United Airlines customer service

jordane93 said:
Unfortunately the media already "knows" who is wrong. That's the problem. Everyone is so eager to get out the keyboard pitchforks when they don't even know all the facts. They see an outrageous headline and foam at the mouth.
Click to expand...

I'll play, what hypothetical facts would make this practice "ok"? The guy bought the seat. The company told him it was ok to use it for his infant. When the gate agent saw that the older kid didn't board, they sold his seat (FOR THE SECOND TIME) Delta isn't disputing these facts, so tell me, what "might" come out to that would make what Delta did "ok"?
 
Mike Smith said:
I'll play, what hypothetical facts would make this practice "ok"? The guy bought the seat. The company told him it was ok to use it for his infant. When the gate agent saw that the older kid didn't board, they sold his seat (FOR THE SECOND TIME) Delta isn't disputing these facts, so tell me, what "might" come out to that would make what Delta did "ok"?
Click to expand...
The employee was wrong for giving them bad information. The older kid got on another flight, therefore foreiting his seat? Seat opened up for another passenger. Here's part of the contract of carriage

The purchaser of a Delta ticket and the passenger intending to use such ticket are responsible for ensuring that the ticket accurately states the passenger's name. Presentation of a ticket for transportation on Delta by someone other than the passenger named thereon renders the ticket void. Such ticket will be subject to confiscation and will be ineligible for any refund.
 
Last edited:
jordane93 said:
The older kid got on another flight, therefore foreiting his seat? Seat opened up for another passenger.
Click to expand...

If I buy 2 seats for the opera, and my wife can't make it, I get 2 seats for myself.
If I buy 2 seats for a football match, and my wife can't make it, I get 2 seats for myself.
If I buy 2 seats on a train, and my wife can't make it, I get 2 seats for myself.

What in the name of Zeus, makes the airline industry so special that they get to resell that second seat?
 
deonb said:
If I buy 2 seats for the opera, and my wife can't make it, I get 2 seats for myself.
If I buy 2 seats for a football match, and my wife can't make it, I get 2 seats for myself.
If I buy 2 seats on a train, and my wife can't make it, I get 2 seats for myself.

What in the name of Zeus, makes the airline industry so special that they get to resell that second seat?
Click to expand...
:dunno: Maybe read through this https://www.delta.com/content/dam/delta-www/pdfs/legal/contract_of_carriage_dom.pdf#page17
 
jordane93 said:
:dunno: Maybe read through this https://www.delta.com/content/dam/delta-www/pdfs/legal/contract_of_carriage_dom.pdf#page17
Click to expand...

I don't care if they have a "All your base are belong to us" carriage agreement. No other industry would ever get away with that. For that matter no free market enterprise would get away with that - you have to have collusion between all of the service providers involved to come up with an agreement that is so utterly against common sense, so that consumers would have no choice or ability to select a more sane option.

Which by definition, would make them a cartel.
 
deonb said:
I don't care if they have a "All your base are belong to us" carriage agreement. No other industry would ever get away with that. For that matter no free market enterprise would get away with that - you have to have collusion between all of the service providers involved to come up with an agreement that is so utterly against common sense, so that consumers would have no choice in the matter of being able to select a more sane option.

Which by definition, would make them a cartel.
Click to expand...
So per the CoC Delta was in the right? Seems to me like some people have issues with reading the CoC and really have no idea what their rights or lack of rights are.
 
jordane93 said:
So per the CoC Delta was in the right? Seems to me like some people have issues with reading the CoC and really have no idea what their rights are.
Click to expand...

The were in the wrong the moment they drafted that CoC. I'm not specifically picking in Delta, they all are in cahoots with that ridiculous named passenger restriction when it comes to empty seats.
 
Dao also was in breach. You buy A seat on A flight, not seat 17A on the 9:05 flight. The airline can assign you a different seat on a different flight. Most don't know this.

But exceptions are made all the time. This would have been a great time to make an exception. Shielded by the contract or not, Delta F'd up and admitted as much. Bet they'll have a press release announcing changes to the policy in a few days.
 
deonb said:
The were in the wrong the moment they drafted that CoC. I'm not specifically picking in Delta, they all are in cahoots with that ridiculous named passenger restriction when it comes to empty seats.
Click to expand...
So they enforced the CoC that apparently no one reads and they get flak for it? Again, the employee was an idiot for saying she was going to take away the couple's kid but I don't think we should be rewarding or raising pitchforks for people who don't know their rights and how to read the CoC.
 
I you're saying this wouldn't have happened if he bought both tickets in his name?
 
This is what's known as a contract of adhesion.
 
jordane93 said:
Unfortunately the media already "knows" who is wrong. That's the problem. Everyone is so eager to get out the keyboard pitchforks when they don't even know all the facts. They see an outrageous headline and foam at the mouth.
Click to expand...
But you're taking the other side without knowing all the facts either.

I viewed the video on BBC and I'm sure of one thing, the female rep who got in and tried to explain to the father that the FAA doesn't allow children under 2 to use a car seat was wrong. Children under 2 are not forced to be lap children. It's an option many parents use so they don't need to buy another seat. However, I have known some parents to buy a seat for their sub-2-year old children for safety reasons. Also, we allowed babies in car seats on our airplane.
 
Here's a way to look at it - Family plans this trip well in advance and buys tickets when the prices are low. Older kid makes a last minute change of plans onto another flight, family now wants to use that extra ticket for a kid they had planned to keep on their lap. That fills the empty seat that the older kid vacated, and the seat has been paid for. Airline now misses out on chance to re-sell that seat for a premium to a last minute pax willing to pay more.

With all the pricing formulas, I'm guessing airlines really don't want to be dealing with ticket brokers. The "no name change" rules prevents someone from buying up a block of tickets and then reselling them. And I have no idea how TSA plays into all of this.
 
jordane93 said:
So they enforced the CoC that apparently no one reads and they get flak for it? Again, the employee was an idiot for saying she was going to take away the couple's kid but I don't think we should be rewarding or raising pitchforks for people who don't know their rights and how to read the CoC.
Click to expand...

You are close, but not quite.
Customer: "Hey, I bought three tickets for this flight, one for me, one for my wife and one for my 18yo son. I want to buy another ticket on an earlier flight for my 18yo son so that I can use the seat for my infant, can I do that?"
Delta CSR: " Yes Mr. Customer, you certainly can do that!"
Customer: "fantastic, because right now, before we board would be a great time to tell me I can't."
Delta CSR: "No problem Mr. Customer, we know that there is no way you can possibly know all the ins and outs of the Contract of Carriage unless you are a transportation attorney and since I am a representative of Delta, you can believe what I say."
Customer: "Thanks, you guys are great!"
Customer: "Hello Ms. Gate Agent. This ticket is in my 18yo sons name, but I talked to a CSR and they said it would be fine. Is it ok?"
Delta Gate Agent: Yes Mr. Customer, its just fine.
Customer: "Fantastic, we will board now"
~~~~~sometime later~~~~~~
Delta Flight Attendant: "Excuse me Mr. Customer, but we noticed that the person this seat is ticketed to didn't board."
Customer: "Yes, my older son. I called customer service and talked to the gate agent and they said it was fine to use it for my infant son SINCE I PAID FOR THE SEAT."
Delta Flight Attendant: I'm sorry, but we sold that seat AGAIN because we have a legal document that says we can."
Customer: "But, I was told, not once, but twice that it was ok. I was told this long before we boarded."
Delta Flight Attendant: " Mr. Customer, if you don't vacate that seat you will be arrested and sent to jail and your children will be taken from you."
~~~~~~Mr. Customer and family deplane~~~~~
Do I have any of that wrong?
 
jordane93 said:
So per the CoC Delta was in the right? Seems to me like some people have issues with reading the CoC and really have no idea what their rights or lack of rights are.
Click to expand...

Look up the term "contract of adhesion." Courts tend to take a dim view of such contracts. That's why software EULAs rarely hold up when their more ridiculous clauses are challenged.

Rich
 
paflyer said:
How about the jail threats and threatening the parents that their kids would be taken from them? You airline guys OK with that?
Click to expand...

Nah, that's usually government's job. You know, like, if you let your kids walk to the park or something.
 
Mike Smith said:
You are close, but not quite.
Customer: "Hey, I bought three tickets for this flight, one for me, one for my wife and one for my 18yo son. I want to buy another ticket on an earlier flight for my 18yo son so that I can use the seat for my infant, can I do that?"
Delta CSR: " Yes Mr. Customer, you certainly can do that!"
Customer: "fantastic, because right now, before we board would be a great time to tell me I can't."
Delta CSR: "No problem Mr. Customer, we know that there is no way you can possibly know all the ins and outs of the Contract of Carriage unless you are a transportation attorney and since I am a representative of Delta, you can believe what I say."
Customer: "Thanks, you guys are great!"
Customer: "Hello Ms. Gate Agent. This ticket is in my 18yo sons name, but I talked to a CSR and they said it would be fine. Is it ok?"
Delta Gate Agent: Yes Mr. Customer, its just fine.
Customer: "Fantastic, we will board now"
~~~~~sometime later~~~~~~
Delta Flight Attendant: "Excuse me Mr. Customer, but we noticed that the person this seat is ticketed to didn't board."
Customer: "Yes, my older son. I called customer service and talked to the gate agent and they said it was fine to use it for my infant son SINCE I PAID FOR THE SEAT."
Delta Flight Attendant: I'm sorry, but we sold that seat AGAIN because we have a legal document that says we can."
Customer: "But, I was told, not once, but twice that it was ok. I was told this long before we boarded."
Delta Flight Attendant: " Mr. Customer, if you don't vacate that seat you will be arrested and sent to jail and your children will be taken from you."
~~~~~~Mr. Customer and family deplane~~~~~
Do I have any of that wrong?
Click to expand...
Again, the CSR was wrong for giving them wrong information and handling it the way they did. I've said that many times.
 
jordane93 said:
Again, the CSR was wrong for giving them wrong information and handling it the way they did. I've said that many times.
Click to expand...

Yes you have. I know you are a class guy, I respect you, but you are trying to defend what happened because Delta "could" do what they did. I agree with you that they where within their legal right to do it, but you cannot blame the customer for acting the way he did. Had the CSR given him different information, I would bet he would have done something different, The customer didn't do anything wrong, Delta did. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean that you SHOULD do something. I think that is the issue here. I get that it is your profession, I do, but you cant defend this. It is wrong, maybe not to the legal technicality, but it was absolutely morally wrong.
 
Mike Smith said:
You are close, but not quite.
Customer: "Hey, I bought three tickets for this flight, one for me, one for my wife and one for my 18yo son. I want to buy another ticket on an earlier flight for my 18yo son so that I can use the seat for my infant, can I do that?"
Delta CSR: " Yes Mr. Customer, you certainly can do that!"
Customer: "fantastic, because right now, before we board would be a great time to tell me I can't."
Delta CSR: "No problem Mr. Customer, we know that there is no way you can possibly know all the ins and outs of the Contract of Carriage unless you are a transportation attorney and since I am a representative of Delta, you can believe what I say."
Customer: "Thanks, you guys are great!"
Customer: "Hello Ms. Gate Agent. This ticket is in my 18yo sons name, but I talked to a CSR and they said it would be fine. Is it ok?"
Delta Gate Agent: Yes Mr. Customer, its just fine.
Customer: "Fantastic, we will board now"
~~~~~sometime later~~~~~~
Delta Flight Attendant: "Excuse me Mr. Customer, but we noticed that the person this seat is ticketed to didn't board."
Customer: "Yes, my older son. I called customer service and talked to the gate agent and they said it was fine to use it for my infant son SINCE I PAID FOR THE SEAT."
Delta Flight Attendant: I'm sorry, but we sold that seat AGAIN because we have a legal document that says we can."
Customer: "But, I was told, not once, but twice that it was ok. I was told this long before we boarded."
Delta Flight Attendant: " Mr. Customer, if you don't vacate that seat you will be arrested and sent to jail and your children will be taken from you."
~~~~~~Mr. Customer and family deplane~~~~~
Do I have any of that wrong?
Click to expand...
Ding ding ding. We have a winner.
 
Mike Smith said:
Yes you have. I know you are a class guy, I respect you, but you are trying to defend what happened because Delta "could" do what they did. I agree with you that they where within their legal right to do it, but you cannot blame the customer for acting the way he did. Had the CSR given him different information, I would bet he would have done something different, The customer didn't do anything wrong, Delta did. Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean that you SHOULD do something. I think that is the issue here. I get that it is your profession, I do, but you cant defend this. It is wrong, maybe not to the legal technicality, but it was absolutely morally wrong.
Click to expand...
Handled poorly. Yes. Terrible customer service. Yes. Airline at fault. No. It's just something we'll have to disagree about. They need to handle things better and explain why they are right and the customer is wrong.
 
So what should the customer have done differently? He asked for and received permission from Delta employees! They didn't communicate with each other which does not make him wrong.
 
Jordan,I've really enjoyed following your journey over the years, have learned a lot from your posts, and I know you are a good guy. But when the scandal hits this close to home...post anonymously, bite your tongue, or disclose your bias straight away.
 
Pnwannabe2 said:
Jordan,I've really enjoyed following your journey over the years, have learned a lot from your posts, and I know you are a good guy. But when the scandal hits this close to home...post anonymously, bite your tongue, or disclose your bias straight away.
Click to expand...
I think my bias is pretty clear:)
 
jordane93 said:
I think my bias is pretty clear:)
Click to expand...
Don't feel bad, EVERY airline pilot, current or retired, that has commented here and on other forums is in lockstep with the airline's initial "screw you" standing.
 
paflyer said:
Don't feel bad, EVERY airline pilot, current or retired, that has commented here and on other forums is in lockstep with the airline's initial "screw you" standing.
Click to expand...
Oh, come on. There are very few absolutes in life. And that certainly isn't one of them.
 
jordane93 said:
Handled poorly. Yes. Terrible customer service. Yes. Airline at fault. No. It's just something we'll have to disagree about. They need to handle things better and explain why they are right and the customer is wrong.
Click to expand...

Legally right doesn't mean a hill of beans in the court of public opinion. Neither do all the absurdities that a room full of lawyers can stuff into a CoC that is the epitome of a contract of adhesion protect against the outcry that one man, woman, or child can create with a cell phone video. That's the point that I think you and most people in the industry are missing: Technically legal isn't the same thing as "right," "smart," "fair," nor even "good for business" when all is said and done.

Just in case it's still unclear, air travelers are tired of being treated like ****. They're getting tired enough of it that when they stand up and protest, they become instant YouTube heroes; and that encourages others to do the same. That's what matters in the end, not the one-sided ******** that the lawyers wrote into the CoC.

Read the comments on the video:


Hopefully there are a few U.S. airline executives who still have the common sense that the good Lord gave them. If so, it should be obvious to them what the solution to this problem is: Stop treating your customers like ****! It's not rocket surgery. Stop acting in ways that **** people off, and they won't be ****ed off. At least most of them. There are always a few who can never be pleased, and there are always the scam artists. But that's true in every business. Most people are happy to just not be treated like ****.

If I were starting up a new airline, I think I'd make the company's motto: "Fly With Us and We Won't Treat You Like ****!" It might be hard to get it past the FCC for radio and television adverts; but even with the offending synonym for a turd bleeped out, I bet it would pull in a lot of pax (assuming, of course, that we really didn't treat them like ****).

Rich
 
First off, what the flight attendant said was wrong. That is not how the child seat thing works.

Next:

IF the 18 year old was traveling on a separate purchased ticket on another flight, and not one that was transferred TO that flight;

IF the parents (dad) changed the reservation of the remaining seat to the one-year-old's name;

and IF the car seat was approved by the FAA to be used in that seat:

THEN and only then do the parents (dad) have a leg to stand on.

It is by no means clear by anything I have read online (Yeah, right. That is a whole different issue.) that any of these things happened.

Look, all we really know is what is being reported. And quite frankly, most news is being sensationalized with the objective of getting ratings, NOT reporting what actually happened. As far as any comments made on these "news" stories, they don't mean a DAMNED thing because most of the comments are made in ignorance.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
First off, what the flight attendant said was wrong. That is not how the child seat thing works.

Next:

IF the 18 year old was traveling on a separate purchased ticket on another flight, and not one that was transferred TO that flight;

IF the parents (dad) changed the reservation of the remaining seat to the one-year-old's name;

and IF the car seat was approved by the FAA to be used in that seat:

THEN and only then do the parents (dad) have a leg to stand on.

It is by no means clear by anything I have read online (Yeah, right. That is a whole different issue.) that any of these things happened.

Look, all we really know is what is being reported. And quite frankly, most news is being sensationalized with the objective of getting ratings, NOT reporting what actually happened. As far as any comments made on these "news" stories, they don't mean a DAMNED thing because most of the comments are made in ignorance.
Click to expand...

They're representative of public opinion, Greg. That means a hell of a lot to any business, even if it's misinformed.

Rich
 
Mike Smith said:
You are close, but not quite. <Snip> Do I have any of that wrong?
Click to expand...

Yeah, you do.

Customer: "Hey, I bought three tickets for this flight, one for me, one for my wife and one for my 18yo son. I want to buy another ticket on an earlier flight for my 18yo son so that I can use the seat for my infant, can I do that?"
Delta CSR: " Yes Mr. Customer, you certainly can do that!"
Customer: "fantastic, because right now, before we board would be a great time to tell me I can't."
Delta CSR: "No problem Mr. Customer, we know that there is no way you can possibly know all the ins and outs of the Contract of Carriage unless you are a transportation attorney and since I am a representative of Delta, you can believe what I say."
Customer: "Thanks, you guys are great!"
Click to expand...

That is fine as long as the CSR issued the appropriate ticket for the 18 year old and re issued his original seat to the 1 year old. Did that happen?

Customer: "Hello Ms. Gate Agent. This ticket is in my 18yo sons name, but I talked to a CSR and they said it would be fine. Is it ok?"
Delta Gate Agent: Yes Mr. Customer, its just fine.
Customer: "Fantastic, we will board now"
Click to expand...

Except it is NOT ok. The ticket has to be re issued in the 1 year old's name. And the gate agent will not allow that ticket to be used for the passenger whose name is not on that ticket. At least that is the way it is supposed to work.

~~~~~sometime later~~~~~~
Delta Flight Attendant: "Excuse me Mr. Customer, but we noticed that the person this seat is ticketed to didn't board."
Customer: "Yes, my older son. I called customer service and talked to the gate agent and they said it was fine to use it for my infant son SINCE I PAID FOR THE SEAT."
Delta Flight Attendant: I'm sorry, but we sold that seat AGAIN because we have a legal document that says we can."
Customer: "But, I was told, not once, but twice that it was ok. I was told this long before we boarded."
Delta Flight Attendant: " Mr. Customer, if you don't vacate that seat you will be arrested and sent to jail and your children will be taken from you."
~~~~~~Mr. Customer and family deplane~~~~~
Click to expand...

I have not seen a clip that shows what happened PRIOR to that comment by the flight attendant. It is acknowledged that the fight attendant was wrong in saying that. What she should have done was call the customer service representatives and have them sort it out.

Mike, yours is an interesting scenario, but it is just that, a possible scenario. No credible proof that it happened that way.
 
RJM62 said:
They're representative of public opinion, Greg. That means a hell of a lot to any business, even if it's misinformed.
Click to expand...

Yep. And it's a big problem.

Walked out in the garage this morning to hear multiple non-aviators on a local ham radio frequency (there's a scanner on out in the garage 24/7 for various reasons) blathering on about all the airline stuff. Not even 5% of what came out of any of their mouths was accurate or even made any sense logically at all, not a bit of it. But by the end of their commutes they'd all decided United is the Debil...

It'd be funny if it weren't such a sad commentary on both the power of the media, and the stupidity of multiple people (some of whom I know personally).

The comments were so bad I'm standing there in the garage doing something saying, "You never go full retard..." But there they were, deciding United was the cause of all of life's problems...

I doubt even one of them even got on a commercial airline flight in the last few years. Let alone ever traveled regularly.
 
RJM62 said:
They're representative of public opinion, Greg. That means a hell of a lot to any business, even if it's misinformed.

Rich
Click to expand...
Yeah, but when is enough enough? When do you stand up to the public and tell them they are flat WRONG? If you allow public opinion to determine policy and procedures, you end up with chaos.
 
denverpilot said:
Yep. And it's a big problem.

Walked out in the garage this morning to hear multiple non-aviators on a local ham radio frequency (there's a scanner on out in the garage 24/7 for various reasons) blathering on about all the airline stuff. Not even 5% of what came out of any of their mouths was accurate or even made any sense logically at all, not a bit of it. But by the end of their commutes they'd all decided United is the Debil...

It'd be funny if it weren't such a sad commentary on both the power of the media, and the stupidity of multiple people (some of whom I know personally).

The comments were so bad I'm standing there in the garage doing something saying, "You never go full retard..." But there they were, deciding United was the cause of all of life's problems...

I doubt even one of them even got on a commercial airline flight in the last few years. Let alone ever traveled regularly.
Click to expand...

You make my point beautifully, Nate.
 
denverpilot said:
Yep. And it's a big problem.

Walked out in the garage this morning to hear multiple non-aviators on a local ham radio frequency (there's a scanner on out in the garage 24/7 for various reasons) blathering on about all the airline stuff. Not even 5% of what came out of any of their mouths was accurate or even made any sense logically at all, not a bit of it. But by the end of their commutes they'd all decided United is the Debil...

It'd be funny if it weren't such a sad commentary on both the power of the media, and the stupidity of multiple people (some of whom I know personally).

The comments were so bad I'm standing there in the garage doing something saying, "You never go full retard..." But there they were, deciding United was the cause of all of life's problems...

I doubt even one of them even got on a commercial airline flight in the last few years. Let alone ever traveled regularly.
Click to expand...
Thank you for articulating what I've been trying to say. I'm just too stupid to formulate this on my own!
 
ifly4fun said:
My assumption is the older son purchased his own ticket. With change fees, it was probably cheaper that way. If this was a flight change the dad wouldn't be argueing the seat was paid for.
Click to expand...
Delta allows a same-day-change (SDC) for a $75.00 fee. Last minute one-way tickets OGG-LAX seem to run $325.00 and up. If you were trying to go back early, would you opt for the $75.00 SDC or a new $325.00 ticket? Which is more likely to be what happened here?

In either case, it doesn't matter. The family doesn't retain rights to the seat.

Case 1: SDC -- As soon as the 18yr old clears onto the earlier flight his reservation on the incident flight is cancelled (well, moved). Any pre-printed boarding pass for him on the late flight would be invalid. The airline would show the seat open and available for sale or assignment.

Case 2: New ticket -- At the completion of boarding, no earlier than the published cutoff time, anyone who hasn't boarded the flight will be unseated. Their seat is then available to be assigned to standby passengers, last minute purchasers, or other passengers who don't yet have a seat assignment. The value of the ticket would be available for reuse after deducting any applicable change fee (which varies based on fare and FF status).

Airline tickets are not transferable. That is how ticketing restrictions are enforced such as pre-purchase, round-trip, minimum stay, etc.

Fully refundable tickets are available for sale. With a fully refundable tickets you can effectively transfer a ticket by cancelling it then using those funds to buy a new ticket with whatever changes you wanted.

Non-refundable tickets are sold at a discount. In exchange for getting that discount, the buyer is agreeing to certain restrictions including non-transferability.

You can't take the discount then expect to get the benefits of the unrestricted ticket. If you like the stage theater analogy, you can't buy the cheaper balcony seats then move yourself to an empty seat in the front row.

All we have is the family's version of events and their edited video. That's unlikely to give a full, unbiased view of the events. If they did ask an agent to use the 18yr old's seat for the 1yr old there was likely some miscommunication. The agent may have thought they were asking if the 1yr old could sit in that seat if it remained open--he can, while the family thought they were asking if the airline would hold the seat open for the 1yr old--they won't.

I wonder what happens when a large person buys two seats and the airline decides it wants to fill that second seat..
Click to expand...
Those tickets are sold as an extra seat on the reservation of the single traveler. The airline doesn't take them back. The details for buying an extra seat are spelled out on each airline's web site. Try Googling something like, "Delta extra seat" and look for results on delta.com.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top