quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

...If the passenger had not been asked to leave the aircraft by an airline employee, there would be no compliance issue regarding the airline. Presumably the passenger was in fact asked numerous times to leave the aircraft by an airline employee. The refusal to leave resulted in the police being called...

...When the police stepped on the aircraft it ceased to be an issue between the airline and the passenger, it was now an issue between law enforcement and the passenger...yada, yada, yada...

Fly-Sig, I quit flying commercially over 20 years ago due to the deterioration of the quality of service. Years before the TSA Brown Shirts came on the scene.

Your posts in this thread, along with posts of the other airline employees here, convince me that I did the right thing then, and that my evaluation is even more valid today.

Fuck this air travel shit.

Those were Chicago not-really-police officers?

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

...If the passenger had not been asked to leave the aircraft by an airline employee, there would be no compliance issue regarding the airline. Presumably the passenger was in fact asked numerous times to leave the aircraft by an airline employee. The refusal to leave resulted in the police being called...

...When the police stepped on the aircraft it ceased to be an issue between the airline and the passenger, it was now an issue between law enforcement and the passenger...yada, yada, yada...

Fly-Sig, I quit flying commercially over 20 years ago due to the deterioration of the quality of service. Years before the TSA Brown Shirts came on the scene.

Your posts in this thread, along with posts of the other airline employees here, convince me that I did the right thing then, and that my evaluation is even more valid today.

Fuck this air travel shit.

TSA Brown Shirts? You really believe that?

As it was amply pointed out years ago when TSA first started doing pat downs and people here were up in arms about being assaulted and battered, not a goddamn thing ever came of all the hype and hoopla. Squat happened and I'll remind you why - there was no crime.

If the pat downs and searches were illegal or outside the scope of the law, the ACLU and every other civil rights group would have run to court and guess what? No one did because the pat downs from the Brown Shirts wasn't against any law.

I'll bet that you have far more interaction with local LEO and I'll further bet that you don't call them Brown Shirts for acting within the course and scope of the lawfully conveyed authority.

Tell me I'm wrong. Please do.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
I caught part of the news conference with the attorney. He mentioned that Dr Dao fled Vietnam when Saigon fell and spent 37(?) days at sea unsure if he would survive. This event was worse...

Ka Ching!

As a side-note, I've had the opportunity to know several Boat People -- those who fled South Viet Nam in 1975. All of them had their troubles in Nam, and many had trouble adapting to life here in the US as Dr. Dao appears to have (referring to his legal battles and conviction), but ultimately most of them seem to have succeeded as he did.

All-in-all, we got the better end of the deal when they fled Viet Nam.

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:
Tell me I'm wrong. Please do.

You're wrong. OK, happy? Don't try to bait me here and get this thread off track, because I won't respond.

quote:

If the pat downs and searches were illegal or outside the scope of the law, the ACLU and every other civil rights group would have run to court and guess what? No one did because the pat downs from the Brown Shirts wasn't against any law.

One, We've seen the efficacy reports where the TSA fails over 90% of the time - so they are nearly useless. Plus, they are a Federal employees who can't hardly be fired, and they collectively bargain against the taxpaying Citizens of the USA - WTF?

Two, they hassle people inadvertently all the time, and many (EJR) cop an attitude like they are GOD ALMIGHTY. "Diary of an Angry Black Woman" comes to mind.

Now, perhaps the few that are rotten apples spoil it for everyone, but they are more than an unnecessary nuisance. I've had my shit groped and I carry a far higher Security clearance then they do; I promise.

Third, at SeaTac, burka-clad Somali muslims go right around TSA security while pilots and flight crews get screened. WTF?

Lastly, just because it's legal doesn't mean it's constitutional or right. We've done all kinds of crazy things in the name of safety that are clearly unconstitutional. The TSA is just kabuki theater for the ignorant masses.

details of the press conference

http://fortune.com/2017/04/13/...ao-press-conference/

An attorney representing David Dao, the United Airlines passenger whose forcible removal from a flight went viral this week, said Dao suffered a "significant" concussion, a broken nose and a sinus injury during the incident. He also lost two front teeth, and has been discharged from the hospital.

Crystal Dao Pepper, Dao's daughter, said the family was "shocked and horrified" to learn what had happened. " What happened to my dad should never happen to any human being regardless of the circumstance ," Crystal Dao Pepper said during a news conference on Thursday.

Dao was involuntarily removed from a United Airlines flight to make room for the airline's employees. Videos that have subsequently gone viral show law enforcement dragging him through the aisle of the plane. The incident has sparked outrage against United Airlines, which has apologized. But Thomas Demetrio, one of Dao's attorneys, called the apology staged and indicated his client will likely sue.

"When we file our lawsuit it's going to be because every word, every deposition is in that lawsuit fro a reason," he said.

Dao Pepper spoke alongside her father's attorneys, Thomas Demetrio and Stephen Golan, in Chicago. It was the first time since the incident that a member of the family spoke publicly in person. Earlier this week, Dao's attorneys released a statement from the family noting the outpouring of support for Dr. Dao, but requesting privacy until his release from the hospital.

Dao's attorneys, who filed an emergency request in Illinois State court Wednesday to preserve all evidence relating to the incident on the flight, indicated they will likely sue the airline. The only reason they haven't yet sued, Demetri said, is because they are conducting "due diligence."

"Will there be a lawsuit? Yes probably," said Demetrio. "If you’re going to eject a passenger under no circumstances can it be done with unreasonable force, or violence. That s the law. If unreasonable force and violence is used under a set of circumstances, the common carrier, United Airlines is responsible."

The hearing on preserving the evidence will take place Monday. Three officers from the Chicago Aviation Department have been placed on leave since the incident, and a review is ongoing. Demetrio said the city of Chicago bears responsibility for the incident as well. "Just because the city of united is responsible doesn’t mean the city of Chicago isn't also responsible," he said.

United reiterated their apology in a statement following the press conference, noting they are reviewing their policies, improving their training programs, and refraining from forced removals off airplanes unless they are necessary for security.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

Come on. Seriously. These examples for comparison sake are indeed utter nonsense.

Really? <<<<<<<That was going to be my only reply, but I think the sarcasm would have been lost.

Not having an argument is one thing, but simply creating a quote in a thread 28 pages deep and then responding with 1 word with no rebuttal is fatuous! Sure, I will concede that the "what if" game is not one to be played often, especially not on this forum; however, when people are not getting a given point (like 28 pages worth of everyone telling them the same thing), sometimes we need to play that game. It is a very useful tool to show how easily anyone of us can get trapped in a particular situation through no fault of our own with similar results across multiple industries.

I don't believe for one nanosecond that the CEO is sincere when he says the Dr. was not at fault. He is just playing the game. Talking the talk to soothe the masses a bit.

So I wouldn't hang my hat on that. He is just using it to be seen as reasonable, and make it easier to settle out of court, which is almost certain to happen.

Some additional info about the Chicago aviation police

http://www.chicagotribune.com/...-20170413-story.html

Are aviation police part of the Chicago Police Department? No

Aviation officers can "temporarily detain and take people into custody until Chicago police arrives,"

But only Chicago police can file an arrest report

They cannot carry weapons but must be state-certified police officers. Airport police have sought for years to be allowed to carry firearms, but the city has opposed that. Aviation Committee Chairman Ald. Michael Zalewski, 23rd, said the latest incident weakens the push by aviation police to carry guns.

Aviation Department spokeswoman Karen Pride said in the statement: "While they do have limited authority to make an arrest, Sunday's incident was not within standard operating procedures nor will we tolerate that kind of action ."

Three officers have been placed on administrative leave while the department reviews the incident.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:....I'll be in Starbucks per Para's instructions. You and the rest of the Sigforum braintrust have this under control. I have confidence in your Plan B. Just let me know when to kick the tires and light the fires.

That is the exact attitude that has/will cost United many $tens of millions. And the longer that attitude prevails, the higher the price tag (as the United CEO is finding). So how much is that arrogance worth in legal fees, damages, lost revenues, $100 Million??

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Some additional info about the Chicago aviation police

http://www.chicagotribune.com/...-20170413-story.html

Are aviation police part of the Chicago Police Department? No

Aviation officers can "temporarily detain and take people into custody until Chicago police arrives,"

But only Chicago police can file an arrest report

They cannot carry weapons but must be state-certified police officers. Airport police have sought for years to be allowed to carry firearms, but the city has opposed that. Aviation Committee Chairman Ald. Michael Zalewski, 23rd, said the latest incident weakens the push by aviation police to carry guns.

Aviation Department spokeswoman Karen Pride said in the statement: "While they do have limited authority to make an arrest, Sunday's incident was not within standard operating procedures nor will we tolerate that kind of action ."

Three officers have been placed on administrative leave while the department reviews the incident.

Think of the Aviation Police as "Unarmed Security Guards". They DO have power to arrest, however, don't have access to Chicago Police Departments computer system, so they can't do any of the paperwork involved.

They DO have training in firearms in the academy, however, under Heir Daley's regime, were verboten to carry weapons in the airport.

The DOA Police were a shit-show since it's inception and have continued to be not much better than a speed bump since. Recently there has been talk of folding them into the Chicago Police, letting the agency "die off" or disbanding them altogether. I'm guessing that this might just be a deciding factor in their fate.

side note on CEO Munoz.

He has been CEO less than 2 years.

One month after he became CEO, he had a heart attack and needed a heart transplant.

http://fortune.com/united-airlines-ceo-oscar-munoz/

Its hard to watch that video but the early events aren't clear.

Did that DOA officer punch or strike Dr. D in the face at the outset of the altercation?
Or, did Dr. D struggle loose, and hit his face on something hard?

Who was doing all the squealing? Dr. D or a passenger nearby?

quote:

Originally posted by Paragon:
I don't believe for one nanosecond that the CEO is sincere when he says the Dr. was not at fault. He is just playing the game. Talking the talk to soothe the masses a bit.

So I wouldn't hang my hat on that. He is just using it to be seen as reasonable, and make it easier to settle out of court, which is almost certain to happen.

That's not the way it works. The CEO speaks for the company. The company is now on the record on this issue. Yes, he can change his tune later, but if he does he will open himself to the question "Are you lying now, or were you lying then"?

He made an initial stupid statement before he knew any facts. Then, he said that the company conducted an internal investigation and he made the statement that the passenger did nothing wrong and the United personnel did not use common sense due to a 'system failure'.

That is now the official position of United Airlines, whether he believes that deep down or not. I'm sure his legal department wishes he would have kept his mouth shut, but due to the public pressure mealy mouthed platitudes were not going to quell the uproar. So, we are left with United Airlines agreeing that the passenger did nothing wrong and United personnel being at fault.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:

quote:

Originally posted by Paragon:
I don't believe for one nanosecond that the CEO is sincere when he says the Dr. was not at fault. He is just playing the game. Talking the talk to soothe the masses a bit.

So I wouldn't hang my hat on that. He is just using it to be seen as reasonable, and make it easier to settle out of court, which is almost certain to happen.

That's not the way it works. The CEO speaks for the company. The company is now on the record on this issue. Yes, he can change his tune later, but if he does he will open himself to the question "Are you lying now, or were you lying then"?

He made an initial stupid statement before he knew any facts. Then, he said that the company conducted an internal investigation and he made the statement that the passenger did nothing wrong and the United personnel did not use common sense due to a 'system failure'.

That is now the official position of United Airlines, whether he believes that deep down or not. I'm sure his legal department wishes he would have kept his mouth shut, but due to the public pressure mealy mouthed platitudes were not going to quell the uproar. So, we are left with United Airlines agreeing that the passenger did nothing wrong and United personnel being at fault.

How it works is irrelevant to me. He is just saying what is most expedient for the company and a settlement. I don't believe for a moment he had a change of heart.

quote:

Originally posted by Paragon:
How it works is irrelevant to me. He is just saying what is most expedient for the company and a settlement. I don't believe for a moment he had a change of heart.

Yes, I know - what I'm saying is that now United is on record and that is the company's official position. It's just a matter of agreeing to a number on the settlement now.

Shall we begin a betting pool for the award amount?

$3MM? $10MM?

Reading this thread throws me into a warped reality where the Twilight Zone has been merged with Days of Our Lives!

As a result my head hurts so I'm not bothering with the thread any more.

Interesting that United has no plan B (as in backup) to get their crews to their next plane. What if something else happened? What if they all had seats (without having to forcibly remove people) but got sick? Say they all ate at the same place before the flight, got sick on the flight to their plane and couldn't go to work anyway? What is the plan then? Do they have a contingency or do they send the goons back to the restaurant to tune the chef up?

If they don't have MULTIPLE contingency plans to get crews in place they are more pathetic than I thought.