this is a link to the United contract of carriage

https://www.united.com/web/en-....aspx?Mobile=1#sec21

As previously described by the Cornell professor,

Rule 25 is for Denied Boarding Compensation

Rule 21 is for Refusal of Transport

I think the Cornell professor may have a very valid point

subitem C: The phrase "Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather" may get discussed a lot.

subitem J of Rule 21:

"UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule"

they are still going to lose

the court case is the least of their problems

their damage control is costing them their profits in PR damage

thats where they lose - the doctor is expendable

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:...

However, I would greatly appreciate if you (or any other industry expert)...

USAF, so I will speak of the things that are common to flight.

Many things happen very fast, or with very little latitude in time.

Things like runway crossing of aircraft and vehicles, turn/prep times on aircraft, constant reassigning of gates due to incoming and outgoing aircraft and the time that the "boarding gate is open and closed".

And a great number of things happening all over the airport, and above and beyond that are in constant flux.

It is true organized chaos, and things happening "now" always affect the things that are "supposed" to happen next.

And this chaos is being co-ordinated and interfaced with thousands of people and good, timly and constant communication is paramount.

You have scheduled and un-scheduled events going on all the time, and many plans, policies and procedures to deal with all of this. There is the "above ground" (what everyone, including passengers see), and "underground" (what passengers do not see, and even many of the "above ground" workers do not see or often forget are ongoing.

Imagine, the gate is closed, the boarding complete and the aircraft is being readied for departure. Inside the aircrew is performing pre-flight/departure checklists, and the cabin crew ready and crosschecking each other before departure.

The ground handling crew has finalized everything and the lead maintenance person is tasked with his paperwork being checked, questioned and signed off by the aircrew, then the doors close and cabin final prep, and up front the aircrew is communicating with the company, with tower and or ground control and other cat juggling.

And, someone makes a call that there is urgent need to deadhead 4 crew to enable them to serve fly on at their destination.

Perhaps there aircraft that was arriving that they were going to fly out is beyond arrival time that they can continue to wait for it, still get that flight to the destination and make the down-level connections, or a maintenance problem grounded their jet, but they still need to get to the destination, again to continue service.

Or, they may be able to wait for maintenance or late arrival, but would bust crew rest before they could service flights down level, so they need to leave now.

Calls go out among company airlines, then affiliates, and then with other carriers, as fast as possible since the clock is ticking, and the time it took to type/read this, remember the gate closed and the aircraft was getting ready to depart. So that all occurs in about 5 minutes.

The call to action to find transportation is a very narrow window and "interrupts" (that pesky un-scheduled actions thing) and only a few minutes can be given to find the ride, non found so the airline calls the aircrew and asks them to "make room", and the ticket agent, and or, cabin crew and or aircrew makes the announcement.

"we need four..." (this per policy of who makes the call to make the request, so the person "making the request" to the passengers could be any one of the above.

So, no takers, and time is getting tight to still make an on time.

And then the UAL thing happened as we know, and likely something similar to the above is how it got to that point.

It happens all over the flying world several times a day, and without trouble, so it is not a bad method or something that needs to be fixed.

I think the manner in which this one unfolded will be revealed going forward.


At one time I worked in a USAF Undergrad pilot training base, and both flightline and Job Control.

On the flightline, I managed and led a little over a dozen maintainers in the launch and recovery operations of 50 aircraft that flew 200 sorties in about 8-10 hour day.

In Job Control I ran the flying board and managed all four flights of 100 aircraft and flew 400 sorties in that same time.

Things happen real fast, and any number of things can turn your day into a shit show. And you deal with a bunch of people who deal with a bunch of people who deal with a... and the clock never stops, even when "the ball is out of bounds".

You do like "Gunny Highway", improvise, adapt, and overcome.

I flew early on as aircrew member, and then spent the rest in maintenance. So, I tried to look into the "Matrix" of civilian aviation anytime I flew commercial (and it was a good bit), and talked with folks about things that most never see.


That's just a little of what I know, and hope that helps.

sigmonkey, that makes a lot of sense. I hadn't considered the 'time crunch' factor. That may explain why UAL felt this flight was their 'only option' for getting their crew on that one flight (though I still think, like many here, that United didn't try hard enough to get *real* volunteers. . .

sigmonkey, they had already found 3 seats. One more seat was all that's truly needed. As already mentioned, there were/are many daily flights by various airlines between Chicago's 2 airports and Louisville thru out the day. I find it hard to believe that United management did not believe that they could find ONE more seat on some other airline for that day. It's a short flight anyway, so the cost for that flight on a competitor, even at the last minute, would have been less than the $800 + hotel + food vouchers.

If the flight was out of Midway, call a cab or airport transport and send that one crew down to Midway to catch that short flight.

But instead, they called the cops for a forced removal, of that one single seat.

I answered the question, and provided insight as to what can and does go on.

The intent of that, is to help people to understand how fast the pace, how many parts moving and that it contributes to the "sense of urgency", and that can result in people who should not make decisions, doing so, or someone tasked to carry out a directive who should not.

That, is a leadership problem, and this should cause good leaders to make changes.


I am not or will not make excuse for what happened.

Having had to make critical decisions, I understand how it works. And I believe if I would have been involved, I would have exhausted every means before getting to the point of having to pull people off a flight.

I have canceled high dollar, high visibility missions in the military of weapons testing that invoked multiple military services, and in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and did so because it was the right thing to do.

And I have witnessed "go along to get along" decisions made by others that cost more, and cost lives.

But, I was not there, so I don't know how it got out of control, but it did, and the actions were as wrong as anything can be.

No one in this country should ever be treated that way for the "reason" that caused it.

And I want that addressed and fixed.


Sort of like the reviewing of a police shooting, where we have the luxury of reviewing over and over from several POV, with copious information that those involved, do not have and did not have as things unfolded for the narrow POV/perspective as it occurs.

It does not change the facts of what is right and wrong, but that we have luxury, and to be dismissive or ugly and arrogant in that POV and luxury is disingenuous at the least.

I am a troubleshooter, problem solver and fixer and wired and driven to it like a boarder collie is to a tennis ball.

My goal is to always help, when and how ever I can.

Sometimes I get lucky and get the ball.

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
WRONG Protein...

Minimum 10 hours of rest from the end of duty to the start of the next duty period with the stipulation that the crew has the opportunity for 8 hours of SLEEP.

It's irrelevant what is said from this point forward, as most are ready to play jury, judge, and executioner on this one. Have to run...Gotta don my brass knuckles for the next flight, as the passengers are boarding. LUCKILY no one has crossed us today, so we haven't had a beat down yet, but we have 2 more legs. I need my safe space with crayons and bubbles.

So, agreeing with everything you are saying, you are saying that United had no plans in place for how to comply with a federal law that MUST be obeyed no matter what. No plans at all for the super complex clockwork of thousands of flights beyond the understanding of us unwashed masses. The only recourse to this event that MUST be complied with, is to drag off paying customers.

So, even fully accepting what you are saying, United still sucks for not having any plans on how to comply with this holiest of commandments without disrupting passengers. It reminds me of years ago when I was put in charge of inventory and ordering material for customers, my boss sat me down and said "understand if you run the customer out of material, you are fired. No questions." I made damn sure I complied with that order and had plans in place for contingencies. That was my holy order. When I had to expedite an order it cost more because there were two drivers in the truck so one could drive while the other slept.

So even everything the pilots on here are saying points to a fuck up by United. They didn't have better plans for a common occurring, by their own words, mandatory federal problem. That's just bad business and a poorly run operation

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
WRONG Protein...

Minimum 10 hours of rest from the end of duty to the start of the next duty period with the stipulation that the crew has the opportunity for 8 hours of SLEEP.

It's irrelevant what is said from this point forward, as most are ready to play jury, judge, and executioner on this one. Have to run...Gotta don my brass knuckles for the next flight, as the passengers are boarding. LUCKILY no one has crossed us today, so we haven't had a beat down yet, but we have 2 more legs. I need my safe space with crayons and bubbles.

Ok. Understood. My plan still seems to be valid given my parameters. They could have driven. They would have had time to rest and sleep. 14 hours. Who monitors their sleep?

It's cool. I'm not interested in arguing. It's clear they fucked up.

My opinion can certainly be changes as far as the crew travel issue...just not the dragging off of an old man.

So 36 pages and what we've come to, through all the talk about regulations, contracts, and who holds authority, we've landed on what was discussed on page one.

IANAL but to the best that I can discern, as more and more information comes out, it would seem that AT MOST the Dr. MAY be guilty of a breach of contract, and that's probably not a slam dunk, at least according to one Cornell Professor. But even then, I am totally unaware of any situation where a total fucking beatdown is legal remedy for breach of contract.

The end of this will be as most see it. United was wrong and they'll pay dearly for it. People do the right thing in bad situations all day long without "systems" in place. They do it because discerning the right thing to do is usually a whole lot easier than your average melodrama makes it out to be. There is a problem with the culture here, it's so obvious it's painful. I guaren-damn-tee all the other airlines are putting "systems" in place to handle this, and it won't be a system that fucks paying customers.

When the company demands you comply, they send in the Pinkertons.

6 months from now this will be a blip on the radar. People will still fly UA and since this is the ONLY incidenct of its type, people will recognize it as such and move on.

While the flying public wants service and a great price, people today are concerned with price above all else. They figure they can do without a $7 sandwich and the complimentary soda and peanuts will hold them over for wherever they're domestically flying. They'll continue to search for flights, just like we all do now, using any of the online ticket sites and use "Least Expensive" as their #1 criteria in finding a flight.

Flying today is just an affair in getting from A to B.

quote:

6 months from now this will be a blip on the radar. People will still fly UA and since this is the ONLY incidenct of its type, people will recognize it as such and move on.

I am pretty certain change will come from this. Delta has already revised some policies. Americans have a long memory for certain things. I believe this is one of those. Post in six months and we will see.

This catastrophe for United is not blip-like in any way. Take a look at this thread. This incident resonates with everyone.

quote:

Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:

quote:

6 months from now this will be a blip on the radar. People will still fly UA and since this is the ONLY incidenct of its type, people will recognize it as such and move on.

I am pretty certain change will come from this. Delta has already revised some policies. Americans have a long memory for certain things. I believe this is one of those. Post in six months and we will see.

Sure. I'm confident that this will be chalked up as a UA fuck up, UA addressed the problem and paid some money, other airlines will change policies and that'll be it.

Notice that today UA published a new policy memo on removing people from flights. In this 36 page thread people were sitting in ashes over the overbooking policy and no airline will ever get rid of it. Not going to happen. UA says it won't remove people already seated but it will certainly decline to board folks at the gate. There were other changes but if your butt is in the seat, they will not remove you.

I'll give you a counter bet - Ask everyone in this thread who went apeshit over overbooking if at the end of 6 months they declined commercial travel due to the any airline still maintaining their overbooking policy. Post back but the answer will be that no one will cancel a flight or refuse to take one over the policy of overbooking. Overbooking will not go away for any airline, ever, because of this UA fuck up.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
This catastrophe for United is not blip-like in any way. Take a look at this thread. This incident resonates with everyone.

With all due respect, this thread and the members here are not the rest of America. People who fly are concerned, as their #1 goal, the cost of the ticket. That's it. UA will say they made a policy change, people will say it's addressed and the public will get back to their cheap fares. The entire airline industry is built on cheap fares and this won't derail that for them or the flying public.

What's your point with all this? Are you a lobbyist for the airline industry?

And you're mistaken. I'd say that the reaction you see in this thread is an indication of how people in this country feel about flying cattle cars. Everyone can relate to it and everyone has an opinion on the subject.

[quote]Sure. I'm confident that this will be chalked up as a UA fuck up, UA addressed the problem and paid some money, other airlines will change policies and that'll be it.[quote
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
I do not think you see the entire picture. The United CEO did not at first. This goes way beyond overbooking. It is about how you treat people, not a policy. It is symptomatic of a much greater problem. Note Para's comment above.

quote:

Originally posted by Flashlightboy:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
This catastrophe for United is not blip-like in any way. Take a look at this thread. This incident resonates with everyone.

With all due respect, this thread and the members here are not the rest of America. People who fly are concerned, as their #1 goal, the cost of the ticket. That's it. UA will say they made a policy change, people will say it's addressed and the public will get back to their cheap fares. The entire airline industry is built on cheap fares and this won't derail that for them or the flying public.

My #1 goal would be to not get brutalized so I won't fly United.

The problem is the smug 'fuck you' attitude.
We need your seat. Sucks to be you.

I guess we'll knock out a few of your teeth and see if you still want that seat.

As far as over-booking goes, I'm sure they will continue to pull whatever crap they feel they can get away with.

And I'll continue to avoid flying as much as possible as a result.

quote:

Originally posted by Protein anchor:

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
WRONG Protein...

Minimum 10 hours of rest from the end of duty to the start of the next duty period with the stipulation that the crew has the opportunity for 8 hours of SLEEP.

It's irrelevant what is said from this point forward, as most are ready to play jury, judge, and executioner on this one. Have to run...Gotta don my brass knuckles for the next flight, as the passengers are boarding. LUCKILY no one has crossed us today, so we haven't had a beat down yet, but we have 2 more legs. I need my safe space with crayons and bubbles.

Ok. Understood. My plan still seems to be valid given my parameters. They could have driven. They would have had time to rest and sleep. 14 hours. Who monitors their sleep?

It's cool. I'm not interested in arguing. It's clear they fucked up.

My opinion can certainly be changes as far as the crew travel issue...just not the dragging off of an old man.

Your plan has zero merits, because you have not taken into account the time the crew was already on duty. The crew had just walked off a flight they had just worked and were told they needed to be in IIU because that crew was unavailable for whatever reason. Time off is only 1 clock we have to watch. We also have a fed.gov mandated time we can be on duty. And on duty means doing ANYTIHNG for the company. We are required to be on duty an hour before the flight to account for preflight and such, if you fly a 2 hour leg then sit for an hour and fly another 3 hour leg, plus post flight time you are already at 8 hours and have not really done much. There is NO way to accept a 4 hour drive from ORD to IIU and be legal. And I mean legal, the LAW states very clearly that no company may assign and no crewmember may accept an assignment that exceeds duty time limitations, it's a law. And very highly monitored. So number one, they could not drive and still be within legal ON duty limits and still get the amount of rest they would legally have to get.
2, even if they could accept the drive and over duty time assignment, once they bust duty time, they MUST be legally assigned "penalty rest". The FAA feels that if you are flying and a storm cause you to go over duty time, that is beyond anyones control so no biggie, HOWEVER, the crew MUST be assigned additional rest to compensate based on how far over their duty time they were exceeded.

So even if they could drive, which they are legally bound to reject, they would be over duty time and have to be assigned extra rest and would therefore miss their next assignment.

This thread is really disappointing in that the people who know the voluminous regulations and rules that must be applied are being systemically shouted down by people with opinions and some back seat travel time. There are a million nuances that we are trying to get across, but no one wants to hear it.