconvenience of being scolded by the TSA and US customs officers.

Actually, I wonder how much this will last considering that fossil energy will
likely cost more and more and that more and more people from developing
countries start to travel too.

~~~
ricw
Given that we have likely hit peak demand for fossil fuel (the theory being
that the demand for fossil fuel has peaked before we have reached peak
supply), this is unlikely. Oil prices are unlikely to ever reach the highs of
$100+ ever again. Or so goes the theory..

In short, flight prices are unlikely to be severely effected by oil prices
again.

~~~
bmh_ca
> Oil prices are unlikely to ever reach the highs of $100+ ever again.

Since the oil price crash, investment in exploration has gone down
dramatically, so I would argue the contrary.

When the current supplies start to dwindle, I would not be surprised to see
oil prices strike $200 or more a barrel.

The oil crash removed the cost of exploration from oil prices, so current
prices are no longer a indication of probable future supply.

There's a multi-year lag between exploration and crude coming to market. While
futures/derivatives can cover that exploration for future crude extraction,
there's a growing spectre of competitive alternative energy that will likely
reduce the attractiveness of crude – i.e. there being higher risk of relative
oil obsolescence, the anticipated return on futures diminishes, meaning less
money going into exploration, even with what will be present-day high prices.

Given the lag in investment, I suspect that when the "spike" comes people will
look as much to ramping up more immediate alternatives (solar, wind) than
exploring for oil.

The above is all speculation of course, but the 5-10 year market forces at
work are not pushing towards lower or even stable oil prices, but towards much
higher ones – at least until demand drastically drops, which some figure is at
least 15-20 years out.

Just my 2¢.

~~~
davidf18
> "Since the oil price crash, investment in exploration has gone down
> dramatically, so I would argue the contrary...."

The fracking technology for oil and gas is still on it's Moore's Law curve and
is getting cheaper and cheaper so in fact more and more fracking is coming on-
line so that we're unlikely to see prices much above $50 per barrel.

Mar 21, 2017 [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-21/big-
oil-s...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-21/big-oil-s-plan-
to-buy-into-the-shale-boom)

April 12, 2017 [https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-12/u-s-
shale...](https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-04-12/u-s-shale-
investment-is-back-on-the-upswing)

~~~
bmh_ca
Good point. It just occurred to me that the spectre of shale that you
highlight also counter-incentivises exploration, perhaps more so than
alternative energy.

------
jhulla
Comment might be buried... But, the problem is the baroque overlaid
combinations of [seat class, fare class, FF status, standby, cash vs FF
purchase, time of arrival at gate, etc.] intersecting with [connecting flts,
equipment, weather, etc.] leads to a large range of predictable conditions
with uncertain outcomes. E.g. only one seat remaining, who gets it: passenger
needing to make intl connection on a FF ticket or cash paying high status
passenger?

This is a global optimization problem that can be easily solved - but there
are many cases where on the ground discretion is required [last minute
aircraft change, weather delay]. Poorly paid, under trained and under
motivated staff will always drop the ball in this situation.

The solution for United here is two fold 1) Increase training, comp, authority
and motivation of gate agents to solve problems with minimal disruption. This
used to be the case a bankruptcy ago. This setup is not likely to return due
to a simple reason: cost. United in bankruptcy blew up the pension promises to
some of their most experienced staff. They left.

2) The best outcome for United is to reduce the complexity of their product so
that customer expectations of service align with the company's ability to
deliver.

tl;dr: United's service is too complex for their gate agents to deliver.
Service should be simplified.

~~~
imgabe
The other issue is to stop overbooking every single flight and allow some
slack to handle these unexpected situations that inevitably come up.

~~~
e40
They will never do that, since it impacts profit.

~~~
anovikov
Due to airlines' razor thin margins, this is simply impossible. That simple.
Every single traditional airline will go bankrupt if it stopped overbooking.

Unfortunately it is the greed and stupidity of us consumers that drove this
market into the ground. We shouldn't blame airlines. Think about this next
time when you pick 'order by price' in skyscanner...

~~~
yeukhon
This is a scary statement that no one is willing to test it. But is it really
true? I offer an alternate theory.

It won't lead to an airline bankruptcy.How about we create a cancellation fee.
UA can add an incentive (not sure if one already exist) to their mileage club
membership giving club member free cancellation up to 5 hours before the
onboard time.

* Free cancellation up to 24 hours, and thereafter no refund plus a $30 cancellation fee.

* 50% refund for up to 24 hours

* no refund if no show

* club members get up to free cancellation and 50% refund up to 5 hours, except

* ultra gold club members free cancellation and 80% refund without cancellation fee

IDK. Someone on their business team make up a profitable number.

The truth is though, airline does this because they have a proven statistics
the percentage of customers are no-show. According to [1]:

> On average, the number of people not turning up to flights is around 5
> percent, but, in certain circumstances, that number can be up to 15 percent.
> Obviously, that puts airlines in an interesting position.

In the long run as airlines struggle to keep up with profit if overbooking is
illegal, airlines will be forced to implement the above. [1]:
[https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/](https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/11/overbooking/)

~~~
nsnick
Airlines already take your money when you cancel. They overbook because so
many people cancel that they have vacant seats, meaning they can sell X% of
seats twice.

~~~
yeukhon
Yes, I am aware they take my money. But my point is to add cancellation fee to
cover up the losses after making overbooking illegal. Profit will go down, but
they avoid delays and other unnecessary disputes/situations.

~~~
daemin
How can they charge you that fee? All it would mean is that you won't board
the plane and instead take another flight.

I have done this before because buying a new ticket cost me less than moving
the existing ticket. So I just didn't check in, and didn't turn up for the
flight.

~~~
yeukhon
The incentive for a refund.

------
ptero
At the moment I wish United gets beaten up well for forced passenger removal
earlier this week. However, IMO this article just tries to pile onto the
"United stinks" meme and is poorly written (more emotions than facts). Some
things missing (for me):

1\. When did this happen? The article makes it look like this just happened,
but does not mention a date. I suspect the omission is on purpose (if so,
boo!; if not, sorry, but please add event date).

2\. The fact that the guy bumped off is rich is irrelevant (and going on and
on about it dulls the message).

3\. The fact that the seat the guy was downgraded was noisy (people arguing on
both sides) is irrelevant.

IMO the main point is valid -- the person was first to the seat and in general
whoever gets into the seat first keeps it in case of a seat collision or a
duplicate ticket. He should not have been asked to free it to another
passenger (who should have been downgraded instead and compensated somehow).
But conflating this with unrelated issue to get on a "United stinks" meme is a
cheap trick. My 2c.

~~~
rsync
"IMO the main point is valid -- the person was first to the seat and in
general whoever gets into the seat first keeps it in case of a seat collision
or a duplicate ticket."

I would be _extremely annoyed_ if I were in the same situation as this flyer.

However, I'm not really sure what United is supposed to do here ... according
to the article they had a mechanical problem with the original plane and the
replacement plane had fewer first class seats ...

So _somebody_ has to not fly in the first class seat.

Again, I would be very, very upset - but as an outsider looking in, it seems a
bit childish and primitive to assume that whoever raced to the seat first gets
to keep it, regardless of any other factors.

Again, United has to downgrade _somebody_ to coach in this situation - it
seems reasonable that they sort that downgrade to the lowest "status"
passenger.

~~~
ptero
Duplicate / messed up tickets happen and IME (I travel roughly once a month
and saw this maybe 3-4 times) the "first in" is always how things are
resolved. Whoever is first keeps his seat, whoever is late is reseated, gets
an apology and some goodies especially if this is a downgrade / later flight.
I think (but not 100% sure) this might even be codified in some airlines
policies.

I saw duplicate assigned seats, I saw seats assigned in the toilet -- the
plane had last row of ABC seats and lavatory where DEF seats would be. Sure
enough two people show up with tickets in the DEF section. After some (weary)
chuckles the folks just got squeezed into any open seats.

What is messed up about this case though was the lack of clear policy (so the
person does not feel he is discriminated against), threats instead of apology
and no compensation.

I am also surprised at the price: $1000 for a first class ticket on a _long_
flight is low. Was that be one of the "gate upgrades" he purchased instead of
the real first class ticket? This does not absolve United at all, but at least
gives some potential sanity to their choice of a purchased seat over a gate
upgrade.

------
Belphemur
What a lack of professionalism.

The customer even paid premium price to be in first class and instead of being
notified at the gate, like any respectable airline would do, he's asked to
give his seat to somebody "more important" than him when already seated.

It doesn't make any sense, if that "more important person" came later, he
should be the one getting compensated by the airline especially when the
problem occurred because United needed to change the plane for a smaller one.

You don't kick customer, you compensate them.

~~~
linker3000
I asked United whether I could use their lounge at SFO as they cancelled my
flight to Heathrow and I was going to be waiting the best part of a day for a
flight to Dulles to take an alternative that would get me home 1.5 days late.

By the look on the faces of the two lounge receptionists, you'd think I'd
asked if I could take a dump on their desk. "Other people have paid membership
to use this lounge" I was told in a rather disdainful way. "Sure", I said,
"would you like to put a value on the fact that I will never fly with you
again then?", I replied...silence - they stopped talking to me and carried on
doing other stuff as if I had suddenly become invisible.

No, I did not get to use the lounge, and no, I have never flown with United
since - which also means that work colleagues who travel with me are also lost
to them.

~~~
zippergz
I have a paid United Club membership. Those lounges are already pretty full a
lot of the time, and one of the biggest reasons I (and many of the other
members I know) pay for it is exactly the situation you describe. When
something goes wrong with a flight, it's well worth the cost of the membership
to have helpful agents, minimal lines, and a nice place to relax. It's not
about the free mediocre food. Having a place to be during a disruption is one
of the primary value drivers, so they're not going to give that away. And if
they let in everyone who had a disruption, it would be quickly overcrowded.

There's no excuse for them being rude about it, but I don't think your
expectations were especially reasonable either.

~~~
dagenleg
I too do enjoy paying the bribe just to get an acceptable service! Oh, it's
just like when visiting a poor post-Soviet country.

I am so glad that United officially incorporated this wonderful custom. No
longer do I need to decide on the bribe amount on a per-case basis, I can now
just pay once!

~~~
zippergz
It's market segmentation. Most of the traveling public is cheapskates who will
buy the lowest fare they see, no matter the consequences. This is an option
for those who aren't purely driven by budget to pay for a better experience. I
guarantee you that if United increased fares to hire enough staff to provide
the same level of service you get in the lounge (with almost no line to talk
to someone even in event of a major disruption), most people would switch to
another airline.

~~~
dagenleg
It feels to me like you are trying really hard to justify to yourself and to
everyone else paying $500 for the membership.

------
tech4all
I don't develop games... But if I did I would create a game called "United
flight agent". You would be standing in the aisle facing the rear of the
plane. Each round you would have a goal number of passengers to forcibly
remove.

You would walk up and down the aisle and punch out selected passengers. Once
you had suitably subdued a passenger you click a security badge and the
"Airport Rental Security" guys come and drag the passenger off.

The game timer would be a chart of United's share price. The round is over
when the price hits zero.

The price could rise and fall with certain events:. A passenger stumbling back
on the plane for instance.

The game would end immediately if you punched a baby - even United agents
don't punch babies!

Feel free to run with it!!

~~~
cryodesign
These guys are already on it:

[https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/vr-game-voluntary-
disemba...](https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/vr-game-voluntary-
disembarkment#/)

------
jeswin
I'm appalled by how this frontal assault on human dignity is shielded by law.
What many of us learned this week is that it seems to be perfectly legal to
bump off poorer or less privileged people specifically from a plane.

This is boat allocation on Titanic all over again.

~~~
mirimir
No, it's _not_ legal.

Edit: See lawyer quote from tiatia.

~~~
michaelt
In a way, there are two questions at work here.

The first question is whether you can have rent-a-cops throw a passenger off a
plane after they have taken their seat. As I understand it, that is not legal.

The second question is about over-booking more broadly. After all, though
there's a legal distinction between a passenger a second before boarding and a
second after, from a customer service standpoint they're still denied the seat
they were promised. Is it right that an airline can sell 310 tickets on a 300
seat plane, deliberately entering into 10 contracts it knows it cannot honour?
As I understand it, that is legal. But should it be?

~~~
gm-conspiracy
_Is it right that an airline can sell 310 tickets on a 300 seat plane,
deliberately entering into 10 contracts it knows it cannot honour? As I
understand it, that is legal. But should it be?_

I assume there are weasel words in the contract(airline ToS) to allow this.

~~~
tyingq
There are full fare tickets that can be cancelled/refunded, or changed to
other flights, at any time. So there's always some amount of no-shows. So they
don't really "know" that they cannot honor the oversells. There's also
equipment swaps to smaller aircraft, flights cancelled for mechanical issues
that then moves passengers to other planes, etc.

Denied boarding is actually pretty rare, happens to about 0.1% of passengers:
[https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/pu...](https://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_64.html)

The other approach would be to never overbook, but if you're the only airline
not overbooking, your margins will be lower. Empty seats don't make money.

------
paulgb
He and the doctor may have a solid legal case: [http://lawnewz.com/high-
profile/united-cites-wrong-rule-for-...](http://lawnewz.com/high-
profile/united-cites-wrong-rule-for-illegally-de-boarding-passenger/)

I hope for United's sake these are anomalies and not a pattern of behavior.

~~~
mpweiher
> ...not a pattern of behavior.

It's actually far worse than just a "pattern of behavior", it is how United
and other airlines (mostly US, but rest of the world is catching on) have
deliberately structured their enterprise and the entire customer experience.

Everything revolves around "privilege". Even 20 years ago, this used to be
bad. On most European airlines' flights, you just waited at the gate until
your flight was called, then got in line (with some minor prioritization) then
flew.

Whenever I had the misfortune of flying United (an ever rarer occasion as I
wizened up to the situation and later to "codeshare" flights), half the gate
was at the counter, jockeying for perks and arguing status and privilege.

This has apparently now been codified with (last I checked) 6 separate cattle
lanes for boarding. Also, when I was booked on United business (a mistake),
the flight attendants apparently had to try to find certain "special" elite
passengers and suck up to them, in order to get little "stars" on their cards.
How utterly demeaning!

Again, the US has been on the frontier of this deplorable trend, but the rest
of the world is catching up, with Heathrow being the first airport I've seen
with separate security lines for first class passengers. Munich caught up a
little later.

To me, it looks like the airlines in general (and it looks like United in
particular) are so embedded in this completely artificial conception of
segregating their passengers by privilege, that results like the ones we are
seeing are not anomalies and not even outliers, but the logical and maybe even
unescapable consequences.

Dear Airlines: I just want to get from A to B. I don't care the slightest bit
about your weird privilege system, and your efforts of forcing me to care by
making "non-privileged" travel hellish just make me consider alternatives
including not flying, but certainly not flying with your airline.

Oh, and it doesn't have to be that way. Quite a few years ago I was on a
multi-legged Star Alliance trip, with several legs across the US getting me
from Maui to a Lufthansa flight out of JFK. The penultimate stopover was
Chicago, but the United flight coming in to Chicago was late and the United
flight leaving didn't wait for me. I tried the United counter, but for the
longest time there was simply no-one there, and when someone showed up they
told me it wasn't their problem. ??

Desperate, I searched a bit and found a Lufthansa hotline. After I told my
sob-story, the operator said "Oh, you're in Chicago, why do you need to go to
JFK? We have a flight leaving Chicago in 3 hours, let me just rebook you on
that" Said, done. It was a normal economy ticket.

Service.

Update: Check out [https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-
ser...](https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-services/)
This is a thing?!?

~~~
shimon_e
Unfortunately, due to the economics of airline class[0], privileged passengers
account for about 70% of airline revenue.

0\.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzB5xtGGsTc)

~~~
mpweiher
Yes. I know where it's coming from. The airlines can't actually differentiate
on the basic transportation service: you're in the same noisy metal tube
traveling at exactly the same speed, arriving at the same time.

There is some differentiation on the service you offer, bigger seats, maybe
being able to lie flat.

But that's about it, and since that's all there is the airlines just start
making shit up.

"Global Services (and generally 1K) members have their food orders taken
first"[1]

Really, this is a thing? Just think about how ridiculous it is. And that it
obviously has to be codified somewhere in the rule book. Along with all the
other silly rules that aren't public. A friend of mine is a frequent
traveller, and he told me a lot of the little tricks you have to pull to get
good service.

"GS members have their own phone line, [..] the agents are based in the United
States and are extremely helpful."[1]

Well, my Lufthansa agent was extremely helpful to "random joe with economy
class ticket".

[1] [https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-
ser...](https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-services/)

~~~
moftz
If I had the money, why wouldn't I want to fly first class and receive all the
perks it entails? Hot towel? Don't mind if I do. Complimentary mimosa? Yes,
please. I certainly can understand why some people choose to spend their money
on first class tickets. The flight is more comfortable. The airlines wouldn't
be able to offer these services to everyone on the plane unless they upped
ticket prices. I, along with the majority of air travellers, feel comfortable
enough in coach to not pay for all the extra service. I might pay for extra
legroom but I understand why I'm paying extra for this service, I'm buying an
extra fraction of the seats they weren't able to sell because they extended
the legroom for X number of rows (plus additional money because they can).

------
olodus
> _Instead, the service rep offered to refund Fearns the difference between
> his first-class ticket and an economy ticket_

So he paid the cost of first class but flied economy and when they get called
out on it they think all they need to do is compensate for the difference?
With the way he was treated?! How can you call yourself "Customer care
specialist" and think that is a way to treat customers?

~~~
jamiethompson
Not only that, if you're downgraded and the policy is to refund the difference
then you as a customer shouldn't have to ask for a refund, it should just
happen. As a business, you literally could not get away with this kind of
behaviour in Europe.

------
ijafri
In Pakistan Citizen didn't let a minster on board a flight, after it got
delayed due to him. Citizen abused him and he had to leave the plane. I meant
United is demonstrating something even worse than would happen in our 3rd
world country, and all I get it now, the 1st World only got bit of money and
tech and at the end of the day, they are just as big an assholes as we are.

First they beated a customer and now another one was moved to economy in order
to make room for a certain high profile.. !!! So you truly see, this is the
so-called first world, racism against minorities and immigrants despite 'they'
invaded Red Indians land, and now they are demonstrating same 'social class'
discrimination, that's common place in the 3rd World, minus the $+Tech, and
there you have even worse of the 3rd World.

------
adekok
Can someone read this:

[https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-
carriag...](https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-
carriage.aspx)

and explain where it allows them to refuse transport to a well-behaved
passenger _after boarding_?

Rule 21 seems to apply, but nothing there looks like "United can refuse to
transport you 'just cause'".

I've seen lots of people claim this behavior is legal, all without a shred of
evidence to back them up.

~~~
jacquesm
Even if it would be legal that does not make it right.

~~~
pyre
I don't think that this was being alluded to, just a question of how this is
supposedly legal, since lots of people are stating that it is without anything
to back it up.

------
boomka
By the way, in the case of Dr Dao it was also not overbooking that caused him
to get bumped off, but airline's assignment of lower priority to him than
someone else. Just like in the parent article.

There were other misreportings as well, not to mention that some news outlets
ran character assassination stories and almost nobody emphasised that Dr Dao
was a senior.

The best piece I've seen deconstructing this is
[http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/04/united-passenger-
remo...](http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/04/united-passenger-removal-
reporting-management-fail.html)

------
marcosscriven
The crux of the article, for me, is this:

"What United and all companies need to do is to train and empower workers to
deal with specific issues as they arise,” she said. “Don’t just follow
whatever is written in your policies."

Unfortunately that's so often the case - one may as well be conversing with a
robot in many customer service situations. I can only imagine it's just as
frustrating for the disempowered service reps.

~~~
rayiner
Empowering local service reps often leads to worse things. The cases where a
Muslim passenger or whatever was forced to leave because another passenger
complained wasn't written into any policy, it was the result of local crew
exercising their discretion.

------
bedhead
Jeff Bezos' annual letter, released yesterday, had a good line (one of many)
that immediately made me think of this United situations and broadly the crazy
rules we've created for air travel and the culture that surrounds it all:

"It’s always worth asking, do we own the process or does the process own us?
In a Day 2 company, you might find it’s the second."

------
11thEarlOfMar
Been flying for 25 years, 1.5 million miles total, most of that on United. US
airlines have been through hell over the last 16 years. Bankruptcies, union
battles, fierce competition, and not to mention, the real threat that someone
could blow up or intentionally crash the plane they're flying, all contributed
to a mentality that the employees have to stick together to survive.

 _The end result is that US airline employees see their loyalty to each other
as more important than customer service._

This mentality enables the micro-selling, endless class stratification, rigid
authority and the generally unpleasant demeanor of staff. They're really _not_
friendly in the US, and strikingly different from, say, Asia-based carriers.

~~~
Markoff
> US airlines have been through hell over the last 16 years. Bankruptcies,
> union battles, fierce competition, and not to mention, the real threat that
> someone could blow up or intentionally crash the plane they're flying, all
> contributed to a mentality that the employees have to stick together to
> survive.

So you say US market is more competitive than European and have more strikes
than European airlines and less risk? I call that very poor excuse compared to
European airlines, which work under harsher conditions than American, but
still keep level of service higher than American airlines (of course both are
inferior to Asian carriers).

~~~
11thEarlOfMar
I said nothing about European airlines.

But I've wondered how much worse it would have been here if Ryan Air or Easy
Jet had moved in.

~~~
Markoff
is there any reason to believe it could be worse than status quo?

------
davidf18
Actually, the Obama administration allowed United to take over Continental
when we already had so few competing airlines in this country as it is, so
Obama should be blamed. We need more competition, not less.

With the consolidation of airlines, it is much harder than it was to say you
don't want to fly with them anymore and they know it.

The case with the passenger being dragged off the plane was not regular United
but some lower-cost airline that has a close business relationship with
United.

The CEO should have set up an on-call executive that can quickly deal with
situations like these two cases. It would not be very hard to do.

------
davidf18
I have a good story to tell about El-Al (Israeli) airlines and US Air.

I was on a connecting flight on US Air to Newark to take El-Al. The US Air
flight left late and arrived late. Israeli security escorted me and 2 other
passengers onto the El-Al plane to Tel Aviv but the luggage did not make it.

El-Al opens all bags that don't travel with the passenger in a bomb chamber
which is located at JFK. So it took 3 or 4 days to get my luggage. El-Al gave
me $75 even though it was not their fault. US Air paid suit, shoes, etc. that
I had to purchase.

------
jsemrau
Time for regulating the oligopoly of the airline industry. Obviously the
safety of passengers can not be ensured anymore.

[https://medium.com/@thisTenqyuLife/united-airlines-should-
go...](https://medium.com/@thisTenqyuLife/united-airlines-should-go-out-of-
business-325e9983e51f)

~~~
hueving
>Obviously the safety of passengers can not be ensured anymore.

Let's not be dramatic. Actual airline safety issues that lead to horrific
deaths are not being discussed here. This is just piss poor customer service
that could be encountered on any property (e.g. hotels that have overbooked,
etc).

~~~
macintux
Trying to remember the last news story about someone being dragged out of a
hotel room they've already checked into.

~~~
fixermark
Trying to remember the last news story about someone being asked to leave
their hotel room, refusing to do so, having police called, and continuing to
refuse to do so.

People being kicked out of hotel rooms because of scheduling errors does
happen. It's pretty rare.

~~~
macintux
I'd be surprised were it _legal_ to have the police drag someone out of a room
they've paid for and been checked into, merely because another guest wants
that room.

Sure, you can ask, but on what legal basis do you have to apply violence?

~~~
laretluval
The hotel is private property. If the owners of the property ask you to leave
and you don't, you are trespassing.

~~~
deong
I doubt it's quite that simple. It's private property that serves the public.
We've had court rulings saying you can't, e.g., refuse to rent your wedding
venue to gay couples. If you make accommodations available to the public,
there are legal responsibilities that go along with that.

I don't know what the specific regulations are surrounding hotel rooms, but
certainly they're not "private property" in the same way that your house is.

------
yeukhon
So two days ago my 2-month old Dell UltraSharp monitor broke with flickering
and some cosmetic damage. I reached out to Amazon rep because I bought from
there. The repr and I spoke and did some testing. Eventually he said he would
help me make an exception by sending me a replacement without any fees, a pre-
paid return label, and do a two-day guarantee shipment, despite the return
window has already passed (it was April 6th, last week).

I got my new monitor today, and I am happy.

The repr said because of my purchase history. I am a good customer to them,
someone who have bought probably couple thousand dollars worth of goods from
Amazon over the years.

AWS itself also offered to eliminate all of the charges on my account after a
huge spike on billing (which is believed to be the results of network attacks)
under no questions.

This is how you build a $300B company. You take constant short-term losses
over long-term gains.

United Airline has a long fucking way to learn how to treat its customers. If
customer B's flight had a mechanical failure, should do this:

UA: "Sorry, we have a mechanical problem, do you wish to take the next flight?
We will offer you a voucher."

B: "No. I need to get there on time."

UA: "Do you wish to take an economy seat? Our first-class is full."

B: "No. I am a priority seating customer." (<\--- does this shit even exist?)

UA: "I understand. We will ask if anyone on the current flight is willing to
give up."

UA: "HEY PEOPLE ANYONE WANT TO GIVE UP THEIR SEAT FOR X AMOUNT OF MONEY AND
INCENTIVES?"

UA: "Okay no one. Increasing. We still have a few minutes left to auction a
seat for an economy seat swap."

UA: "Sorry Sir / Madam. No one is willing and the flight is destined to leave
now, so we can't hold up the 365 passengers onboard. We are sorry for your
inconvenience, we will see if other airlines have seats available and we can
help arrange a flight for you based on your continued support of United
Airlines."

Now either B take it or leave it. Done. One airplane's delay is a delay for
other 100 flights waiting to leave the airport on time.

Win 100 customers over 1 customer.

This is grade-school manner, fucking grade-school manner. Change your policy
now if you are so serious about good customer service and fear of law suits.

Actually now I come to think of it, airlines should build an auction/seat
auction app.

------
JustSomeNobody
If I paid full-fare and I'm already seated, who could _possibly_ be more
important than me?

~~~
URSpider94
on United -- it was almost certainly a Global Services passenger. Those folks
get whatever they want.

~~~
gambiting
What's a Global Services passenger?

~~~
gergles
It's United's secret top tier frequent flyer program. They get their ass
kissed for literally everything, even above full-fare revenue passengers.
There's no published requirements for it or information about it - here's the
closest thing: [https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-
ser...](https://thepointsguy.com/2016/04/top-perks-united-global-services/)

Fun anecdote: a few months ago I booked a Star Alliance ticket and had a
United segment ORD-EWR. I was the only (!) non-upgraded revenue first class
passenger on the flight according to the gate agent, but boarded the plane
33rd, thanks to "Global Services" passengers (including the ones in coach)
getting to board before me. They also got to order food first, so I was left
with the leftover food item, and also got their drink orders and other
attention lavished on them first, despite the fact that all the other Global
Services passengers in F were flying on free upgrades to F instead of paying
for it.

Note that "they got to order first" meant that they literally just skipped
over me when taking food/drink orders and when I asked what they were doing
the FA brusquely said "We'll get to you in a moment SIR!"

~~~
gambiting
That website is almost upsetting:

"The biggest benefit to Global Services is the excellent service that is given
to those with the status. They receive what can only be described as the royal
treatment. Below, some examples:[...]

Irritated with a flight attendant or gate agent? Complain about it and he/she
will be reprimanded by HR."

So if you are a GS passenger you can literally get people reprimanded by their
own HR? Fab.

------
tlrobinson
Forcing passengers to relinquish seats they've already sat down in is clearly
a terrible policy. Once you're in your seat you should be "locked in", except
in exceptional circumstances. Pulling someone out of a seat has a much higher
emotional (and PR) cost than denying someone boarding in the first place.

------
mintplant
> Fearns requested a full refund for his flight from Kauai and asked for
> United to make a $25,000 donation to the charity of his choice. This is how
> rich guys do it.

It bugs me that so much of the emphasis in this article is on the idea that
they _dared_ to do this to someone wealthy.

------
4ad
Note: this is a different guy. After just a few days after the previous
fuckup, they pull the _exact same shit_ AGAIN. Unbelievable...

~~~
corin_
Although the article doesn't give a specific date, it seems this incident
actually happened first, but is only now making it to press.

> _He had to fly to Hawaii last week_

~~~
4ad
Yeah, looks like it. Still only a few days apart.

------
jccalhoun
Flying always makes me wish workers of the world really would unite...

That being said, the way this article is written makes me want to kick the
author off of a plane while in flight.

"Fearns requested a full refund for his flight from Kauai and asked for United
to make a $25,000 donation to the charity of his choice. This is how rich guys
do it."

This is how rich guys do it? Really? ugh.

------
musesum
User surly UX. Was going to book an impromptu multi-legged trip between San
Francisco, Iowa and Arizona.

American Airlines quoted a price, but the only available seats cost (around)
$33 - $58 extra for each flight -- total was $200 extra. Bait and switch? So,
I switched to Delta.

But Delta's antique web design wouldn't allow a change. So, I attempted to
talk to a Human. Voice menu was a bit schizoid: transitioning from voice to a
touch-only menu. Love the response: "your selection was invalid" Who designs
these things? A Lost in Space fan?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWwOJlOI1nU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWwOJlOI1nU)

Then I get to the part where it says: "You may choose to have us call you back
... or stay on hold ... wait time is over 3 hours". So, I cancelled.

------
technofiend
United has an interesting way of dealing with elite status these days... sure
you still have silver, gold, platinum but then you have the real elite flyers.

You might be the first person in boarding group one, but you'll still be
eclipsed by the 1K / Global Services / Polaris flyers who are the true elite
both in status and in total dollar spend. They don't even bother to wait in
line - they just show up when boarding starts and are shuffled to the front of
the queue (along with a friend if they want), no questions asked.

Based on those layers it wouldn't particularly surprise me if one day as a
mere Gold flyer I get bumped for higher tier elite. United has made it clear
total dollar spend is how they judge the true status of flyers.

------
nkkollaw
This getting ridiculous.

The removal was awful, and they did deserve all the bad press. This article
however is just trying to ride the wave to get some clicks.

There are millions of people who travel every day. Stuff like this must happen
hundreds of times every day on pretty much every airline.

~~~
Veen
> Stuff like this must happen hundreds of times every day

I think that's the problem.

~~~
nkkollaw
It's bound to happen. The percentage must be 0.something.

------
Zigurd
While this might or might not be technically legal, what shocks me is the
response you'll see on online fora, that passengers should just shut up and
comply, and that failure to do so is childish.

These posts are often at great length, and laden with appeals to authority.
Some might be trolls. But others appear to be by people who genuinely value an
environment where the lowliest airline employee, no matter how poor their
judgement, no matter how absent their discretion, is more right than any
customer. Munoz's email to employees, of which I've not seen a retraction,
takes this line wholeheartedly. It's a trait that suffuses the industry. Who
the hell ARE these people?

~~~
pbhjpbhj
FWIW this attitude is the one taught by primary school teachers in the UK "do
what the teacher tells you straight away without question" and it's evil. I
can see how such an attitude gets then reinforced​ and survives in adults,
"that's what 'good' pupils do".

~~~
user15672
This is taught so that small kids don't carry on doing things that might be
dangerous (kids don't know the difference between dangerous and annoying, so a
blanket rule is more sensible here). It's not evil, it's damn sensible. Please
feel free to critisise the continuation of this teaching to older kids who can
think critically about what they're doing, but don't ask for primary school
kids to _not_ do what the accountable adult is telling them.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
No, demanding doing things without question is truly an insidious evil. Even a
5 year old has faculty enough to question some blanket commands.

T: "everyone sit down now, please"

P: "my chair has wet paint on it Sir, do I have to sit down too?"

Should the teacher say "always do as I say first time" next or should they
acknowledge they were operating on imperfect knowledge of the situation and
modify the command? This is only slightly contrived, some pupils will sit in
the paint through fear of the teacher (some, occasionally, through over-
bearing desire to please the teacher).

Always allowing a command to be questioned develops critical thinking and
encourages creativity whilst demanding pupils use good communications. It's
harder to handle with a group, for sure, but worth it IMO.

Questioning a command in order to get a reason for complying does not equate
to "not doing what an accountable adult says". "Because I say so" should be
the last fallback, not the first and only reason available.

It requires humility. Being corrected by a 7yo, say, in front of a group can
feel humiliating; but it's more important to do what is right than it is to
instill a misplaced sense of obedience as being the highest virtue.

This allows for the fallibility of the accountable adult and respects - and
develops - the faculty of the child(ren).

------
golergka
So, this is a guy who apparently wasn't VIP enough:

> Fearns, 59, is president of TriPacific Capital Advisors, an Irvine
> investment firm that handles more than half a billion dollars in real estate
> holdings on behalf of public pension funds.

------
h1d
This is just golden...

"placing him in the middle seat between a married couple who were in the midst
of a nasty fight and refused to be seated next to each other."

Crews don't even try to move them to be seated next to each others.

~~~
ambulancechaser
You're advocating for the flight crew to instruct a passenger to relinquish
their seat after they have already sat in it so that a first class customer
could have it? I think it's safe to say that that should be an action of last
recourse...

------
imjk
This happened to me once with Delta Airlines a few years back. I was ticketed
for an upgrade to first class (via Medallion status), but when I went to board
I was told that the stewardess had given the seat to another customer and I
was moved to a middle seat in the back. As someone who tends to be non-
confrontational and the fact that it was a short flight, I just went with it.
I did complain when I got back via their feedback form and they compensated me
with 7500 miles, which I now realize was woefully inadequate, but I didn't
have much recourse.

------
gmarx
These things don't matter and the airlines know it. People will continue to
fly. I guarantee that a year from now if United is the most convenient flight
to a place that guy needs to go, he will fly United.

We simply aren't in the "free market competition" will fix it zone with air
travel. I hate air travel and do everything I can to avoid it for work. Most
people think I'm crazy. Why wouldn't you jump at the chance to fly to an
obscure town in India on the company dime!?!?!?

So do not expect this to affect anything unless the government gets involved

------
hocpoc
I had to re-check (twice) if the news in the satire column. I literally cannot
believe you would kick someone paying your company $1000

------
ryan606
United CEO Oscar Munoz was formerly a top executive at railroad CSX. It is any
wonder that he treats his passengers as FREIGHT, not as PEOPLE?

My wife and I try to fly Southwest whenever possible. They are the only
airline (perhaps the only transportation organization) whose employees
actually care about their customers' travel experiences.

------
hilbert42
If that happened to me, I'd be incandescent with rage—and I'd sue at the first
opportunity. I can only hope Fearns makes the airline pay many, many times
over.

It seems the only thing these carpetbaggers understand are lawsuits where they
lose.

Its CEO deserves the boot—it happened on his watch!

------
phkahler
Somehow I feel like this all comes back to banking and the finance industry.
The issues in these cases all come down to money. They overbook flights to
maximize resource (plane) allocation. This one was a case of having to swap in
a smaller plane. It all comes down to how expensive airplanes are and the
fierce competition among carriers that leads to a system with little
redundancy. But think about that - how can there be such intense competition
in an industry dealing with such high-priced equipment? Granted, a solution to
this pinch is probably going to mean higher average fares. But I'm starting to
look toward a much bigger picture to see how this comes about. Any thoughts on
this?

------
metaphorm
The air travel industry is a leading indicator of creeping authoritarianism in
our society. I'm very glad that this story is getting the kind of media
coverage that it is. This needs to be examined and resisted.

------
whack
I've traveled on flights frequently for over a decade, and I've never had an
airline refuse to seat me for a flight I had a ticket for. I don't use
frequent-flyer, and just buy the cheapest tickets available on Expedia. The
only saving grace I can think of is that I always get to the airport way
before anyone else does. Have I just been getting lucky all this time? Short
of being a frequent flyer or buying expensive tickets, is there any way I can
make sure I don't get bumped off a plane I have tickets for?

~~~
krull10
Not with United. I had two flights in a row that I was all checked in with
boarding passes on my phone, and then they bumped me due to an "equipment"
change the night before my flight. In one case I was able to get a new seat
immediately and re-checkin, in the other I had to show up at the airport four
hours before my flight and beg for one of the few unassigned seats. Then I got
to watch hysteria at the gate from all the people that got bumped... I've
never had any other airline try to bump me at all, let alone after checking
in.

(Just to add, I think the "changing" equipment claim is a common excuse they
make up. It allows them to overbook and bump people without having to pay the
US mandated fees to each person who gets bumped. In at least one of these
cases they replaced the original plane with a plane of the same exact type,
but claimed "it might have a different seat layout so it counts as an
equipment change".)

------
MayeulC
People usually like to interact with other people for that "human touch", and
even quote it as a reason why they won't lose their job to automation.

I think I would rather interact with a robot than with a crew that has
procedures so rigid (and dumb) that they are not allowed to have empathy.

I think that's sadly representative of the corporate mindset brought to the
extreme. The consumer is not king anymore, it's a product. When did this
start? I wonder.

------
EtherOr
I wonder if this is a staged attempt (on the part of United, if not also the
passenger) to prove that the prior instance was not about race or class (e.g.
economy vs. first). "See, we do it to everyone!" Could this latest behavior be
used as defensive evidence in a court case alleging discrimination?

~~~
gus_massa
Nah. Apparently this is a previous incident that was ignored because no one
had a viral video with a blooding client. Never attribute to malice that which
is adequately explained by a HUGE amount of stupidity.

------
imroot
I think the "higher priority" traveler might have been a FAM -- an air marshal
-- who was assigned to the flight at the last minute. Even more so if he had
an aisle seat.

------
nonbel
Either this is awful reporting or I missed it. Did the event described here
occur before or after they dragged the doctor off the plane?

------
agumonkey
Incredible how loss of temper is reaching any space of society these days.
Feels like a worldwide fever.

------
hilbert42
If that happened to me, I'd be incandescent with rage—and I'd sue at the first
opportunity. I can only hope Fearns makes the airline pay many, many times
over.

It seems the only thing these carpetbaggers understand are lawsuits where they
lose.

Its CEO deserves the boot—it happened on his watch!

------
apostacy
Some people are getting hit with paywalls. So here is the full text of the
article:

It’s hard to find examples of worse decision-making and customer treatment
than United Airlines having a passenger dragged from an overbooked plane. But
United’s shabby treatment of Geoff Fearns, including a threat to place him in
handcuffs, comes close.

Fearns, 59, is president of TriPacific Capital Advisors, an Irvine investment
firm that handles more than half a billion dollars in real estate holdings on
behalf of public pension funds. He had to fly to Hawaii last week for a
business conference.

Fearns needed to return early so he paid about $1,000 for a full-fare, first-
class ticket to Los Angeles. He boarded the aircraft at Lihue Airport on the
island of Kauai, took his seat and enjoyed a complimentary glass of orange
juice while awaiting takeoff.

Then, as Fearns tells it, a United employee rushed onto the aircraft and
informed him that he had to get off the plane.

“I asked why,” he told me. “They said the flight was overfull.”

Fearns, like the doctor at the center of that viral video from Sunday night,
held his ground. He was already on the plane, already seated. He shouldn’t
have to disembark.

“That’s when they told me they needed the seat for somebody more important who
came at the last minute,” Fearns said. “They said they have a priority list
and this other person was higher on the list than me.”

Apparently United had some mechanical troubles with the aircraft scheduled to
make the flight. So the carrier swapped out that plane with a slightly smaller
one with fewer first-class seats.

Suddenly it had more first-class passengers than it knew what to do with. So
it turned to its “How to Screw Over Customers” handbook and determined that
the one in higher standing — more miles flown, presumably — gets the seat and
the other first-class passenger, even though he’s also a member of the
frequent-flier program, gets the boot.

“I understand you might bump people because a flight is full,” Fearns said.
“But they didn’t say anything at the gate. I was already in the seat. And now
they were telling me I had no choice. They said they’d put me in cuffs if they
had to.”

You couldn’t make this up if you tried.

It shouldn’t make any difference where a passenger is seated or how much he or
she paid for their ticket. But you have to admire the sheer chutzpah of United
putting the arm on a full-fare, first-class traveler. If there’s anybody whose
business you want to safeguard and cultivate, it’s that person.

So how could United possibly make things worse? Not to worry. This is the
airline that knows how to add insult to injury.

A United employee, responding to Fearns’ complaint that he shouldn’t have to
miss the flight, compromised by downgrading him to economy class and placing
him in the middle seat between a married couple who were in the midst of a
nasty fight and refused to be seated next to each other.

“They argued the whole way back,” Fearns recalled. “Nearly six hours. It was a
lot of fun.”

Back in Southern California, he consulted his lawyer and then wrote to
United’s chief executive, Oscar Munoz, who commended airline workers after the
passenger-dragging incident “for continuing to go above and beyond to ensure
we fly right.”

Fearns requested a full refund for his flight from Kauai and asked for United
to make a $25,000 donation to the charity of his choice. This is how rich guys
do it.

He received an email back from a United “corporate customer care specialist”
apologizing that Fearns apparently had an unpleasant experience. But, no,
forget about a refund.

As for that charitable donation, what are you kidding? A hard no on that.

Instead, the service rep offered to refund Fearns the difference between his
first-class ticket and an economy ticket — about a week later, as if that
wasn’t the first thing they should do in a situation like this — and to give
him a $500 credit for a future trip on the airline.

“Despite the negative experience, we hope to have your continued support,” the
rep concluded. “Your business is especially important to us and we'll do our
utmost to make your future contacts with United satisfactory in every
respect.”

I reached out to United and asked if anyone cared to comment on Fearns’
adventure in corporate catastrophe. No one got back to me.

Julia Underwood, a business professor at Azusa Pacific University, said
United’s actions in both the dragged-off-the-plane episode and with Fearns
reflect a coldhearted mindset utterly devoid of compassion for customers.

“They’re so locked into their policies, there’s no room for empathy,” she
said.

As a result, Underwood said, situations that should be manageable spiral out
of control and result in unnecessarily messy PR disasters.

“What United and all companies need to do is to train and empower workers to
deal with specific issues as they arise,” she said. “Don’t just follow
whatever is written in your policies.”

I couldn’t agree more. United is neck-deep in trouble this week because its
workers are clearly out of their depth in handling out-of-the-ordinary events.
You have to think someone on the flight crew would have been able to step up,
if given the trust and authority to do so by the carrier.

Fearns said three different members of the crew on his middle-seat, economy-
class return to L.A. apologized for how he was treated in Hawaii. But they
said they were unable to do anything.

He’s now considering a lawsuit against United — and he certainly has the
resources to press his case.

I asked if he’ll ever fly United again.

Fearns could only laugh. “Are you kidding?”

------
4ad
Original title is "United passenger threatened with handcuffs to make room for
'higher-priority' traveler", but it's too long for HN so I had to shorten it.

------
stuaxo
Browsing that on firefox on mobile was terrible, about part way down the page
a fullscreen video overlay appears that I couldn't work out how to close.

~~~
Markoff
ublock origin?

