United Airlines customer service

Palmpilot said:
The justification for Dr. Dao's removal from the flight has been questioned, but I'm wondering if this settlement is going to make it less likely for passengers to be removed in cases where there is a clear safety or security risk.
Click to expand...
I am sure some people will make it point to be arrogant and cause much problem in a hope to be millionaires
 
Palmpilot said:
The justification for Dr. Dao's removal from the flight has been questioned, but I'm wondering if this settlement is going to make it less likely for passengers to be removed in cases where there is a clear safety or security risk.
Click to expand...

"Munoz said the airline will limit the use of law enforcement to “safety and security issues only.” He also announced that the airline will no longer bump passengers once they have boarded their flight unless it involves a safety or security issue."​

Much more of Munoz's mea culpa here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-went-wrong-that-day/?utm_term=.43426a6b9025

Munoz made it very clear that United owned this issue, and took many of the actions that were discussed by some here.

“Did I believe what law enforcement folks did was wrong? Yeah. But once again, it was I and we who put them in that situation.”

“United Airlines takes full responsibility for what happened,” reads the report’s introduction. “The intention of this report is to communicate concrete and meaningful actions that will avoid putting our customers, employees and partners in impossible situations.” ...

... the airline should not have tried to find space on the flight for crew members at the last minute. It also should have offered more compensation or more transportation options to entice customers to give up their seats voluntarily, but it acknowledged that agents did not have the authority to make such decisions. Finally, the report said the airline has not provided regular training for employees on how to deal with “denied boarding situations.”

“Our review shows that many things went wrong that day, but the headline is clear: Our policies got in the way of our values and procedures interfered in doing what’s right,” Munoz said.​
 
WannFly said:
I am sure some people will make it point to be arrogant and cause much problem in a hope to be millionaires
Click to expand...
I don't know, I would HOPE that people would consider Dao's injuries too high a price to pay, even if it made him rich.
 
WannFly said:
I am sure some people will make it point to be arrogant and cause much problem in a hope to be millionaires
Click to expand...

Well, they now have a process to pay true market rates to volunteers for a seat, before passengers are boarded.

By removing the crappy involuntary bumps in the first place, there won't be opportunities for people to get arrogant about involuntary bumps.
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
"Munoz said the airline will limit the use of law enforcement to “safety and security issues only.” He also announced that the airline will no longer bump passengers once they have boarded their flight unless it involves a safety or security issue."​

Much more of Munoz's mea culpa here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-went-wrong-that-day/?utm_term=.43426a6b9025

Munoz made it very clear that United owned this issue, and took many of the actions that were discussed by some here.

“Did I believe what law enforcement folks did was wrong? Yeah. But once again, it was I and we who put them in that situation.”

“United Airlines takes full responsibility for what happened,” reads the report’s introduction. “The intention of this report is to communicate concrete and meaningful actions that will avoid putting our customers, employees and partners in impossible situations.” ...

... the airline should not have tried to find space on the flight for crew members at the last minute. It also should have offered more compensation or more transportation options to entice customers to give up their seats voluntarily, but it acknowledged that agents did not have the authority to make such decisions. Finally, the report said the airline has not provided regular training for employees on how to deal with “denied boarding situations.”

“Our review shows that many things went wrong that day, but the headline is clear: Our policies got in the way of our values and procedures interfered in doing what’s right,” Munoz said.​
Click to expand...
Seems like a reasonable approach.
 
Looks like they settled today...My wife just came off a four day and was handed several thank you cards from passengers during this last trip...I guess some people still understand the issues they have to deal with...she says its been interesting mix of attitude since the incident on both sides.
 
I don't want this to sound like I am trivializing the plight of blacks and I realize this not a 100% match but this strikes me as a Rosa Parks moment for air travellers. I was not around then but I am sure that the internet blogs then revolved around "she was morally in the right but legally in the wrong". Which is an exact summary of the 361 responses in this thread. The upshot of both Park's and Dao's actions is that procedures and laws have been changed. Saw on PBS news this evening that SWA is ending its overbooking policy, and Mr. Munoz said today that UA will no longer unseat passengers who have been seated, and will no longer call security where there is not a security issue. In the aggregate I think this was a positive development in the long term, however painful in the short term.
 
hankrausch said:
I don't want this to sound like I am trivializing the plight of blacks and I realize this not a 100% match but this strikes me as a Rosa Parks moment for air travellers. I was not around then but I am sure that the internet blogs then revolved around "she was morally in the right but legally in the wrong".
Click to expand...

There was no Internet back then, so no blogs.
 
Munoz tiptoed the line of throwing his employees under the bus, and juuuuust barely crossed it.
 
jordane93 said:
Yea so the older son got on another flight and forfeited his seat. The couple can't just put their son in a seat that no longer belongs to them.
Click to expand...
How do you know that's what happened? 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.

I wonder what happens when a large person buys two seats and the airline decides it wants to fill that second seat..
 
jordane93 said:
Yea so the older son got on another flight and forfeited his seat. The couple can't just put their son in a seat that no longer belongs to them.
Click to expand...
My understanding is the older son/dad paid for the earlier flight. Therefore the dad still "owned" the seat. The dad had already asked and was given the ok to do exactly as he did. As an outsider, it looks like the airlines saw that someone didn't board and said "cool, we will sell this seat again" not knowing that a Delta CSR had already told the family that it was fine to use the seat for the child. BTW, how do you defend the FE that told the family that is was against Delta policy and FAA regs to use the child seat when that is polar opposite to the truth? I for one am glad these issues are being addressed, According to the rules, Delta was within their rights to do what they did, I get that, but it is a crap way of doing business. There is change coming in the airline industry and its about time.
 
The airlines wanted deregulation and to answer to market forces as exerted by the flying public.

They got their wish.

Rich
 
ifly4fun said:
How do you know that's what happened? 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.

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...
"Brian Schear said the family had initially purchased a ticket for their teenage son on the red-eye flight, but decided to send him home early so that their 2-year-old could have a seat on the plane. The couple was also traveling with a 1-year-old."
 
ifly4fun said:
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...

I always used to buy 3 seats between my wife and I on those JetBlue Extra Legroom rows. Basically created my own redneck first class before we got JetBlue Mint over here.

They've hinted that they wanted to re-use that seat on more than one occasion... (I would have gotten off the flight immediately if they ever tried to pull that). It annoyed me no end though when the flight attendants came around and asked 'Is there anybody sitting there?' It's a paid for seat! Who cares if someone is sitting in it??

That, and... seriously - don't you have a flight manifest?
 
jordane93 said:
"Brian Schear said the family had initially purchased a ticket for their teenage son on the red-eye flight, but decided to send him home early so that their 2-year-old could have a seat on the plane. The couple was also traveling with a 1-year-old."
Click to expand...

Exactly, they bought him a ticket on an earlier flight. Still had the ticket for the later flight. Asked Delta if it was ok to do it and was told that it was. THEN after boarding they oversold the seat and told them to hold the baby. You really cant polish this turd.
 
Mike Smith said:
Exactly, they bought him a ticket on an earlier flight. Still had the ticket for the later flight. Asked Delta if it was ok to do it and was told that it was. THEN after boarding they oversold the seat and told them to hold the baby. You really cant polish this turd.
Click to expand...
Yes they were given bad information. If you opt for an earlier or later flight, the seat on the original flight is not yours anymore
 
jordane93 said:
Yes they were given bad information. If you opt for an earlier or later flight, the seat on the original flight is not yours anymore
Click to expand...

He paid for both tickets. He didn't transfer the later to the earlier. I get that tickets aren't transferable.....I get it, but he asked and they said it was ok. Can you really not understand this? He paid for the seat....he paid for it. Then Delta oversold. They sold the seat TWICE. Can you not see it?
 
jordane93 said:
Yes they were given bad information. If you opt for an earlier or later flight, the seat on the original flight is not yours anymore
Click to expand...

They didn't "opt" for an earlier flight. They bought a ticket for an earlier flight in addition.

If he used the earlier flight, then caught another ride back and flew the later flight as well they would have been obligated to give him his seat. (Well...)
 
Mike Smith said:
He paid for both tickets. He didn't transfer the later to the earlier. I get that tickets aren't transferable.....I get it, but he asked and they said it was ok. Can you really not understand this? He paid for the seat....he paid for it. Then Delta oversold. They sold the seat TWICE. Can you not see it?
Click to expand...
deonb said:
They didn't "opt" for an earlier flight. They bought a ticket for an earlier flight in addition.

If he used the earlier flight, then caught another ride back and flew the later flight as well they would have been obligated to give him his seat. (Well...)
Click to expand...
Negative. They a paid a fee for the older son to transfer him onto an earlier voiding his current ticket. They tried to put the toddler in the voided ticket seat (which was no longer their seat), and the seat was released and given to another passenger.
 
jordane93 said:
Negative. They a paid a fee for the older son to transfer him onto an earlier voiding his current ticket. They tried to put the toddler in the voided ticket seat (which was no longer their seat), and the seat was released and given to another passenger.
Click to expand...

That is NOT what I read. IF that is true, it is a different matter for sure.
 
jordane93 said:
Negative. They a paid a fee for the older son to transfer him onto an earlier voiding his current ticket. They tried to put the toddler in the voided ticket seat (which was no longer their seat), and the seat was released and given to another passenger.
Click to expand...

Where do you get that from? The dad specifically said: "I bought him a ticket on another flight so that my son would have a seat".
 
deonb said:
Where do you get that from? The dad specifically said: "I bought him a ticket on another flight so that my son would have a seat".
Click to expand...
Every article says the son decided to catch an earlier flight, which means he was put on standby for an earlier flight which means his current ticket was void. Pesky things like reading the seat contract would have avoided this mess.

According to the article posted on this thread:

"The dispute was over the seat Schear had originally purchased for his teenage son who took an earlier flight but was being used for his two-year-old son in a car seat."

So the father purchased the ticket but the son took an earlier flight making that purchased seat void on that flight. There were three travelers but only 2 seats.
 
jordane93 said:
Every article says the son decided to catch an earlier flight, which means he was put on standby for an earlier flight which means his current ticket was void. Pesky things like reading the seat contract would have avoided this mess.
Click to expand...

LOL, it doesn't mean that at all. The dad bought both tickets. Pesky little thing like reading the available news on this would have avoided you trying to defend the indefensible. BTW, have you seen Delta's public statement? I'll provide you a link to current info, please read it all.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/04/news/companies/delta-family-kids-kicked-off-flight/
 
According to my go-to source for U.S. news -- BBC -- they purchased an additional seat on an earlier flight for the older son specifically so the toddler could have a seat on the later flight; but Delta claimed that the older boy still "owned" the seat on the later flight and that the toddler couldn't use it.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39814586

That's probably in line with the letter of their bazilion-word Contract of Carriage, but it's still idiotic on Delta's part in view of the current public sentiment toward airlines. They should have re-issued the ticket in the toddler's name and waved them through the gate. Why throw gasoline (or Jet-A, as it were) on a fire?

Personally, I'm glad that people are standing up and creating fusses about this sort of thing. What U.S. airlines have done to air travel since deregulation has been a disgrace. If some uppity pax can at least slow down the spiral to the bottom, then good for them. Sometimes a little anarchy is a good thing.

Rich
 
Last edited:
Mike Smith said:
LOL, it doesn't mean that at all. The dad bought both tickets. Pesky little thing like reading the available news on this would have avoided you trying to defend the indefensible. BTW, have you seen Delta's public statement? I'll provide you a link to current info, please read it all.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/04/news/companies/delta-family-kids-kicked-off-flight/
Click to expand...
Well of course they're going to apologize. You think they're going to pull an Oscar Munoz?:)
 
Airlines don't like it when you buy extra tickets for a leg you don't use. People did that when they would find a mix of connecting and direct flights that were cheaper than any one flight and then threw away the unused tickets. This episode sounds similar: older son bought another ticket then "threw away" his other one and dad just happened to pick it up.
 
Not sure how they figured out the 2-year-old wasn't the older son. Neither the airline nor the TSA are required to ID children.
 
Everskyward said:
Not sure how they figured out the 2-year-old wasn't the older son. Neither the airline nor the TSA are required to ID children.
Click to expand...
Maybe the reservation system flagged it by catching the older son's name on two tickets and noticed that one was used and figured he couldn't be in two places at the same time.
 
Matthew said:
Maybe the reservation system flagged it by catching the older son's name on two tickets and noticed that one was used and figured he couldn't be in two places at the same time.
Click to expand...
Which sorta leads us to the question: how can you be in two places at once when you are nowhere at all? And that leads to the statement: don't crush that dwarf hand me the pliers.

If anyone thinks I'm drunk or tripping I assure you that I'm only caffeinated. The Friday quiz is: where did the statement and question come from?
 
I'm with Rich on this one. Regardless of whether the family was in the right or wrong, the airline blew it, apparently not caring about all the publicity as of late.

FWIW, my last experience with Delta (more than 10 years ago) was much worse than this. That won't happen twice with them. I seldom say this, but that's one company I wouldn't mind seeing go belly-up.
 
I'm all for punishing the airlines when they are wrong but this case they were not in the wrong. Seems like everyone is trying to get their 15 minutes of fame after the United incident. Just like the airlines should be punished, these people who cause a stink and are in the wrong should be punished as well. Seems to me like there's more outrage than there should be.
 
I don't think that all the facts have come out so it's difficult to determine who might be wrong or right.
 
Everskyward said:
I don't think that all the facts have come out so it's difficult to determine who might be wrong or right.
Click to expand...
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.
 
jordane93 said:
Well of course they're going to apologize. You think they're going to pull an Oscar Munoz?:)
Click to expand...
How about the jail threats and threatening the parents that their kids would be taken from them? You airline guys OK with that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top