United Airlines customer service

172andyou said:
Today's summary:

1) The "doctor" turns out to be a felon who had his license stripped for trading sex for drugs

2) He's also a semi-pro gambler

Would think he'd know when to fold 'em...

I'm curious to hear what his BAC turned out to be after his weekend gambling trip...
Click to expand...
Is there a factual source for this information? Whether or not it's true, these accolades have zero bearing on the situation.
 
Sorry Art,
I'd love to continue this discussion, but my wife is waving her underthings at me. Gotta go.
 
citizen5000 said:
Report: Doctor dragged off United Airlines won $230,000 at poker while his medical license was suspended for trading prescription drugs for secret gay sex http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4403138/United-doctor-poker-champ.html
Click to expand...

Does not matter if the was a priest or a prostitute...by all first hand passenger accounts he was never anything more than just "verbally annoyed" until the cops grabbed him.

Vilifying the "vicim" has zero bearings on the actions the Airline and LEO took.
 
weilke said:
The problem with taking an overnight from United at ORD is that you never know whether they will actually hold their end of the deal and get you on the next flight.
Click to expand...

It's already been reported that they could not get the passengers on next flight or the one after. In fact, the passengers would have to wait a full 24 hours for a "confirmed" seat.

Not that anyone really cares as it doesn't support the comments about one another or the airline in this thread, but like an aircraft accident there are a bunch of contributing factors which in normal times wouldn't cause a problem. This one had a detonator so it blew up.

The only surprise is that it hasn't happened before now.

Factors include:
1) Airlines, in general, being one of the most disliked industries out there, down there with or below cable companies. People already assume that the airlines won't treat them well.
2) The fact that consumers essentially have no control over the situation. The airline rules and contracts are very one sided and give the airlines virtually all the power. For most consumer transactions you don't pay until the service is rendered - with airlines, the payment is most often non-refundable and made well in advance. That further reduces consumer power and makes it very expensive (prohibitively so in some cases) to fly another airline when things like this happen at the last minute. Rebooking on another airline has virtually been eliminated.
3) In general, America is much more antagonistic these days and very divided. In normal circumstances people feel that they're being taken advantage of.
4) The airline flying experience is terrible, especially on the regional carriers.
5) Customer service folks are overworked and not well respected, so they're surly with passengers. That puts everything on edge from the get-go.
6) The air carriers overbook and have high load factors, meaning that taking a bump may mean a day or more before getting to your destintation. There is no good recovery plan. Heck, it took Delta what 3-4 days to clear up the situation in Atlanta?
7) You have very little regulatory support for the customer - the regulatory process is used to the advantage of the businesses being regulated (not just the airlines, happens with other industries, too).
8) Rules that are rarely read, and even if you try to read them they are confusing. Just look at what folks are interpreting the UA rules to be in this thread... The rules are not well explained to the customer.
9) Airlines tend to be authoritarian to enforce the rules.

And into this volatile environment, you throw a match:
9) A passenger that has his own pressures and believes he *must* be there that night. And he said "no".

Others have suggested that the regs need revision, but the fact is that would take years and not likely improve things for consumers (well, unless Elizabeth Warren were writing them). Social media will bring about change faster than regs ever can.
 
Art VanDelay said:
That makes NO sense.
Click to expand...
Yes that's evident, but it's true. Check with an attorney. If u have an agreement u have to abide by those agreement stipulations, like it or not. The fact that his license was suspended for whatever reason didn't have any bearing on this situation. Someone mentioned the camera guy was planted...seiously??? As if this doctor dude knew he would be booted or always carries a camera guy around so that his booting can be captured when it happens

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
upload_2017-4-11_19-13-54.png


New Untied Seat Map. If this was posted earlier in this interminable thread, my apology but I did want to wade thru 12 pages of stuff.

Cheers
 
Shawn said:
Does not matter if the was a priest or a prostitute...by all first hand passenger accounts he was never anything more than just "verbally annoyed" until the cops grabbed him.

Vilifying the "vicim" has zero bearings on the actions the Airline and LEO took.
Click to expand...

Sure it matters. It explains why he was throwing a fit and disobeying lawful orders from security and the flight crew. He is flaky. The point people are missing is this guy was committing an act of terror on an airliner. A federal offense.
 
JOhnH said:
It was an option that could have been exercised by free thinking management. Now, I do admit to ignorance to their contract that may prohibit this. If you tell me that is the case, then I will withdraw that suggestion as an option. But I could come up with a dozen more options.
Click to expand...
I think such a plan would be likely to run afoul of the FAA, given that airline pilots' personal aircraft are probably not covered by an operating certificate.
 
citizen5000 said:
Sure it matters. It explains why he was throwing a fit and disobeying lawful orders from security and the flight crew. He is flaky. The point people are missing is this guy was committing an act of terror on an airliner. A federal offense.
Click to expand...
Yes someone missed the C4 strapped on his twins

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
citizen5000 said:
Sure it matters. It explains why he was throwing a fit and disobeying lawful orders from security and the flight crew. He is flaky. The point people are missing is this guy was committing an act of terror on an airliner. A federal offense.
Click to expand...

Act of terror my arse...complying with crew member instructions is not without its limits. It is the airline that escalated it from a customer service and civil matter to a criminal matter and hiding behind the guise of "security" or terror is complete and utter bulls#!t in this case for the connivence of the company.

...or do you believe that we should allow airlines to just yell "9/11" and "Terrorism" just to save the companies money and connivence?
 
Last edited:
Tummler said:
Agreed. However, United's CoC does limit United's available courses of action, which does not include the removal of boarded passengers to make room for other passengers.
Click to expand...
Your interpretation of the CoC is incorrect. VDBs and IDBs occur daily, both in the gate area and onboard airplanes. This is not new. This happens on every airline (even JetBlue which never has overbooked). DOT regulations (14 CFR 250) provides passenger protections and procedures which airlines must follow but it does not restrict the process to the gate area or terminate it once a passenger is onboard.

register@teamandras.com said:
Larry, got a cite, or a link, to the definition?
Click to expand...
14 CFR 250, link already provided, is the DOT regulation. There is no definition specified for "denied boarding" though the phrase is used throughout the regulation. Definitions are listed in 14 CFR 250.1. The regulation has been in place for many decades so it's not something new that hasn't been tested.
 
Last edited:
citizen5000 said:
Sure it matters. It explains why he was throwing a fit and disobeying lawful orders from security and the flight crew. He is flaky. The point people are missing is this guy was committing an act of terror on an airliner. A federal offense.
Click to expand...
HaHaHaHa; yeah right. An "act of terrorism". You must work for NSA or TSA.
 
Everskyward said:
You aren't getting it either. If you do that for seemingly no good reason, the person who is being evicted or people who support them may go to social media and let the world know. I'm sure you don't care but I'm betting United does, based on the CEOs new, belated apology. United is lucky you aren't the CEO or they would be out of business in weeks.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You can be perfectly in the right and still be dumb.

Rich
 
JOhnH said:
I have no doubt that a charter flight would have been available. In the obscure chance that wasn't available, I'll bet that United has hundreds of pilots (with commercial certificates) that own 6 seat airplanes that could have flown them. Or has been said before, Uber.
And I bet that if they offered cash instead of stupid vouchers, and maybe for a few bucks more, and a hotel (with more than one-star), someone would have taken them up on it.
Click to expand...

You're kidding right? Suggesting a crew deadhead on a single engine piston plane? Even at my regional, our contract says any deadhead on a plane will be via a corporate multi-engine plane or a multiengine 121 or 135 operation. I'd love to get the call you're suggesting from scheduling telling me I'm riding on a PA32. I'd make a ton of money off the grievance.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
You're kidding right? Suggesting a crew deadhead on a single engine piston plane? Even at my regional, our contract says any deadhead on a plane will be via a corporate multi-engine plane or a multiengine 121 or 135 operation. I'd love to get the call you're suggesting from scheduling telling me I'm riding on a PA32. I'd make a ton of money off the grievance.
Click to expand...
Yeah dammit. I was (sort of) kidding. But there were other options. Or do you disagree with that?
 
JOhnH said:
HaHaHaHa; yeah right. An "act of terrorism". You must work for NSA or TSA.
Click to expand...

Under the Model Penal Code, "a person is guilty of a felony of the third degree if he threatens to commit any crime of violence with purpose to terrorize another or to cause evacuation of a building, place of assembly, or facility of public transportation, or otherwise to cause serious public inconvenience, or in reckless disregard of the risk of causing such terror or inconvenience."

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.
 
Ryanb said:
Is there a factual source for this information? Whether or not it's true, these accolades have zero bearing on the situation.
Click to expand...

They actually do. You have to read the gory details in the medical board decision. Lets say he is a bit stubborn to a point where it bought him a raft of psychiatric diagnoses.
 
jordane93 said:
Exactly. There are some people who will hold true to their word though and not fly United. About a decade ago, my mom saw blatant racism going on at a Stop N Shop (grocery store if you don't know) and to this day, she still doesn't shop there. But for the most part, people will just shop for the lowest bidder and not care.
Click to expand...

Except that United is not just a low fare carrier. They also have business and first class, and those consumers aren't as price sensitive - at least not on domestic flights. Most people I know pick an airline first, and then price-comparison shop between dates on that airline. United now has lost a good bunch of those people.
 
weilke said:
You have to read the gory details in the medical board decision
Click to expand...
I'll pass on that. Anytime I see 12 pages and counting in a single subject thread such as this, I know there's lots and lots of poo flinging taking place. This thread is no exception.
 
CC268 said:
Wow I can't believe you would assume his race identity like that. He could very well identify as a Chinese man.
Click to expand...

Like most countries in that region, Vietnam has (or had) a population of ethnic chinese. He may well be both, vietnamese and chinese.
 
JOhnH said:
Setting aside the fact that it probably would have worked, and excluding the possibility that this would be against the law or against union contract, what would be the problem?
Click to expand...

Well sure, if you exclude consideration of the reasons why it wouldn't work, then it would have worked! :rofl:
As I said before, this was just one potential solution that a free thinking employee may have considered. And even if it wasn't a United employee with a private airplane, are you suggesting that there were no known commercial pilots or charters that could have accommodated them (without being re-accommodated)?
Click to expand...

When they found out that the guy was refusing to get off the airplane, I doubt they they could count on getting a charter set up quickly enough so that their crew members could get to where the airline needed them to be quickly enough to meet the crew rest requirements.
 
JOhnH said:
Yeah, social media can suck. But that doesn't mean it is always wrong.
Click to expand...
Which doesn't prove anything one way or the other about whether it's right in this case.
 
deonb said:
Except that United is not just a low fare carrier. They also have business and first class, and those consumers aren't as price sensitive - at least not on domestic flights. Most people I know pick an airline first, and then price-comparison shop between dates on that airline. United now has lost a good bunch of those people.
Click to expand...
Other companies have done equally worse PR stunts and have still survived. I think United will be ok. Maybe not short term, but in the long run they'll be fine.
 
Palmpilot said:
Which doesn't prove anything one way or the other about whether it's right in this case.
Click to expand...
Do you think UA acted in a way that was "right"? (I don't mean "legal", I mean "right").
 
CC268 said:
Wow I can't believe you would assume his race identity like that. He could very well identify as a Chinese man.
Click to expand...

So it's OK for you to assume that he was Chinese, but it's not OK for me to assume that the fact that he told someone he was from Vietnam means he was Vietnamese? What's up with that?
 
Art VanDelay said:
UAL stock down 0.81 cents today - this is really killing them - wow.
Click to expand...
That is just market reaction. But .81 cents times 314.62 million shares = $254,842,200.00
and that doesn't include any future revenue reductions, if any. They probably could have resolved the whole situation for a hundred thousand times less than that.
 
JOhnH said:
That is just market reaction. But .81 cents times 314.62 million shares = $254,842,200.00
and that doesn't include any future revenue reductions, if any. They probably could have resolved the whole situation for a hundred thousand times less than that.
Click to expand...
It's a little over a 1% drop. I, for one, have not found that I can predict what the stock market will do. Maybe you've had better luck at it. :dunno:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top