The United debarcle

[TeeVee]

have to agree with 3WE. sure, if you really get to the bottom of it all, you could, theoretically, blame consumers for wanting the cheapest fare. who doesn't? funny thing is, it seems that only airlines use this excuse to charge more and give less--more fees for everything--even if the ticket itself is cheap.

many journalists and parlor talking forum pundits, claim that airlines have responded to the demand for cheap and customers could care less about becoming sardines and paying for toilet use. as a person that flies about 75 segments per year, i disagree. sure, i mostly fly in biz or first but the difference is palpable. boarding takes longer cuz everyone has a huge carry-on plus personal item to avoid the bag fee.

i dare any airline to offer a better experience for a slightly more expensive ticket. i suspect that in the end, their profits would remain the same.

p.s. the answer to the entire problem is this: i dn't care which airline we are talking about, the passenger is ALWAYS the last to be considered in ANY decision.

[Evan]

p.s. the answer to the entire problem is this: i dn't care which airline we are talking about, the passenger is ALWAYS the last to be considered in ANY decision.

p.s. the answer to the entire problem is this:

Regulate the airlines so that they MUST include in their price:

- A carry-on bag + personal item
- one checked bag (50lbs/23kg) on short haul domestic and two on long haul international flights.
- a basic-level seat reservation (aisle and window seats included)
- basic refreshments
- basic snacks or meals depending on the flight duration
- basic IFE where available
- pillows and blankets
- a minimum seat pitch (perhaps 30")
- rebooking for a fair, regulated fee
- cancellation up to a fair, regulated time before the flight

BOOM, you're back to the 90's, when prices were maybe a BIT higher, airlines were profitable enough and everyone was happier.

The internet pricing sites have created a race to the bottom and it will just keep getting worse until it is prohibited by regulation that forces ALL airlines to include basic dignity in their price.

[Schwartz]

p.s. the answer to the entire problem is this:

Regulate the airlines so that they MUST include in their price:

- A carry-on bag + personal item
- one checked bag (50lbs/23kg) on short haul domestic and two on long haul international flights.
- a basic-level seat reservation (aisle and window seats included)
- basic refreshments
- basic snacks or meals depending on the flight duration
- basic IFE where available
- pillows and blankets
- a minimum seat pitch (perhaps 30")
- rebooking for a fair, regulated fee
- cancellation up to a fair, regulated time before the flight

BOOM, you're back to the 90's, when prices were maybe a BIT higher, airlines were profitable enough and everyone was happier.

The internet pricing sites have created a race to the bottom and it will just keep getting worse until it is prohibited by regulation that forces ALL airlines to include basic dignity in their price.

I think you're looking at the kind of regulation. Relaxed anti-trust laws in the past several decades have resulted in oligopolies in many industries which have enriched shareholders at the expense of innovation and customer service.

[EconomyClass]

I remember being lectured on the Contract of Carriage at Flyer Talk. A sheaf of boilerplate that basically is a legal department contradiction of everything the PR department puts out. The number of flyers who actually have expertise in the Contract of Carriage is infinitessimal. Really the same as all lengthy legal documents we all sign for any business we do. Whatever "rights" we have are a result of concessions in that document. And I'm guessing the rights are minimal. But recent flying history has turned most of us into bleating sheep. If they can paw us at security clearance, that can't escape the notice of airline legal departments (let along security goons) and so they certainly see no reason to be lenient in contracts of carriage. Will this make anyone, anyone, fly less? Seriously doubt it. But for the minority, people like me, it takes a pretty negative experience and adds a layer of further humiliation. More reason to seriously consider (a) travel and (b) modes of travel.

[3WE]

- A carry-on bag + personal item
- one checked bag (50lbs/23kg) on short haul domestic and two on long haul international flights.
- a basic-level seat reservation (aisle and window seats included)
- basic refreshments
- basic snacks or meals depending on the flight duration
- basic IFE where available
- pillows and blankets
- a minimum seat pitch (perhaps 30")
- rebooking for a fair, regulated fee
- cancellation up to a fair, regulated time before the flight.

To hell with most of that.

I haven't missed pillows and often do without IFE.

(Concur on seat pitch and booking fees).

It's the double standards.

If your plans change, you pay...significantly.

Vs

The airline changes plans wantonly and routinely and usually owes passengers nothing.

No one has acknowledged my Delta stormy day comment...ironically, it's the exact issue behind this incident...too little resiliency in crew schedules. The agents thought they would strand 50 people if they didn't kick this guy off. ( It was just sloppy workmanship that the other three flights weren't considered.

It's interesting to view the COC as CYA for instances where the airline made a good faith effort, but truly unforeseen circumstances derailed that.

However; today we see systematic screwing of passengers with the COC enabling downright robbery.

[BoeingBobby]

Did the airport police go overboard? Yes! But.. Post 9-11 air travel has changed worldwide. You are asked by someone working for the airline to deplane, you get your baggage from under the seat or overhead, get off the plane and work it out in the terminal period. You don't like the seating, food, etc. Book with a different carrier or take a damn train or car. Nobody is forcing you to fly.

And LH, when you buy that Barron let me know how the 32 gallons of avgas an hour at probably 7 or 8 dollars a gallon in Germany is working out for you! Let alone the 150k to 250k to buy it.

[brianw999]

Bobby....for Christ sake, don't rattle his cage, he'll wake up !

[elaw]

Nobody is forcing you to fly.

And when the cops shoot an unarmed person walking down the street, do you justify it by saying nobody was forcing the person to walk down the street?

[3WE]

Did the airport police go overboard? Yes! But.. Post 9-11 air travel has changed worldwide. You are asked by someone working for the airline to deplane, you get your baggage from under the seat or overhead, get off the plane and work it out in the terminal period. You don't like the seating, food, etc. Book with a different carrier or take a damn train or car. Nobody is forcing you to fly.

Today's story:

A couple to be wed...finds a man stretched out sleeping in their seats. No problem, the plane is light and they move up a few rows in the coach section.

UA Hostie informs them they have moved up to that "new second class" section with the extra 0.683 inch of seat pitch and pretty multi-color head rests. FA's move the sleeping man and get the couple to move to their proper "third class" seats...A few minutes later, an air marshall approaches and asks the couple to leave the plane "for no reason"...they are rebooked for the next day.

And to be a good journalist: "The story from United varies slightly"

Where I am going with Bobby's comment AND this one is: Time to get body cams for the FA's...seriously...

Is the FA being a jerk? (Tee Vee's rotten mayo)

...OR...

is the passenger being a jerk?

...OR...

is the system at fault and the FA is stuck being the 'paid agent of the screw over' and the situation goes down hill?

If some threat is offered, then we are in Boeing Bobby black and white mode...Unfortunately we don't turn on our cell phone recorders for the crucial minutes as the incident begins...so sure, a small defense for the airlines and the need for security.

Yes, we only see Dr. soon-to-be-Moneybags being dragged off and passengers supporting him. It does not matter if he has a long rap sheet of crimes...It DOES matter if he said something threatening...then (unfortunately) 'happy-logic' and common sense does go out the window (to a reasonable degree).

And again, time for us to be smarter passengers. I'm sorry Mr/Ms flight attendant, I am seated with my legally purchased ticket in my legally preassigned seat with my other-than-last-second check in with my $25 suitcase underneath in the cargo hold. What lawful order from the flight crew am I ignoring? Mr. Law Enforcement, what laws am I charged with violating? Am I under arrest? If you wish to remove me, please obtain a warrant. (and yes, we need to have our recorders too! ...ideally turned on nice and early...)

[elaw]

Today's story:

.........

Is the FA being a jerk? (Tee Vee's rotten mayo). Is the passenger being a jerk? Or is the system at fault and the FA is stuck being the 'paid agent of the screw over' and the situation goes down hill?

Although it may not be the main issue, the apparent current trend toward making every seat a different "class" sure didn't help!

[BoeingBobby]

And when the cops shoot an unarmed person walking down the street, do you justify it by saying nobody was forcing the person to walk down the street?

This Eric, does NOT even justify an answer.

[Evan]

Nobody is forcing you to fly.

Every now and again someone posts this little bit of absurdity. "Nobody is forcing you to fly"...

Yes, somebody, namely society and the modern world, is forcing you to fly. You can't not fly for many reasons today. Now, you could say, "Nobody is forcing you to fly United, and this used to be true, before the US Justice Dept allowed a series of reckless megamergers that removed your ability to choose your airline. The incident flight was the only flight leaving ORD for SDF that evening. The only competition left on that route is American and their last flight was earlier in the afternoon. So yes, sometimes you DO have to fly and you DO have to fly United, thanks to corporate lobbying and the general corruption of our far-from-disinterested Federal government.

And, despite airline contracts of carriage, which are unconscionable contracts of adhesion and would not be legally enforceable without the aforementioned corruption, when the airline accepts your money and returns you a confirmation number (and, in most cases a seat assignment), you have the ethical right to that service and that seat (unless safety concerns, security concerns or equipment problems intervene). An airline simply booting you off a flight that you paid for because their employees need that seat for logistical reasons is a pure and glaring ethical violation. And to add validity to that statement, you will notice that United has just changed their policy to prohibit this from happening again. Of course, they will still boot you off the flight before you board... only Federal regulations are going to prevent unethical abuse of implied contracts in the airline industry.

Which means you, guy in 36A, need to stop voting for game show hosts and puppets of industry and elect a legitimate government that will represent your rights over those of corporations.

What else can you do? Well, there's this thing called 'civil disobedience'. It got us the civil rights bill of 1964. When a woman didn't want to give up her seat on a bus, despite the bus company 'policy' she helped us to establish new rights and a more universal dignity.

No one was forcing her to take a bus, you could have argued...

: \

I honestly believe, if the Rosa Parks incident happened in 2017, she would have been forceably dragged off the bus with sustained injuries by armed security thugs dressed in psuedo-combat gear. That's how far we've come.

[elaw]

This Eric, does NOT even justify an answer.

Why not? Because a person walking down the street can reasonably expect that they will not be mistreated by the authorities, but someone boarding an airplane can not?

The fact that "things are different since 9/11" does not justify the use of force in every situation, just because a person is occupying an airplane.

[BoeingBobby]

Why not? Because a person walking down the street can reasonably expect that they will not be mistreated by the authorities, but someone boarding an airplane can not?

The fact that "things are different since 9/11" does not justify the use of force in every situation, just because a person is occupying an airplane.

I never said that it did, in fact I opened with the fact that I believe that the police over reacted. This however does not change the fact that since 9-11 MANY things have changed, and will NEVER go back to the way it was. Hey I remember as a brand new First Officer that they were serving roast beef off of a carving cart and you were served on china and linen table cloths. Hell, we had one 74 with an aluminum piano on the upper deck!

[3WE]

This Eric, does NOT even justify an answer.

If I may stick my nose in this:

1. The answer is a gray area..."9/11" is not THE answer. Nor is "The customer is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS right."
2. No fouls on anyone either. Bobby made his disclaimer...Eric's response was valid, and in fact, downright called for as "the other side of the story....

...well, maybe the quoted comment above was a bit dismissive...just to be factual...but it's all good.

Dittos with: "you don't have to fly"...some truth in that statement...some truth that that statement dismisses valid counter points...The answer is a gray area...