Another flyertalk post about what to do if you’re asked to involuntarily deboard a flight. The poster admits that this doesn’t work 100% of the time, but asserts that it has allowed him to stay on flights after being asked to deboard:
…
I am curious, Czarcasm and Leaffan: do you think it’s kind of dirty pool for a passenger to calmy and reasonably assert their rights and turn stickler upon being asked to deboard? The guy doing the things described above … is he kind of a jerk (or worse) in your opinion?
You guys keep arguing that the passenger should have accepted deboarding and followed up in the courts. Why doesn’t that apply to the airline? When he refused to move (violated his contract), why was it appropriate for them to use physical force, but not him? Why shouldn’t they have left him there, selected someone else, and then sued him in court, after?
That would have sucked for the other person (who could also have sued him, I imagine), but I don’t understand why violence is an acceptable tool for one party in the dispute, but not the other.
Because post 9/11 all airline passengers are treated as suspected terrorists. They take advantage of the genuine need to maintain control of the cabin in security situations to have anyone who protests or disobeys the airline’s terrible treatment of passengers physically dragged off the plane.
Well, there’s also the problem that tired crew are more likely to make mistakes and crash the airplane… Most of the time that doesn’t happen, of course, but when it does happen it’s a LOT of money between the cost of the airplane, compensation to crew heirs, passengers’ families…
Even if the David Dao dragged from the airplane is the one who had their licensed suspended, exchanged prescriptions for sex, played professional poker, etc. it’s irrelevant because that particular Dr. Dao did in fact have his license reinstated and is seeing patients again. So “I have patients to see” could be just as truthful for him as for any other practicing Dr. Dao.
Beyond that - it doesn’t matter, because his past wasn’t why he was chosen to be roughed up and literally dragged off an airplane. That’s not acceptable regardless of whether the victim has a shady past or is a saint.
Remember-it wasn’t the airline that instituted force in this case. It was a duly appointed law enforcement officer that instituted force, and did so independent of any request than “He is a trespasser-please remove him.”
At which point his lawyer says “They must have not been too concerned since they let him fly to his destination-why are you harassing him after the fact?”
Assuming that’s what they said, would you agree that the officer should have said “this is a civil, not a criminal, matter and you’ll have to resolve this through the courts”?
First, I was asking a question about the nature of the contract, so your vehemence is absolutely unnecessary, and second, not screw the contract, specifically pay out the penalties delineated in the contract for violating it.
What? So, like, if someone hits my car and tries to leave without giving me insurance information, am I obliged to physically restrain him, lest his lawyer later argue that I apparently didn’t care enough to tackle him at the time?
Ahh, we’re supposed to remember this from the recorded/transcribed conversation between the flight crew and law enforcement officers? Or, perhaps, you’re a psychic?
I think he was bone-chillingly terrified for his life. That seems like the best explanation for his behavior, anyway (including that blood curdling scream).
But the police only got involved because the air crew requested assistance. Had they been able to resolve this peacefully (say by asking another passenger to disembark), the police would not have been involved.