Officer on leave after dragging United Airlines passenger off plane

[Chip Allen]

Airlines have behaved as a law unto themselves ever since September 11th, 2001. The public has simply no recourse when  flying. Just another example of corporate America reigning supreme over the people they ostensibly serve.

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

Well there you are. Exactly as I described. They reasoned with him calmly for a long time. The guy refused to comply. You don't argue with security. You comply and if you have a grievance, take it up legally later.

 

This kind of mindless, childish arrogance and selfishness is unacceptable in any circumstance, especially on a plane when everyone is being held up.

 

People on here should stop promoting this kind of anti-social behaviour. Calls to boycott the airline or for the airline to be brought down completely (as some individual above wants), or for management to be dismissed, or simply for people to lose their jobs - all display a barely sane vindictiveness and brutality.

Maybe the good doctor didn't share their reasoning, and people didn't argue with Hitler, maybe they should have. Whichever way you look at it he is going to be considerably richer than most of us!

[dick dasterdly]

1 minute ago, ddavidovsky said:

Well there you are. Exactly as I described. They reasoned with him calmly for a long time. The guy refused to comply. You don't argue with security. You comply and if you have a grievance, take it up legally later.

 

This kind of mindless, childish arrogance and selfishness is unacceptable in any circumstance, especially on a plane when everyone is being held up.

 

People on here should stop promoting this kind of anti-social behaviour. Calls to boycott the airline or for the airline to be brought down completely (as some individual above wants), or for management to be dismissed, or simply for people to lose their jobs - all display a barely sane vindictiveness and brutality.

Difficult to know where to start with this post as you've so obviously missed/ignored the points raised by so many other posters.

 

I'd add that the other passengers also seemed to be less than happy (British understatement) at the way this guy was treated.

[Rob13]

Good to see the airlines getting some due justice. Selling a seat twice and expecting paying passengers to cover for the resilting overbookings is absurrd.

 

Hope they get slammed hard.

[reenatinnakor]

Well there you are. Exactly as I described. They reasoned with him calmly for a long time. The guy refused to comply. You don't argue with security. You comply and if you have a grievance, take it up legally later.
 
This kind of mindless, childish arrogance and selfishness is unacceptable in any circumstance, especially on a plane when everyone is being held up.
 
People on here should stop promoting this kind of anti-social behaviour. Calls to boycott the airline or for the airline to be brought down completely (as some individual above wants), or for management to be dismissed, or simply for people to lose their jobs - all display a barely sane vindictiveness and brutality.

I absolutely want United to go bankrupt over this and all their employees to lose their jobs, not only will it be funny but it will be karma for the initial non apology of the boss and the gung ho don't fxxxxg mess with me attitude of the low intelligent bruisers who think the law doesn't apply to them. All this could have been sorted out for a few thousand dollars... But no, now it's going to cost them billions! Hilarious.

Its a bit like Man United or Chelsea losing a game... No one cares how they lose or unfair it is, just as long as they lose it will be funny.

Sent from my LG-H990 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[thaihome]

I actually agree that the airline had the legal right to remove the doctor from the plane and he was in the wrong all the way. The issue I have is the method that was employed against a 69 year old man was excessive force.

 

As I have said several times, there were numerous other ways to handle this that would not have resulted in the doctor becoming a martyr to airline incompetence and police brutality.  

 

To say that you cannot expect a security officer representing the airport authority or the airline staff at the scene to be able to handle such a situation to avoid such a scene is ludicrous.  If they can't handle a 69 year old man without injuring him in front of 70 some odd people what the <deleted> are they doing in those jobs in first place. Handling these situations to avoid such a scene is their job.

 

What goes through the mind of somebody that will reach across a seat and jerk a 69 year old man into the aisle in front of an entire plane full of people, many with their phones recording the event. You really want such a person responsible for security in one of the largest airports in the US?

TH 

Edited April 13, 2017 by thaihome

[wordsofwisdom]

I won't be flying in United Airlines. It's not safe for me. Air Asia does a far better job than United Airlines. RIP UA.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[sandrabbit]

I've seen a news report this morning that says all the passengers will be compensated by having their tickets refunded, does this mean cash or worthless vouchers again?. If they don't offer cash it will be another shot in the foot as I presume a lot of those witnesses will not want to fly UA again.

[sandrabbit]

Just found this, interesting.

 

United Airlines is taking a beating for forcibly removing a passenger from one of its planes, but the passengers who shot the videos that exposed the incident may also run into some trouble.

According to the airline's policy on electronic devices, passengers are free to take pictures and shoot video as long as they are "capturing personal events." But the policy forbids passengers from capturing other passengers or airline personnel without their consent.

Technically, that means the passengers were in violation of United's policies and could face legal repercussions in civil court or be barred from future United flights. Practically, aviation and legal experts doubt United would take that step.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/04/12/videos-united-airlines-flight-may-violate-rules/100372674/

[billd766]

4 hours ago, tuktuktuk said:

Why am I not surprised now to read that Dr. Dao is also a "pill doctor"?  He's been charged multiple times for illegal prescription drug offenses and had his license to practice medicine suspended for a number of years.  He still practices under a restricted license.  Not that it justifies how he was treated, but it explains the disdain for authority.  If I were United, in addition to apologizing and offering a settlement, I'd also refuse service to him in the future.

 

Nice try at blaming the victim by bringing into the story something that has absolute nothing to do with it.

 

If he had been a convicted murderer and served his time would UA have refused his custom? How about if he was a convicted bank robber who had served his time, or an ex CEO who served time for swindling the public and fraud. Does that make a difference?

 

How about me who was banned from driving for a year for no insurance. That was back in 1962 when I was 18. If I were to try to fly on UA would they refuse to carry me?

 

What he did prior to the flight is of no consequence at all.

 

The problem has been with UA and their actions and with their CEO.

 

At 72 if I were selected " at random" to be removed from the flight and I had to be at work at 8 in the morning I would have refused also.

 

The fault and the solution lay in UA hands and they screwed it up completely from the start. Now they are facing the "unexpected backlash" and are still failing to understand the problem.

 

If the CEO was an honourable and moral person he would have accepted the blame and resigned. He didn't/hasn't and can't seem to understand the problem.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, Rhys said:

....these types of MDs are royal Rectums to deal with in the hospital setting ... yes being an impaired MD would explain his attitude of entitlement.   Of course, sad they way he was removed should follow approved physical removal procedures, but the impaired MD brought it on himself, delaying departure and creating a spectacle as he said he would, "you have to drag me out of this seat."  

 

No excuses both ways...

 

 

 

 

 

Another victim blamer.

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, sandrabbit said:

Just found this, interesting.

 

United Airlines is taking a beating for forcibly removing a passenger from one of its planes, but the passengers who shot the videos that exposed the incident may also run into some trouble.

 

According to the airline's policy on electronic devices, passengers are free to take pictures and shoot video as long as they are "capturing personal events." But the policy forbids passengers from capturing other passengers or airline personnel without their consent.

 

Technically, that means the passengers were in violation of United's policies and could face legal repercussions in civil court or be barred from future United flights. Practically, aviation and legal experts doubt United would take that step.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/04/12/videos-united-airlines-flight-may-violate-rules/100372674/

To look on the bright side, UA are already in enough trouble - unlikely they'd be stupid enough to again misuse any rules/laws!

[lvr181]

2 hours ago, eldragon said:

 

My opinion is if you're asked to leave a plane for whatever reason, you do it. As soon as you resist that request, you're asking for trouble. Sorry, I can't go into any more detail. I'm exhausted from discussing the topic here and with my friends. Dipterocarp nailed my thoughts on the issue. If you need any more clarification, check out his post at #305.

OMG. If there is no "threat to security" reason ,then the law is an ass and your defending it, right? Do you work, consult/an agent or an employee for an airline?

 

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."  I can only guess that that the United CEO has blinkers (used on horses) on, cannot think outside of the square or is in capable of critical thinking!

[ddavidovsky]

1 hour ago, reenatinnakor said:

 

I absolutely want United to go bankrupt over this and all their employees to lose their jobs, not only will it be funny but it will be karma for the initial non apology of the boss and the gung ho don't fxxxxg mess with me attitude of the low intelligent bruisers who think the law doesn't apply to them. All this could have been sorted out for a few thousand dollars... But no, now it's going to cost them billions! Hilarious.

Its a bit like Man United or Chelsea losing a game... No one cares how they lose or unfair it is, just as long as they lose it will be funny.

Sent from my LG-H990 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Well that says it all. You want thousands of innocent people to lose their jobs on account of one trivial incident that some petulant idiot brought on himself? You would actually be laughing at destroying all those lives? Anyone who thinks this way is a menace to society, and in my book depraved and barely sane.

[ddavidovsky]

27 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

OMG. If there is no "threat to security" reason ,then the law is an ass and your defending it, right? Do you work, consult/an agent or an employee for an airline?

 

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."  I can only guess that that the United CEO has blinkers (used on horses) on, cannot think outside of the square or is in capable of critical thinking!

Listen to yourself.

 

[reenatinnakor]

Well that says it all. You want thousands of innocent people to lose their jobs on account of one trivial incident that some petulant idiot brought on himself? You would actually be laughing at destroying all those lives? Anyone who thinks this way is a menace to society, and in my book depraved and barely sane.

Next time your wife, daughter or mother gets dragged off a plane on her back for the world to see... Then it's trivial.


Sent from my LG-H990 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[F4UCorsair]

3 hours ago, tuktuktuk said:

I have to put myself in the shoes of the security guards.  They were no doubt briefed by the captain.  He didn't accompany them because he had a responsibility to secure the cockpit in case of trouble.  They were probably only told that the airline has decided to remove this passenger from the flight and they were authorized to use force to compel him to leave the aircraft.  It would have been very hard for them to go back to the captain later and say "he doesn't want to leave".  They probably went too far, but after the good doctor punches you in the stomach or kicks you or bites you the animal instinct kicks in.

The Captain wouldn't have been involved other than being advised by ground crew what was happening. He/she has nothing to do with those decisions.  

The command begins, effectively, when the doors are closed.

I do agree with your other post tuk, in that the doctor has a problem with being a law abiding person.  He's been suspended, and has only a limited licence to practice medicine because of inappropriate prescribing.

Educated but stupid.

 

Edited April 13, 2017 by F4UCorsair

[ddavidovsky]

4 minutes ago, reenatinnakor said:

 

Next time your wife, daughter or mother gets dragged off a plane on her back for the world to see... Then it's trivial.


Sent from my LG-H990 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

That's right. Though there's no question of that happening, as everybody in my family are rational and decent. They would simply have got off - must be something to do with the way we were brought up.

 

On the other hand, if my wife, daughter or mother lost their jobs because of your butt-hurt 'social justice' campaigning, then that is not trivial at all. Understand?

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, ddavidovsky said:

Well that says it all. You want thousands of innocent people to lose their jobs on account of one trivial incident that some petulant idiot brought on himself? You would actually be laughing at destroying all those lives? Anyone who thinks this way is a menace to society, and in my book depraved and barely sane.

Yet again you're ignoring all the points raised about why this should never have happened - preferring to rely on ' it was all the victim's fault'.....

 

Having said this, I do agree that the odd poster (much like yourself, but from the opposite direction) hoping that the airline fails are equally wrong.  Nobody wants to see innocent staff losing their jobs.

 

This far from "trivial" incident was the result of gross incompetence and deliberate 'misinterpretation' of laws/rules by lower rung UA management.  To make things even worse,  a security man decided (or was instructed) to physically remove the randomly chosen passenger even though he clearly wasn't a security threat - just an annoyance to UA.

 

Compounded even further when UA's CEO blamed the victim!

[Basil B]

14 hours ago, Scott said:

As I understand it, there are a lot of Asians who are upset and see this as being racial in nature.   I think United has a fairly prominent presence in Asia, so not so good for business.  

 

Whether what I have heard from Asian friends about how this is being received overseas, is correct or not, I don't know.   It is a perception and with situations like this perception is important.  

 

 

 

I am not sure if the selection of passengers was racially biased but the lawyers for David Dao:

Quote

... filed an emergency request with an Illinois court to make sure that United preserves evidence such as videos, cockpit voice recordings, passenger and crew lists and other materials related to United Flight 3411.

http://news.sky.com/story/united-passenger-david-dao-takes-legal-action-over-forceful-removal-10835055

 

Presume one question will be to demonstrate how they selected which passengers to off load, I am sure they will be looking for any from of discrimination. 

 

The CVR (cockpit Voice Recorder) would be very interesting as likely a lot of discussions took place in the cockpit, I do not see any reason for the Captain to leave the cockpit until things started to turn nasty.

 

In the mean time the CEO of United is being lined up for the job as the next White House Press Secretary... 

 

 

Edited April 13, 2017 by Basil B

[ddavidovsky]

19 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Yet again you're ignoring all the points raised about why this should never have happened - preferring to rely on ' it was all the victim's fault'.....

 

Having said this, I do agree that the odd poster (much like yourself, but from the opposite direction) hoping that the airline fails are equally wrong.  Nobody wants to see innocent staff losing their jobs.

 

This far from "trivial" incident was the result of gross incompetence and deliberate 'misinterpretation' of laws/rules by lower rung UA management.  To make things even worse,  a security man decided (or was instructed) to physically remove the randomly chosen passenger even though he clearly wasn't a security threat - just an annoyance to UA.

 

Compounded even further when UA's CEO blamed the victim!

You're ignoring the fact that the guy basically asked for it - in fact he literally asked for it. You're promoting victimhood even for people in the wrong and this attitude is turning society into a bunch of self-entitle whiners. This is actually the only serious issue here.

 

Perspective needed. Considering all the horror that goes on in the world everywhere, everyday,  one trouble-causing idiot being removed from a plane is... simply nothing.

[Flustered]

9 hours ago, eldragon said:

What is an "internal, corporate decision"? When I say the airline was entitled to their decisions, I mean they were within the terms of the agreement they make with passengers when they sell them a ticket. It's covered in the contract of carriage. The fine print. I could be wrong, or it could eventually be determined that I'm wrong, but at the moment everything I'm reading on the issue says UA had the right to remove Mr. Dao.

As always, this will be settled out of court and Mr Dao has already hired his team of lawyers while in a hospital bed with a minor scratch to his face.

 

From a legal point, United made a big mistake by publicly announcing that the aircraft was overbooked, 4 passengers were to be denied boarding and this was the reason for his eviction. It was not of course overbooked, the passengers had already been allocated seats and boarded the plane. They just wanted the seats for 4 air crew (last minute arrivals after the plane had been boarded) that they had failed to arrange seats for in advance. They were using the "staff come before passengers" routine. Had they stated that they needed the seats for air crew to enable another plane to fly they could have been in the clear.

 

United's CEO has already stated on television that a paying passenger should not have been asked to give up his seat and then be evicted by force just so that air crew can take them. He further said that "this will never happen again" (until the next time).

 

 

[mommysboy]

33 minutes ago, reenatinnakor said:

 

Next time your wife, daughter or mother gets dragged off a plane on her back for the world to see... Then it's trivial.


Sent from my LG-H990 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

This is a major point.  Up until a few years ago, organizations could get away with high handedness in many forms.  If the story ever made the newspapers, many of us would pay scant regard, or assume it was sensationalized, or assume that it was so beyond belief that we need not bother, or that there was more to the story than met the eye. 

 

This latest event shows the power of video footage, for good or otherwise.

 

I think it shows that these things can happen to anyone!  And that is why people are crying foul so loudly.

 

The doctor was wrong not to leave the plane in the sense that he did not think of his own welfare.  Under different circumstances he could have been charged with a criminal offence. 

 

One thing is for sure: no seated customer behaving normally will ever be turfed out of his seat for spurious reasons.  Had he not have made a stand, it would be business as usual.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mommysboy]

7 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

You're ignoring the fact that the guy basically asked for it - in fact he literally asked for it. You're promoting victimhood even for people in the wrong and this attitude is turning society into a bunch of self-entitle whiners. This is actually the only serious issue here.

 

Perspective needed. Considering all the horror that goes on in the world everywhere, everyday,  one trouble-causing idiot being removed from a plane is... simply nothing.

 

So speaks a man somewhat aloof to real life.

[Basil B]

1 minute ago, ddavidovsky said:

You're ignoring the fact that the guy basically asked for it - in fact he literally asked for it. You're promoting victimhood even for people in the wrong and this attitude is turning society into a bunch of self-entitle whiners. This is actually the only serious issue here.

 

Perspective needed. Considering all the horror that goes on in the world everywhere, everyday,  one trouble-causing idiot being removed from a plane is... simply nothing.

I assume any Captain of a plane under Air Laws of most countries has the legal right to off load any passenger without giving any reason, (passengers could sue the airline for compensation if there was no good reason).

 

But the way he was manhandled off the plane was not done professionally, I assume the Captain was telling them to get it done quickly as every minute on the stand was costing the airline thousands of dollars...

 

Will United be counter suing Dao for holding up the plane???

[55Jay]

6 hours ago, eldragon said:

What is an "internal, corporate decision"? When I say the airline was entitled to their decisions, I mean they were within the terms of the agreement they make with passengers when they sell them a ticket. It's covered in the contract of carriage. The fine print. I could be wrong, or it could eventually be determined that I'm wrong, but at the moment everything I'm reading on the issue says UA had the right to remove Mr. Dao.

Meaning that the air crew/UA staff have been emboldened and reinforced to play fast and loose with the authority and recourse they DO have under the law.  In other words, boot strapping the law for trivial and/or non-criminal/ security/safety/threat related situations, which the law was intended for.

 

 

49 U.S. Code § 46504 - Interference with flight crew members and attendants: An individual on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform those duties, or attempts or conspires to do such an act.

 

14 CFR 135.120: No person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crew member in the performance of the crew member's duties aboard an aircraft being operated under this part.

 

Confronting this is uncomfortable and as you've said in a later post, you are now fatigued by this conversation.  I know, makes my head hurt, thoughts are scrambled by mental interference from a lifetime of programming, bias and reflexive thinking - mind the cops, pay your taxes, be a Patriot, etc.   You seem to be balanced though, but when you got tired, you check binned and went with your initial reflex.  

 

Anyway, have a good one, happy Songkran.   

[reenatinnakor]

That's right. Though there's no question of that happening, as everybody in my family are rational and decent. They would simply have got off - must be something to do with the way we were brought up.
 
On the other hand, if my wife, daughter or mother lost their jobs because of your butt-hurt 'social justice' campaigning, then that is not trivial at all. Understand?

Yeah sure. Your daughter has just been involved in a serous accident and is in hospital and your wife is on the first flight out to go see her... Off course she will just get off and not kick up a fuss. Your family is amazing... I totally want to be your family.

Sent from my LG-H990 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dick dasterdly]

34 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Yet again you're ignoring all the points raised about why this should never have happened - preferring to rely on ' it was all the victim's fault'.....

 

Having said this, I do agree that the odd poster (much like yourself, but from the opposite direction) hoping that the airline fails are equally wrong.  Nobody wants to see innocent staff losing their jobs.

 

This far from "trivial" incident was the result of gross incompetence and deliberate 'misinterpretation' of laws/rules by lower rung UA management.  To make things even worse,  a security man decided (or was instructed) to physically remove the randomly chosen passenger even though he clearly wasn't a security threat - just an annoyance to UA.

 

Compounded even further when UA's CEO blamed the victim!

 

11 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

You're ignoring the fact that the guy basically asked for it - in fact he literally asked for it. You're promoting victimhood even for people in the wrong and this attitude is turning society into a bunch of self-entitle whiners. This is actually the only serious issue here.

 

Perspective needed. Considering all the horror that goes on in the world everywhere, everyday,  one trouble-causing idiot being removed from a plane is... simply nothing.

I give up - you continue to ignore all the points raised and rely on "the guy basically asked for it - in fact he literally asked for it" .

[dick dasterdly]

15 minutes ago, Basil B said:

I am not sure if the selection of passengers was racially biased but the lawyers for David Dao:

http://news.sky.com/story/united-passenger-david-dao-takes-legal-action-over-forceful-removal-10835055

 

Presume one question will be to demonstrate how they selected which passengers to off load, I am sure they will be looking for any from of discrimination. 

 

The CVR (cockpit Voice Recorder) would be very interesting as likely a lot of discussions took place in the cockpit, I do not see any reason for the Captain to leave the cockpit until things started to turn nasty.

 

In the mean time the CEO of United is being lined up for the job as the next White House Press Secretary... 

 

 

I suspect (but could be wrong) that the victim's lawyers petitioning the court to stop any recordings being deleted has more to do with the chain of events - e.g. reasons given for calling in security staff to physically remove a passenger from the 'plane.

 

But agree that it will be interesting to find out the discussions between crew staff and the  'random selection' procedure applied.

[Kadilo]

Now the lawyers are involved things will escalate no end. From an incident that could of been prevented in the first place then escalated due to UA incompetence they will find themselves footing the bill for not only the Docs physical injury but no doubt for the lasting mental and emotional damage they will claim. He won't have to play poker again for sure.
The court scene will be a bit like on here, 2 extremes. Those that want UA to go bust and the inevitable fallout from that, and those that say the Doc asked for it.
Of course the reality as always is somewhere in between.
I'm sure UA wish they could turn the clock back .........


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect