So, your contention is that United Airlines handled this matter competently? Well, CNN seems to think that it was atotal disaster, but if you really think this was the competent way for them to handle their staffing requirements at Louisville, and that it was impossible for them to plan ahead to avoid it, then I don’t think further discussion would be useful.
Other than a retraction of your false claim about what I had said- that would be appropriate.
Police aren’t judges. All they’re equipped to do on the spot amounts to discerning whether or not the people who own the plane want the guy off of it, and removing him if so.
Anything else related to the contract dispute gets settled later, in court, for damages. Otherwise, anyone who wanted to could day, “Well, I feel like I’m entitled to be here, so nyah-nyah” and nothing could be done.
The law does not recognize self-help as a remedy, and rightfully so–because you’re not the best arbiter of the rectitude of your own case. So when there’s a dispute over whether or not someone is being properly excluded from property, the governing principle in the moment is the wishes of the property owner since those are about as much as can be reasonably determined and applied on the spot in a manner that doesn’t lead to utter chaos; later, in court, if the property owner is found to be in the wrong then the wronged party will be awarded damages.
Wait – are you no longer upset that I summarized your post as you accusing United of being incompetent?
It literally makes no sense whatsoever to bristle at the term “incompetence” and then immediately turn around and embrace it. So which is it? Is United incompetent for needing to move a flight crew, or not?
Then the airline has to find alternative means, like putting their crew on another flight, even if it’s a different airline or driving them there, or finding different backup crew who can get to the destination. A company as large as United is not without means to solve this problem. They just don’t get to force someone off the plane because they want his seat. That should be the rule.
It says they can’t ride in limousines when working the next day?
I don’t give a fuck what an airline says, there is no other democratic country in the world where this would be tolerated - the sense of entitlement by this company is extraordinary.
Jesus fucking Christ, I can’t even begin to think how the check in staff, the pilot, the cabin crew, the police got to this point.
The other thing utterly striking is the passivity of the other passengers. Who put’s up with this shit - someone’s dignity being invaded like this by some ape in a uniform: what is the matter with these people?
Is this really what the USA is reduced to - a bunch of obese people filming their outrage from their seats. Pathetic.
Yep. It’s 300 miles. You’ve got half a dozen solutions.
Attacking someone legally isn’t one of them.
Quite so. The big deal here, to me, is if in the process of being called in to handle someone who was failing to comply with crew instructions, the police resorted to excessive force; and whether UA is to be held responsible for the excessive violence part, since mere removal would have been within their legal right.
It says that time in transit, by any means, count as duty time–and given that we don’t know how close the crew was to timing out, slow surface travel is likely to cause even more problems than getting them there by air.
And “we don’t know” is really my point: the specific constraints the airline faced in getting the flight out of Louisville crewed is something that only their ops department knows, and so all the yahoos screaming about how the airline was incompetent or failed are basing their claims on precisely zero knowledge of the situation beyond the fact that it doesn’t line up with how they, in their infinite wisdom, have decided things ought to be, real world be damned!
The preferred nomenclature is “pigs,” and I can only assume that you didn’t notice that two of the police officers were African American.
Ahh, nuance. I’m fine with nuance… but your “Stop spouting nonsense” wasn’t really nuanced.
Yes, it’s indeed possible that there were no other options for United. It’s also possible that there were indeed other options. I think the second is most likely. If they come out with data that shows that the first is correct, then I’ll happily change my opinion.
WTF?
What is the matter with you?
An open revolt of the passengers because one of them refuses to follow the rules? There’s a winning strategy! :rolleyes:
I’ll tell you what-why don’t you follow your own advice instead of bitching about how total strangers aren’t doing enough to satisfy your need for for open revolt against “The System”. o.k.?
And the fact that you resort to ad hominem attacks demonstrates you really don’t have anything more on your side of the fence.
It is still valid to call this out as incompetence, particularly with what is known publicly right now.
Those aircrew regulations notwithstanding: United and other airlines won’t be bumping seated customers for last-minute run-up crew members anytime soon.
the airline didn’t attack anyone, legally or illegally.
If you’ll let me borrow your time machine, I’ll take care of it forthwith.
Look, I’ve been flying regularly since the freakin’ 1950s, and I had no idea the airline would just kick people off, rather than offer a sufficient incentive to get enough people to volunteer. I’ve seen the latter scenario happen any number of times; I’ve seen the former scenario happen just once.
Sometimes it takes an event like this in order that a practice such as this is widely known about, rather than the knowledge being limited to the people who’ve been on the receiving end of this arbitrary practice, and their families and friends.
But now that we all know about it, ISTM that there’d be plenty of popular support for fixing this so that the airline is required to keep offering more until it gets the volunteers it needs.
And delay / potentially cancel subsequent flights for the day, stemming from the delay incurred by getting those crew members to their subsequent flights late. You do know that the daily airplane schedule is a domino effect. If my flight is late, then the passengers risk missing their potential connecting flights, which (depending on whether the plane stays or not to wait) risks subsequent flights are delayed, etc.
So, if I read you correctly, you’d rather risk inconveniencing hundreds of paying customers, than one.
At this point, you shouldn’t have an opinion at all, because you know precisely jack shit about the situation.
Personally I’m not too fond of blackmail, even if it’s The Big Guys That Have So Much Money We Should Be Able To Soak Them For All They’re Worth.