I saw some footage that wasn’t fuzzied out. He was of Asian descent, most likely Japanese, and didn’t appear to be fluent in English. He’s also 69 years old, which makes me wonder if there may have been some dementia or another medical condition.
And is he really a doctor, and if so, what kind? He could have a diploma-mill Ph.D. for all I know.
Ah I guess I have taken you posting your posts “as a lawyer” to mean you have some legal backing to your statements.
You think a business as gigantic as United doesn’t have insurance that covers transporting its employees to their reporting location?
And that’s fine but here, if you can’t make the flight, the airlines will usually get you on another flight, either for free or for a nominal fee.
I prefer that to what you describe. Happened to me enough times.
Why shouldn’t it happen if a guy resists the cops? What’s your alternate reality for resisting arrest that doesn’t involve use of force?
You might want to walk that back just a wee bit…
That took me 5 minutes to quote, I believe there are more, but I’m not going to devote my night to it.
That’s exactly what I’ve been saying all along (and also that the bad publicity from this will hurt them).
Since you insist, I acknowledge it. Huzzah. I did not say otherwise before.
No.
Just to inject a couple of facts into the argument (it’s a pretty good one we’ve got going, ain’t it?), here are statements from United Airlines Contract of Carriage. In effect, when you agree to buy a ticket on United, you are agreeing to this Contract. I think most airlines have similar if not the exact same wording in their Contract of Carriage.
From Rule 5, paragraph G:
From Rule 25, paragraph A2:
If you want to read it yourselves: https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec25
The only relevant difference is that my choice to kick someone else cannot be based on membership in a protected class, and I have to reimburse the person I remove.
Except, you know, the very definition of trespassing.
All the rest of your post is just incoherent babbling.
And frankly I don’t care if this doesn’t translate to any other kind of business. I don’t want an airline to be allowed to do this.
Where does it say they have the right to remove a passenger who has already been allowed to board?
I’m not sure what we are comparing or whether you are expressing an opinion, which is what I’m doing.
The law has specialized definitions for lots of concepts. I don’t accept that we have to apply a definition of trespassing that covers this situation.
ShadowFacts, regarding your post #306. I am willing to concede that comments about the appropriate amount of force to remove the gentleman is a matter of debate and that the comments you quote do seem to show a pattern, albeit I will let Czarcasm and Machine Elf speak for themselves.
The whole argument boils down to the “Saxons”* vs. the “Legals”, IMHO. I’m standing with the Legalists, obviously you differ.
*The Saxon reference is to a Kipling Poem, “Norman and Saxon”:
My experience internationally is that “full service” carriers will put you on a later flight if you turn up late for no fee or very cheap. With budget airlines, too bad so sad, buy a new ticket. IMO, having the choice of these options is far better than the US system.
Legally in Japan, ANA or JAL might not have to put you on a later flight for free, but I bet they do most of the time if they can.
Doug K, as I said in an earlier post to DrDeth, the plane was at the gate, the boarding door was still open, the plane was still on Auxiliary power (engines not turning), so it was still technically in the “boarding” process. Until the crew has the final paperwork from the boarding agent and the door is closed, you are subject to be denied boarding.
Even after that, if they feel the situation warrants they can turn the plane around and kick you off. They have to do so in a safe manner (i.e. they can’t just throw you out the door at 40,000 feet–not that that’d be possible anyway since modern airplane doors are designed to take advantage of pressure differentials to be impossible to open at altitude), but they definitely can do so. It happens.
It’s their fucking plane.
I think the crux of the issue was pointed out near the beginning by Richard Parker then others agreed that’s what they were saying or came around to the same position. The problem is the airline employing law enforcement to settle a commercial contract dispute without any due process.
Lots of amateur lawyers here who are reflexively against the ‘man child’ have tended to overlook this. But it’s just an amateur lawyer opinion that you are ‘trespassing’ if you buy a valid ticket and they let you on the plane, then randomly name you to be removed to make room for somebody else. Many others might have gone along with being removed this way (including a couple on the flight, before this guy, I don’t know who the fourth person was). That doesn’t settle it though.
Same flaw in ‘you must always do what they tell you’. The idea of that is when it’s for public safety. When it’s not police batting you around as well as the commercial entity sicing the police on you are at risk of getting in legal trouble themselves, as they should be.
I bet this guy gets a pretty big settlement out of UAL, though probably out of court, and the careers of the manhandlers will probably suffer, if they remain employed. That’s the very likely practical outcome, and rough justice I think.
Wait, the differences between your hone and an airliner? There are plenty of relevant differences, some of which I listed. And yes they are relevant because I want them to be relevant. That is the point of my comments. If the law doesn’t agree, then the law should be changed.
Just because they can doesn’t mean they should. They had other options that were a lot less disruptive. Eg how about they could have paid for tickets for their crew to fly to where they needed on another carrier? The other passengers on board the flight were clearly disturbed by what happened. This story is all over facebook, reddit and lots of other social media and generally people are NOT taking the airlines side. This will be a PR nightmare for United and it will cost them some passengers in future.
No chance this dude is really a doctor. I can’t believe he hasn’t been outed yet as fast as the internet is at that. I guess that would change the narrative though. Reddit is a rabid pack of douches right now.