United Airlines

[slynne]

"hey, dude, you wanna be a cop?"
"Hmm, what are the rules of being a cop?"
"You have absolute responsibility to enforce the law and keep the peace, and if bad things happen it's YOUR FAULT and you get fired and ostracized by society"
"so if someone is breaking the law i compel them to obey?"
"No, you may politely REQUEST their cooperation, but touch them in any way, use any level of force, or even mean words, and it's YOUR FAULT and you will be fired and and ostracized by society"
"so I'm at fault either way, I have to somehow enforce the law and keep the peace with no authority"
"Pretty much, yeah"
"F**K THAT"
"Why can't we hire any cops? our society is falling into anarchy"

that discussion also applies to other questions our society is pondering

Most folks agree that with power comes with responsibility
most forget that with responsibility MUST come authority

Being a police officer is a hard job to be sure and I don't dispute that. Luckily due to high pay, there are no shortages of police officers. As an armchair economist, I completely understand that requiring police officers to not abuse their authority might mean higher pay would be required to attract and retain police officers. I have zero problems compensating officers for such labor conditions. Here is the thing though. Police officers CAN use their authority in non violent ways. Authority is not violence. Yes, that means that police officers may politely request that someone get off the plane and it means that they can threaten nonviolent consequences, of which there are many in situations like this. There is never a reason to use mean words and police officers who do really probably shouldn't be police officers. There are also established techniques for physical intervention that do not leave people injured and bloodied but unless this person was a violent threat to others, there is no valid reason why physical intervention should be used to remove someone from a plane in a situation like this.

 

[hepcat]

Being a police officer is a hard job to be sure and I don't dispute that. Luckily due to high pay, there are no shortages of police officers.

There are also established techniques for physical intervention that do not leave people injured and bloodied but unless this person was a violent threat to others, there is no valid reason why physical intervention should be used to remove someone from a plane in a situation like this.

slynne...  "due to high pay..."  and "no shortage of police officers?"  

Ok, I suspect you're out of touch with the reality of hiring for police departments right now.  Most of the major cities are running from 15% to 30% below their authorized staffing levels right now because they don't have enough qualified applicants to hire, and their recruiting efforts aren't yielding applicants either.  San Diego PD, for example, is the lowest-paid major police department in the country...  history repeats itself.  

And cops DO use their authority in non-violent ways... and in this case it was my understanding that the two officers talked to the doc for 10 minutes while he steadfastly refused to leave as directed. What then do you suggest they do? Walk away or "use that amount of force necessary to overcome the resistance offered" as is their duty under law to effect an arrest, when the suspect resists?

Take a minute to read my post above as well...  perhaps it'll explain a concept for you that you're not fully in tune with...

 

[DannyB1954]

when there are folks bringing the full force of government to bear on your particular situation, you have a duty to comply. 

Not at all. 
When the Black woman refused to go sit in the back of the bus, she should have complied?
Very seldom is anything changed through compliance.
What law was broken? Police only have jurisdiction or authority if a law is broken. Can't charge him with trespassing. United allowed him to board. He paid for the ticket, they took the money. Disorderly conduct? he was in his seat minding his own business.

As I understand it now, the crew of 4 slept in and missed the flight that they were scheduled to take. Tell me how the Doctor is responsible and should pay the consequences.  Just because United was able to bully 3 out of 4 people, doesn't make the 4th wrong.

As far as what should of the cops done, you got it right. Walk away and tell the airline it is a civil matter. No crime was committed. Public servants are not paid to do the bidding of private industry.

 

[slynne]

Let's change the scenario to your private property inside your home. You have a guest whom you originally invited inside, but has now become unruly and refuses to leave. When the cops show up at your request and grab this person gruffly, and escort them to the squad car, whose fault is it?
Will you then be happy the cops came and got rid of your problem?

When I was in my 20's, I had this situation happen many times because I was managing a short term residential crisis program for mentally ill adults. Most of the time, the police were not necessary even in cases where a resident was asked to leave and refused because we were all pretty well trained in non-violent interventions of this sort. Sadly apparently better trained in such techniques than many police officers. On the few occasions where the police were called, they handled it completely without violence. Why would they need to gruffly grab someone to escort them to the squad car if the person is being non violent in their refusal to leave? You can ALWAYS wait someone out. Eventually they will get hungry, tired, thirsty etc. (I was going to say that eventually they would have to go to the bathroom but experience has shown me that sometimes people are just ok peeing their pants in situations like this)

 

[hepcat]

What law was broken? Police only have jurisdiction if a law is broken. Can't charge him with trespassing. United allowed him to board. He paid for the ticket, they took the money. 

Yes, actually he could be charged with trespassing.  His "right" to be on board is revocable by the airline.  We may neither like it nor agree with it, but that's the case.  You have the same right to revoke consent to have a person in your house or car.  When you've had enough, you ask them to leave.  If they fail to leave after being asked, they're guilty of trespass.  At least that's the way it works in most jurisdictions.

Don't confuse the bad policy decisions on the part of the airline with the law the cops were operating under.

 

[Blanch]

Yes, actually he could be charged with trespassing.  His "right" to be on board is revocable by the airline.  We may neither like it nor agree with it, but that's the case.  You have the same right to revoke consent to have a person in your house or car.  When you've had enough, you ask them to leave.  If they fail to leave after being asked, they're guilty of trespass.  At least that's the way it works in most jurisdictions.

Don't confuse the bad policy decisions on the part of the airline with the law the cops were operating under.

Again, we don't have the details. Can Walmart sell you canned goods and then take them back from you at the door? No. They are legally required to make you "whole" which would mean a refund.

Was he offered a cash refund of the money he spent to make him whole? Was he compensated for his inconvenience ? We don't know what offer was made to him. We don't have facts yet. If he was only offered a voucher for a future flight and his payment for this flight was not refunded he was not made whole.

This is a PR nightmare for both the airline and the doctor since his past is being spread across the entire planet.

This shows the problem with social media. The facts are not available, just a short cell phone video, several actually. But the planet is already taking sides, facts be damned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ballenxj]

Why would they need to gruffly grab someone to escort them to the squad car if the person is being non violent in their refusal to leave? You can ALWAYS wait someone out. Eventually they will get hungry, tired, thirsty etc. (I was going to say that eventually they would have to go to the bathroom but experience has shown me that sometimes people are just ok peeing their pants in situations like this)

Why? Maybe there is another situation that they need to get to ASAP, like a robbery in progress, etc. They don't have the time to just sit and wait somebody out. They need to get it handled as quickly and efficiently as possible.  Now attention back to the unruly person in your home. If they are refusing to leave, that tells me that they also feel entitled to help themselves to your food when hungry, and your bathroom when needed. That is of course they don't just pee themselves while sitting on your furniture.

 

[ArtW]

Exactly, I've spoken on the actual use of force, not who was right or wrong, because we don't know for sure, and folks are taking side without the facts
Hepcat's post on use of force, however, in #60, is excellent
To use your own analogy, if Walmart sells me canned goods, and tries to take them from me at the door, I am not going to fight them over canned goods, i'm going to call the cops, as the law is on my side in that circumstance
if he was offered a voucher, he could have contested that through proper legal channels, as the law would have been on his side, as the offer of a voucher is not due compensation

 

[Blanch]

Exactly, I've spoken on the actual use of force, not who was right or wrong, because we don't know for sure, and folks are taking side without the facts
Hepcat's post on use of force, however, in #60, is excellent
To use your own analogy, if Walmart sells me canned goods, and tries to take them from me at the door, I am not going to fight them over canned goods, i'm going to call the cops, as the law is on my side in that circumstance
if he was offered a voucher, he could have contested that through proper legal channels, as the law would have been on his side, as the offer of a voucher is not due compensation

I agree ArtW. We don't have the facts and the whole thing was handled poorly on all sides. We, as a nation, seem to shoot first and ask questions later. Social media magnifies that.

Would I have gone back to my seat? No. Would I have been pissed? Yes.
Would I fail to comply with lawful orders from identified law enforcement? No.

This is a media frenzy. What a mess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ArtW]

i wonder how much it would have cost to charter a flight for the crew? likely WAAY less than this is costing them

 

[hepcat]

Again, we don't have the details. Can Walmart sell you canned goods and then take them back from you at the door? No. They are legally required to make you "whole" which would mean a refund.

You don't purchase your tickets in your seat on the plane, and other business arrangements such as refunds, re-booking and so forth are handled at the ticket counter.  Whatever he may or may not have been offered kind of became irrelevant once he refused to leave the aircraft when so directed.

All of the business dealings could have and should have logically been expected to be conducted at the ticket counter once he left the aircraft. 

Again, I make no excuses for the way in which United handled (or mishandled) the business end of this whole incident, and again, whether or not the cops used "excessive force" in removing the good doctor will be determined, but the fact remains that the doctor bears almost all of the culpability for the handling of the incident by trying to assert a right to stay on board; a "right" to which he was not entitled.

 

[DannyB1954]

Yes, actually he could be charged with trespassing. 

Don't think so. If they could of, they would of to cover their own behinds. You can't use the argument about a guest in your home wearing out their welcome when dealing with space that rent was collected on. Rent out a room in your home and see what it takes to legally evict. Furthermore, you can not rent out a room and then say you have to leave immediately because I am letting someone else use the room tonight. The Dr. paid rent on that seat space.

 

[hepcat]

There's a huge difference between a bona-fide guest being asked to leave your home and a renter being evicted. Completely different areas of law. That aside, what covers this episode is the contract between the ticket holder and the airline and the fine print that contract contains. Once you've violated the terms of service, the contract isn't valid and you can be asked to leave. Failing to do that becomes trespassing. I don't know whether the good doctor was cited or not.

 

[Blanch]

You don't purchase your tickets in your seat on the plane, and other business arrangements such as refunds, re-booking and so forth are handled at the ticket counter.  Whatever he may or may not have been offered kind of became irrelevant once he refused to leave the aircraft when so directed.

All of the business dealings could have and should have logically been expected to be conducted at the ticket counter once he left the aircraft. 

Again, I make no excuses for the way in which United handled (or mishandled) the business end of this whole incident, and again, whether or not the cops used "excessive force" in removing the good doctor will be determined, but the fact remains that the doctor bears almost all of the culpability for the handling of the incident by trying to assert a right to stay on board; a "right" to which he was not entitled.

Again, we don't have all the details. So we are making assumptions. I already agreed that the passenger made a decision I would not have. But how was he able to get back on the plane? Did someone allow it? We just don't know.

There is plenty of fault to go around it would seem.

When this matter is settled in court and all parties testify as to what was and what was not done we will be much closer to understanding what actually happened.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ballenxj]

Don't think so. If they could of, they would of to cover their own behinds. You can't use the argument about a guest in your home wearing out their welcome when dealing with space that rent was collected on. Rent out a room in your home and see what it takes to legally evict. The Dr. paid rent on that seat space.

Apples and Bananas. There was not a room rented to this person. A rented room becomes a persons private domicile at that point. Not even close to the same thing.
A guest on the other hand has had a revocation of guest privileges revoked once you tell them to leave. If they stay, they are now trespassing.

 

[DannyB1954]

Apples and Bananas. There was not a room rented to this person. A rented room becomes a persons private domicile at that point. Not even close to the same thing.
A guest on the other hand has had a revocation of guest privileges revoked once you tell them to leave. If they stay, they are now trespassing.

I was responding to someone else using the example of a guest being asked to leave. The Dr. was not a guest, he paid for the seat.  I don't think the Dr's high dollar attorney is dumb enough to take a case he can not win. The airline failed to follow proper procedure which makes their actions a violation of law. 
The rules say the person affected must be given a written notice of the rules, so this is like trying to toss out a renter before they get the eviction notice. I bet a jury will decide that if a person pays for something, they should be entitled to get it. name another industry that can repossess an item or service that has been paid in full.

 

[Kathleen]

Not at all. 
When the Black woman refused to go sit in the back of the bus, she should have complied?
Very seldom is anything changed through compliance.
What law was broken? Police only have jurisdiction or authority if a law is broken. Can't charge him with trespassing. United allowed him to board. He paid for the ticket, they took the money. Disorderly conduct? he was in his seat minding his own business.

As I understand it now, the crew of 4 slept in and missed the flight that they were scheduled to take. Tell me how the Doctor is responsible and should pay the consequences.  Just because United was able to bully 3 out of 4 people, doesn't make the 4th wrong.

As far as what should of the cops done, you got it right. Walk away and tell the airline it is a civil matter. No crime was committed. Public servants are not paid to do the bidding of private industry.

Absolutely. The black lady did not deserve to ride in the back of the bus. The paying doc did not deserve to be dragged and beaten. I too wondered where the Captain fit into this picture.

Big money and corporations rule. That does not sit well with me. Is there an entity/entities that want us to feel even more uncomfortable when flying? If so, what would the motivation be? The "Friendly Skies" disappeared a long time ago.

 

[John61CT]

No, flight crew gives you an order you must comply or force will be applied.

I am not saying they didn't apply too much force too early, but no matter how evil the carrier that above principle is a sound one.

Public protest, boycotts, pressure on lawmakers & regulators can make a difference, but advocating subjecting yourself to that sort of treatment is a bit much.

Against war, human rights issues maybe, but airline bumping, no.

IMO.

 

[hepcat]

From the United Airlines Contract of Carriage:

[font=open-sans, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Calibri, Arial, 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif]RULE 25 DENIED BOARDING COMPENSATION[/font]

1. Denied Boarding (U.S.A./Canadian Flight Origin) - When there is an Oversold UA flight that originates in the U.S.A. or Canada, the following provisions apply:
   
   1. Request for Volunteers
      1. UA will request Passengers who are willing to relinquish their confirmed reserved space in exchange for compensation in an amount determined by UA (including but not limited to check or an electronic travel certificate). The travel certificate will be valid only for travel on UA or designated Codeshare partners for one year from the date of issue and will have no refund value. If a Passenger is asked to volunteer, UA will not later deny boarding to that Passenger involuntarily unless that Passenger was informed at the time he was asked to volunteer that there was a possibility of being denied boarding involuntarily and of the amount of compensation to which he/she would have been entitled in that event. The request for volunteers and the selection of such person to be denied space will be in a manner determined solely by UA.
   2. Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority:
      1. Passengers who are Qualified Individuals with Disabilities, unaccompanied minors under the age of 18 years, or minors between the ages of 5 to 15 years who use the unaccompanied minor service, will be the last to be involuntarily denied boarding if it is determined by UA that such denial would constitute a hardship.
      2. The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment.

I dunno what else to say folks.  Under the terms of the United Air Lines "Contract of Carriage" under which every ticket is sold, the airline has the right to deny someone the right to fly when they're over-booked.  You agree to it when you buy your ticket.  Under the "Contract of Carriage" Rule 21, the airlines has the right to remove someone who isn't following the directions of the flight crew.   Right, wrong, or indifferent... and whether you like it or not, United had the right to kick the doc off the flight by the contract terms of the ticket, and HE had a contractual obligation to leave.  We can discuss 'til we're blue in the face whether or not what was done was right... but those are the contractual obligations about under which Doc (and every other passenger) boarded the flight.

 

[John61CT]

Yes, but proper consumer protections, as in most of the rest of the developed world, will override the corporations squeezing those last .001% profit margins at the expense of our human dignity.

Just not in the US' semblance of democracy last few decades.