United airlines PR disaster
#91
Re: United airlines PR disaster
The original claim was that the police didn't face consequences in the US, with the response being that this officer "did get suspended". That's a little misleading given that "paid administrative leave" isn't a consequence per se, but standard practice whilst an incident like this is investigated. The officer may or may not face actual consequences down the road, of course.
#92
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: United airlines PR disaster
It is at times like this we can thank God for WP.
#93
Banned
Joined: Dec 2015
Location: california
Posts: 6,035
Re: United airlines PR disaster
Flying these days sucks. Time for Star Trek Beam me up Scotty Technology
#95
Re: United airlines PR disaster
just when you thought it was dying down...
it seems that the plane was not "overbooked". United are in for a lovely lawsuit.
"Since the flight was not actually overbooked, but instead only fully booked, with the exact number of passengers as seats available, United Airlines had no legal right to force any passengers to give up their seats to prioritize others. What United did was give preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, which would have been a violation of 14 CFR 250.2a (if the flight were overbooked, as United had originally claimed). Since Dr. Dao was already seated, it was clear that his seat had already been "reserved" and "confirmed" to accommodate him specifically.
A United Airlines spokesperson said that since Dr. Dao refused to give up his seat and leave the plane voluntarily, airline employees "had to" call upon airport security to force him to comply. However, since the flight was not overbooked, United Airlines had no legal right to give his seat to another passenger. In United Airline's Contract of Service, they list the reasons that a passenger may be refused service, many of which are reasonable, such as "failure to pay" or lacking "proof of identity." Nowhere in the terms of service does United Airlines claim to have unilateral authority to refuse service to anyone, for any reason (which would be illegal anyway)."
from https://www.inc.com/cynthia-than/the...share=facebook
it seems that the plane was not "overbooked". United are in for a lovely lawsuit.
"Since the flight was not actually overbooked, but instead only fully booked, with the exact number of passengers as seats available, United Airlines had no legal right to force any passengers to give up their seats to prioritize others. What United did was give preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, which would have been a violation of 14 CFR 250.2a (if the flight were overbooked, as United had originally claimed). Since Dr. Dao was already seated, it was clear that his seat had already been "reserved" and "confirmed" to accommodate him specifically.
A United Airlines spokesperson said that since Dr. Dao refused to give up his seat and leave the plane voluntarily, airline employees "had to" call upon airport security to force him to comply. However, since the flight was not overbooked, United Airlines had no legal right to give his seat to another passenger. In United Airline's Contract of Service, they list the reasons that a passenger may be refused service, many of which are reasonable, such as "failure to pay" or lacking "proof of identity." Nowhere in the terms of service does United Airlines claim to have unilateral authority to refuse service to anyone, for any reason (which would be illegal anyway)."
from https://www.inc.com/cynthia-than/the...share=facebook
#96
Re: United airlines PR disaster
A police officers perspective — cops should have never been called to United incident
A police officers perspective — cops should have never been called to United incident | TheHill
A police officers perspective — cops should have never been called to United incident | TheHill