Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The United debarcle

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Dude- safety and regulation do not matter. It's profit that matters.

    Properly trained agents, FA's and security cost too much $.

    It's very plausible that the 'agent' was willing to bend the lap rules to facilitate getting a high-paying passenger into the seat.

    Add in (again), that plausible speculation that Big John never checked in. There may have been a point where the agent saw that the family was SOL and done cowboy improvisation on 1.8 vs 2.2 years old.

    Also, our law officials are generally allowed to lie to facilitate 'reasonable compliance and investigation'.
    Forget about the agents, just for a second please.

    What was on Mom's and Dad's head when they DID NOT buy a ticket for Tod??????, days or weeks before the incident happened?

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

    Comment


    • gabe, you're stuck on the toddler. perhaps the kid was 22 months old. still legal as lap child. the media may have rounded, or the parents may have played a game from the get-go

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Evan View Post
        You have a guy who probably didn't think he had to check in a two-year old
        As a person who has traveled with a baby under 2 in my lap, I can tell you that this is impossible. You are asked if you will fly with lap children, and then are asked for the date of birth. Did they lie? That is not "didn't think...". That is think and intention.

        Sorry, while I get the mad contract and mad response by the agent, and while I feel compassionate for any bad moment that the children were exposed to, I think the parents deserve some pain.

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
          gabe, you're stuck on the toddler. perhaps the kid was 22 months old. still legal as lap child. the media may have rounded, or the parents may have played a game from the get-go
          I am stuck because nobody addressed it... until now. If the kid was under 2, then ok. Still they didn't have the "right" to that seat (and I am talking about the legal and contractual right, not the common sense one).

          --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
          --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
            As a person who has traveled with a baby under 2 in my lap, I can tell you that this is impossible. You are asked if you will fly with lap children, and then are asked for the date of birth. Did they lie? That is not "didn't think...". That is think and intention.

            Sorry, while I get the mad contract and mad response by the agent, and while I feel compassionate for any bad moment that the children were exposed to, I think the parents deserve some pain.
            Why? They paid for the seat! With money! Why doesn't that fact penetrate the skulls of certain people? We are so poisoned by this age...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Evan View Post
              Why? They paid for the seat! With money! Why doesn't that fact penetrate the skulls of certain people? We are so poisoned by this age...
              Evan, we are not speaking the same language here I am afraid. I concede everything you say about the incident itself, but...

              What was their plan when the DID NOT BUY A TICKET FOR TODD WEEKS AHEAD OF THE INCIDENT THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW WOULD HAPPEN? Did they lie by saying that they would not fly with a lap children or did they lie his DoB? Did they already know that Teen would fly in a different flight and still buy a ticket for Teen for this flight that they knew he would not take and didn't buy one for Todd because they planned, at the time of buying the tickets, to use Teen's ticket to seat Todd? I just don't get it. (unless Todd was 22 months old as TeeVee said)

              --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
              --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                Why? They paid for the seat! With money! Why doesn't that fact penetrate the skulls of certain people? We are so poisoned by this age...
                they did not pay for the seat with money or anything else for that matter. the seat in question was purchased for the TEEN. the TEEN exchanged his seat for one on an earlier flight, leaving his family with TWO paid seats for two adults, a 1 year old and a 2 year old.

                Comment


                • not that i often or ever defend airlines' ridiculous policies, but here is an excerpt from a hotel booking policy.

                  "we will charge you 50% of the total reservation value in case you cancel your reservation more than 3 months before arrival. In case of cancellation less than 3 months before arrival, 100% of the booking value will be charged. In case of no-show, the total price of the booking will be charged"

                  this is from a popular resort in curacao. think they have much trouble booking canceled rooms with 3 months advance notice? probably not, so they earn a premium. of course, one could always buy travel insurance to cover for booking cancellations.....

                  Comment


                  • Gabriel is upset because no one will acknowledge that Dad didn't buy him a ticket home and that agents don't seem to understand the kiddie regulations.

                    Evan is upset because no one will acknowledge that the guy paid for a seat.

                    Similarly, I don't see much acknowledgement that this could easily be a scam.

                    Nor has anyone acknowledged the fact that THIS case is loaded with nuances (thus my reason for posting it).

                    So, there we have it- a major fault with human nature on this board (and most discussion boards)- no one will acknowledge anyone.

                    In fact, this probably also happened on the Delta plane. Delta may not have been acknowledging that Dad DID pay them some money. Dad may not have been acknowledging many things: That he forgot to check in Junior, that he knew he was pulling a pseudo scam- flying Junior with Big Johhny being in the computer, OR an all out scam.

                    Yes, Evan...they paid for the seat. That should count for something, but what? I would concur that in todays age it doesn't count for much. (No one acknowledged when I paid Delta to take me to Birmingham, and THEY didn't, they were going to dutifully to cancel my flight BACK from Birmingham- so THAT's what I get for my $) Your black and white idea that they should simply tell Mr. Standby he's screwed is simplistic.

                    Now we get into the realm of common vs insider knowledge- and this is tough. It's pretty much common knowledge that if you AREN'T checked in AND "seated", your seat is up for grabs (what I often feel for is folks who have delays on inbound flights, run to the gate, arrive BEFORE the door is physically closed and are told, "To expletive bad, we've already run the weight and balance (or given your seats to stand bys)" ...THERE is where your money doesn't count for anything!) Ironically- I was on a Delta Flight that was held for 20 people on a soccer team...I wonder if there was PR calculation there, or if it was simply over the magical body count that triggers a hold.

                    Anyway- do we need 25-page tickets with big bullet points- you better be checked in AND 'SEATED' OR WE GIVE YOUR SEAT AWAY....initial here. You must comply with legal requests from the flight crew....initial there...You excuse us from weather delays- not our damn problem....initial.....If there's a mechanical problem, but we still get you there within 24 hours, 'we did our part' sign here. This is non-refundable, non changeable...sign here.....and because of Tee Vee's zillion mile status we reserve the right to kick you off...(but hey, be happy because we got more money from him than you.....sign there.......

                    If I'm going to sneak junior on- I'm sure as hell checking in Big John and having a boarding pass for him! And, doesn't Mr. TSA ask, "Does your child have a boarding pass? " (I dunno, maybe they don't ask) Think about that for a sec...I would bet a beer the man encountered that. Did Dad lie? Did TSA man not ask?

                    Anyway- my judgement is that the Dad started this with a screw up...The agent had a problem that the DAD started- so as the agent tried to fix it, he had more sympathy for Mr. Standby who violated NO policies at all.

                    Gabbie: Kick, scream and yell about your point- it appears that Dad probably DID NOT intend for Jr. to sit in his lap...Junior had a ticket on the way down, and Dad DID DO technically illegal preflight shuffling for the trip home...but something went awry. I again state, that maybe the agent DID consider Evan's point SLIGHTLY and instead of throwing Junior off the plane, saw bending the rules as better option.
                    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                      not that i often or ever defend airlines' ridiculous policies, but here is an excerpt from a hotel booking policy.

                      "we will charge you 50% of the total reservation value in case you cancel your reservation more than 3 months before arrival. In case of cancellation less than 3 months before arrival, 100% of the booking value will be charged. In case of no-show, the total price of the booking will be charged"

                      this is from a popular resort in curacao. think they have much trouble booking canceled rooms with 3 months advance notice? probably not, so they earn a premium. of course, one could always buy travel insurance to cover for booking cancellations.....
                      Acknowledged

                      Many airline policies suck...And, hotels now have new 'lower, non-refundable' reservations....hell, last spring, I was trying to book Holiday in on a REFUNDABLE reservation, the web was only showing non-refundable prices....I scoured and clicked a link to go to refundable...and next thing I knew I wound up booking 8 non-refundable rooms...the non-refundable price was well hidden and at the final clicks there was no bold font saying you at booking a non-refundable room.! (This is what makes it tough...Could Dad have HONESTLY screwed up...or was he running a little scam...or WAS HE RUNNING A BIG STINKY SCAM to get headlines and free gifts.

                      Shitty policy stories:
                      -Banks
                      -Health insurance
                      -Extended warranties
                      -Car sales
                      -Car Rentals
                      -Payday loan companies
                      -Credit cards
                      -Construction contractors
                      -Police interactions with poor people
                      (What have I missed)

                      Question to Tee Vee: What does the law say about transparency? The COC is available, but no longer on the back of many 'tickets' like Bobby thought we still used...and it's definitely fine print and an obscure link, and plenty of crap in there that they want to keep low key... they want to keep it low key, and they make a deliberate effort to keep it low key.

                      LOL- this even comes down to those recent laws forcing Mikkie Dee's to put the calories up on their menus. As much as I hate big government, it's kind of nice that they put that stuff up there for me to see and think about, instead of making a deliberate effort to hide it.
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                        What was their plan when the DID NOT BUY A TICKET FOR TODD WEEKS AHEAD OF THE INCIDENT THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW WOULD HAPPEN?
                        Again, this is a great case...Is your supposition that they were total dumbasses and not thinking at all about Junior (you won't acknowledge that I named him Junior FIRST) COULD be wrong.

                        I think it's HUGELY plausible that the flight was full two weeks earlier...

                        They may have had a beautifully engineered multi part plan.

                        A. Wait for a seat to open up and buy it for Junior.

                        if that fails.

                        B. But Senior a seat on a different flight.

                        if all fails (and this will suck, but....)

                        C. Junior (on the ragged edge of legal) rides in our laps.

                        There's an explanation for you.

                        You have to acknowledge that Dad DID take actions to get Junior a seat, so to extrapolate that he never thought of that two weeks earlier could be wrong. (And I think Junior DID ride down with an official seat...)...So, my theory makes as much sense as your theory that he wasn't thinking at all.

                        (Or it's a premeditated scam)
                        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                          Evan, we are not speaking the same language here I am afraid. I concede everything you say about the incident itself, but...

                          What was their plan when the DID NOT BUY A TICKET FOR TODD WEEKS AHEAD OF THE INCIDENT THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW WOULD HAPPEN? Did they lie by saying that they would not fly with a lap children or did they lie his DoB? Did they already know that Teen would fly in a different flight and still buy a ticket for Teen for this flight that they knew he would not take and didn't buy one for Todd because they planned, at the time of buying the tickets, to use Teen's ticket to seat Todd? I just don't get it. (unless Todd was 22 months old as TeeVee said)
                          Yes, I concede that Dad might have assumed he could do that, since he paid for the seat (or teen did, whatever, the seat was purchased). Anyway, it shouldn't really matter. The family bought that seat; the family should expect it to be available to the family. It's so....

                          Originally posted by 3WE
                          simplistic.
                          Not 'simplistic', simple. Obvious. Fair.

                          That's what I mean about people's minds being poisoned by this age, by what has become the norm. Lawyering and contracts have distanced us from what is simply, honestly, fair.

                          They paid for the seat. It shouldn't matter if they fly Todd or the Beaver or Uncle Fester. It's their seat!

                          Anyway, that's not going to get through, so my only point remains: the airline should have let them fly under these circumstances because the alternative was a losing hand for everyone. And really my point is this: these large mega-airlines have fostered a culture of pathological adherance to policy with a pathological absence of compassion and respect for other members of society.

                          There lies the core problem we are facing.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            Not 'simplistic', simple. Obvious. Fair.
                            So Dad, who broke the rules, get's precedence over Mr. Standby who followed the rules AND ALSO PAID$ for the seats.

                            Seems that the obvious and fair thing is to not punish the dude who followed the rules.

                            Of course, the PR side of it...is opposite...and God forbid, right and wrong figure in...Appearance (and therefore profit) are what matter.

                            You say "simple"....Um no. That is wrong.
                            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                              Yes, I concede that Dad might have assumed he could do that, since he paid for the seat (or teen did, whatever, the seat was purchased). Anyway, it shouldn't really matter. The family bought that seat; the family should expect it to be available to the family. It's so....



                              Not 'simplistic', simple. Obvious. Fair.

                              That's what I mean about people's minds being poisoned by this age, by what has become the norm. Lawyering and contracts have distanced us from what is simply, honestly, fair.

                              They paid for the seat. It shouldn't matter if they fly Todd or the Beaver or Uncle Fester. It's their seat!

                              Yes, Evan, it should matter. You don't buy tickets as a "family" you buy tickets for each individual person. So, no, it's not "their" seat.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                                they did not pay for the seat with money or anything else for that matter. the seat in question was purchased for the TEEN. the TEEN exchanged his seat for one on an earlier flight, leaving his family with TWO paid seats for two adults, a 1 year old and a 2 year old.
                                Say again? This is new to me. Teen (or Senior) EXCAHNGED his ticket on the family flight for one in an earlier flight? So they didn't have that ticket or seat anymore available for Todd (or Junior) even in the ignorance of the contract that names cannot be changed?

                                This would change EVERYTHING we have been discussing here. So they bought 3 seats (in whatever number of flights) and expected to seat 4 persons?

                                --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                                --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X