United Airlines Loses $1 Billion in Market Value After Assaulting Passenger

[Aryzin]

i dont think this is correct. once you leave the plane you can't come back on without prior security checks.

the pilot made an accouncement asked for 4 volunteers, no one came forward so he choose 4 random passengers offloaded them. one of them kicked a fuss and the rest is history.

True but that is what they said last night on CNN. If you trust CNN

 

[BATMAN]

United airlines can gain $2billion of they kill a hijab woman tomorrow.

 

[Malik Alashter]

He was asked to leave because 4 replacement crew need to board that plane to staff another flight back from their destination.

The Captain first offer $1000 and an upgrade for 4 pax to disembark from the plane, where nobody volunteer, then the Captain take out 4 seat number at random and ask these 4 customer to get off the plane with compensation, 3 got off without incident and he refused to leave, and the Captain called Airport Security and he was dragged off.

understood they still need to find someone else to end it peacefully instead they went the hard way alas.

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

Umm, US law only require the offer to be $675 maximum compensation for Airline that offer alternative transportation. $800 is already more than the law required

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

In fact, the number is more than generous than the world standard. In EU, the same amount would have offered to International Flight only.

Offering anymore than the law require is up to each company, you can call UA cheap but you cannot blame US for not offering a reasonable amount to deplane. As I said, they offered a lot more than the world average

I don't think the majority of people are mad about him getting kicked off, I think it's more about how he was taken off.

If we look at

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or"

You also have

42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
"Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia."


If we look at which right under the bill of rights was infringed, we can go to this

Seventh Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


The airline was doing the legal thing and was well within their rights to do such things but the way the man was treated was clearly unfair.


The airline was in the right but the police were out of line.

P.S you also forgot about a part of the law you quoted which was

"(3) Compensation shall be 400% of the fare to the passenger's destination or first stopover, with a maximum of $1,350, if the carrier does not offer alternate transportation that, at the time the arrangement is made, is planned to arrive at the airport of the passenger's first stopover, or if none, the airport of the passenger's final destination less than two hours after the planned arrival time of the passenger's original flight."


So if they didn't offer alternative transport then 800 dollars was really under paying.

 

[jhungary]

I don't think the majority of people are mad about him getting kicked off, I think it's more about how he was taken off.

If we look at

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

"If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or"

You also have

42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
"Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia."


If we look at which right under the bill of rights was infringed, we can go to this

Seventh Article:
The right of the People to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


The airline was doing the legal thing and was well within their rights to do such things but the way the man was treated was clearly unfair.


The airline was in the right but the police were out of line.

P.S you also forgot about a part of the law you quoted which was

"(3) Compensation shall be 400% of the fare to the passenger's destination or first stopover, with a maximum of $1,350, if the carrier does not offer alternate transportation that, at the time the arrangement is made, is planned to arrive at the airport of the passenger's first stopover, or if none, the airport of the passenger's final destination less than two hours after the planned arrival time of the passenger's original flight."


So if they didn't offer alternative transport then 800 dollars was really under paying.

Actually, $1350 is the maximum offered IF THE CARRIER DOES NOT OFFER ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION
It was clearly said in the law, wo when United Offered a flight to be carried out within, they have offered alternate transportation. Which would mean the compensation should be of clause 2, not clause 3

If an alternate transport is offered the maximum amount is $650. Beside, that was a quoted maximum, the lower ceiling is 400% of the original ticket, which is about $200 from a flight from O'Hare to Louisville, $800 has actually reached that lower limited the airline have to offered, plus, he also would have upgrade and dother incentive, which can be paid, per law, in lieu of cash/check payment.

And finally, as I said before, I have no problem you think Chicago Department of Aviation Staff were heavy hand, but then why would this be related to United? United did not hire Chicago DoA Staff, and the call to remove the passenger is indeed legal.

understood they still need to find someone else to end it peacefully instead they went the hard way alas.

The choice is theirs, as I said there may be an underlying clause in this incident, maybe the pilot is about to be over hours, or maybe the weather is getting bad again, so they need to hurried up the flight and no time to do another round? You don't know and We don't know.

What we know is, they offered the first round, then they remove people from the plane, they don't need to do a second round to satisfy the legal requirement, and they didn't, so for whatever reason why they do just enough to go ahead, then what "If" does not matter, law does not build based on what if, because what you think can happen if he does something, there are always a equally strong counter argument that what "if" they did that and didn't work.

I am not saying what UA did was not harsh or stupid, I am saying what they did is legal, and what they did was actually carried out 3000 times last year, yet, this is the first time we talk about it.

 

[TechMan]

Umm, US law only require the offer to be $675 maximum compensation for Airline that offer alternative transportation. $800 is already more than the law required

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5

In fact, the number is more than generous than the world standard. In EU, the same amount would have offered to International Flight only.

Offering anymore than the law require is up to each company, you can call UA cheap but you cannot blame US for not offering a reasonable amount to deplane. As I said, they offered a lot more than the world average

You are again confusing overbooked flight with UAs incompetence. This law is for when you are DENIED BOARDING due to OVERBOOKED flight. He had already boarded the plane and their was no overbooking because suddenly UA wanted their own employees to travel.

 

[jhungary]

You are again confusing overbooked flight with UAs incompetence. This law is for when you are DENIED BOARDING due to OVERBOOKED flight. He had already boarded the plane and their was no overbooking because suddenly UA wanted their own employees to travel.

..........He was removed because he refused the instruction from the flight captain. For that he got nothing

The problem is that, whether or not the flight is overbooked. The flight crew have to right to remove personnel from his/her aircraft, with or without offering compensation. That is because in civil aviation, an active crew will have priority seating over paid customer.

An offer to remove the passenger is based on the good will of the company and the captain, Dr Dao was removed from the flight not because he was asked to leave, at that point, it was way past that, he was removed from the flight because he refused to follow a lawful instruction from the captain.

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

IF THE CARRIER DOES NOT OFFER ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION

Yeah I did see that hence why I put, but I will need the quote where they offered alternative transport because I have yet to hear or see anything.

So if they didn't offer alternative transport then 800 dollars was really under paying.

And finally, as I said before, I have no problem you think Chicago Department of Aviation Staff were heavy hand, but then why would this be related to United? United did not hire Chicago DoA Staff, and the call to remove the passenger is indeed legal.

I never said that the airplane didn't have the right, on the contrary

The airline was doing the legal thing and was well within their rights to do such things but the way the man was treated was clearly unfair.

My main problem is the fact of HOW the man was treated. In fact one could call it police brutality.

 

[Speeder 2]

..........He was removed because he refused the instruction from the flight captain. For that he got nothing

The problem is that, whether or not the flight is overbooked. The flight crew have to right to remove personnel from his/her aircraft, with or without offering compensation. That is because in civil aviation, an active crew will have priority seating over paid customer.

An offer to remove the passenger is based on the good will of the company and the captain, Dr Dao was removed from the flight not because he was asked to leave, at that point, it was way past that, he was removed from the flight because he refused to follow a lawful instruction from the captain.

WTF? You don't even have a friggin clue!

The real issue of this scandal is NOT being thrown off the plane, who had more rights, or even police brutality, but its inbedded 3 deep layers of blantant discrimination that confront ANY East Asian face (it doesn't have a crap difference which part of East Asia you're originally from, wether you're a tourist or citizen, or X gen citizen, wether you're a menial laborer or a top investment banker...) in the West!

These 3 layers of racial discriminations in this inccident werë:

1/ "random selection": everyone knows what does that mean. This is what some of the press talked about on a almost invisible side note, while pretending the following type 2 and 3 having no discrimination bearings.

2/ "being beaten & dragged across the aisle" : I can guarantee you that if Dr Dao were white, black , or arab muslim, the police wouldn't dare to have done so, not there!

East Asians, however, regardless of their individual education and economic statues, are at the lowest racial-social ladder in the PC West, I mean both North America and Europe. Can you imagine the consecuences if someone has done that to a black or a muslim instead nowdays in the same scenario as Dao. That police knew it instinctly, almost for granted, that the cost of carrying out of such inhumane actions to an East Asian would be next to zero.

3/ "we have to re-commodate the passengers"(UA CEO's 1st response): as 2/, they knew it that they could get away with it without even bother a short apology , after even admitting both type 1 and 2 discrimination. So what? Who taught them so? Their everyday life - they can do that without an apology and with no blacklash.

Can you look at a mirror and tell me in a straight face that your everyday life is any different in down'under?

Any East Asian face encounters both type 1 and type 3 descrimination in the West in almost their everyday life in different scenarios and formats (and yes, you still do even if you stick your Swede wife tab on your forehead whereever you go), whereas type 2-alike being less common but exist depending on your luck.

I am so disappointed that NO ONE has enough courage and honesty to look at these real issues. Something needs to be done here, other than some trivial irrelevent aviation rules, who has beaten whom etc!

 

[jhungary]

Yeah I did see that hence why I put, but I will need the quote where they offered alternative transport because I have yet to hear or see anything.

In some news media, the full package offered was $800 cash or voucher (unknown type), hotel stays and an guarantee spot of a flight 21 hours later.

Even if the flight is not offered. Since the compensation can be some form other than monetary compensation, the $800 compensation and hotel stay more than likely to reach the maximum amount of $1350

I never said that the airplane didn't have the right, on the contrary



My main problem is the fact of HOW the man was treated. In fact one could call it police brutality.

You are right, Police Brutality is involved in this, unless David Dao has pick up a fight with the authority, the reality of him dragging off the plane is unnecessarily. On the other hand, we don't actually know what happened, what we know is the grainy picture of a video captured by the other passenger. A full investigation is warrant at this end.

My question is, ARE UNITED AT FAULT here? As my wife point out on the other point, there are no way you can associate United with the Heavy Handed tactics the police use to remove Dao. What United do is bar PR, because they did not symphysis on the passenger, but that does not mean United was wrong to have remove Dao.

In a court case, if Dao decided to sue United, and United decided to fight the case inspirit of the bad press. I honestly don't see how United can lose a court case, however, at this stage, I don't think United would now have guts to fight the case if they were sued.

WTF? You don't even have a friggin clue!

The real issue of this scandal is NOT being thrown off the plane, who had more rights, or even police brutality, but its inbedded 3 deep layers of blantant discrimination that confront ANY East Asian face (it doesn't have a crap difference which part of East Asia you're originally from, wether you're a tourist or citizen, or X gen citizen, wether you're a menial laborer or a top investment banker...) in the West!

These 3 layers of racial discriminations in this inccident werë:

1/ "random selection": everyone knows what does that mean. This is what some of the press talked about on a almost invisible side note, while pretending the following type 2 and 3 having no discrimination bearings.

2/ "being beaten & dragged across the aisle" : I can guarantee you that if Dr Dao were white, black , or arab muslim, the police wouldn't dare to have done so, not there!

East Asians, however, regardless of their individual education and economic statues, are at the lowest racial-social ladder in the PC West, I mean both North America and Europe. Can you imagine the consecuences if someone has done that to a black or a muslim instead nowdays in the same scenario as Dao. That police knew it instinctly, almost for granted, that the cost of carrying out of such inhumane actions to an East Asian would be next to zero.

3/ "we have to re-commodate the passengers"(UA CEO's 1st response): as 2/, they knew it that they could get away with it without even bother a short apology , after even admitting both type 1 and 2 discrimination. So what? Who taught them so? Their everyday life - they can do that without an apology and with no blacklash.

Can you look at a mirror and tell me in a straight face that your everyday life is any different in down'under?

Any East Asian face encounters both type 1 and type 3 descrimination in the West in almost their everyday life in different scenarios and formats (and yes, you still do even if you stick your Swede wife tab on your forehead whereever you go), whereas type 2-alike being less common but exist depending on your luck.

I am so disappointed that NO ONE has enough courage and honesty to look at these real issues. Something needs to be done here, other than some trivial irrelevent aviation rules, who has beaten whom etc!

It have nothing to do with race, even Dao's lawyer said it have NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE.

Dr. Dao has not spoken publicly about the ordeal, and Mr. Demetrio declined to comment on his whereabouts, other than saying he was in a secure location. While some have pointed to the episode as an example of racism toward Asians, Mr. Demetrio said he did not believe race played a role in what happened.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/united-passenger-david-dao-chicago.html?_r=0

You are quite naïve to think everything is related with race because that guy is Asian, do you even know 2 facts?

1.) The removal is picked at random. Do you know the race of the other 3 who willingly be remove at the same flight?

2.) The removal is done in according to aviation authority and appropriate law, not only dao was removed, 3400 pax have been removed in the last year, how many of those are Asian?

Just because the person in question is Asian, does not mean he has been discriminated.

And you ask me? I don't think I have been discriminated against, I have never been removed fro ma flight, willingly or non-willingly, I have not been treated differently, I talked to my neighbour, they talked to me, and yes, my neighbour are all white. If you feel discriminated against, then well, you need to understand why, but please stop being a stereotype and do not project this naive and racist mentality saying any East Asian are all discriminated in western world.

 

[A.M.]

In some news media, the full package offered was $800 cash or voucher (unknown type), hotel stays and an guarantee spot of a flight 21 hours later.

Even if the flight is not offered. Since the compensation can be some form other than monetary compensation, the $800 compensation and hotel stay more than likely to reach the maximum amount of $1350




You are right, Police Brutality is involved in this, unless David Dao has pick up a fight with the authority, the reality of him dragging off the plane is unnecessarily. On the other hand, we don't actually know what happened, what we know is the grainy picture of a video captured by the other passenger. A full investigation is warrant at this end.

My question is, ARE UNITED AT FAULT here? As my wife point out on the other point, there are no way you can associate United with the Heavy Handed tactics the police use to remove Dao. What United do is bar PR, because they did not symphysis on the passenger, but that does not mean United was wrong to have remove Dao.

In a court case, if Dao decided to sue United, and United decided to fight the case inspirit of the bad press. I honestly don't see how United can lose a court case, however, at this stage, I don't think United would now have guts to fight the case if they were sued.

United is toast as their CEO admitted publicly that they won't use police to remove passengers from their planes anymore. This inherently confirms that united sanctioned such practice in the past.

I don't know if an actual suit will be filed. I think the lawyers are talking now and will agree to a settlement behind the scenes. United wants this over with asap.

 

[jhungary]

United is toast as their CEO admitted publicly that they won't use police to remove passengers from their planes anymore. This inherently confirms that united sanctioned such practice in the past.

I don't know if an actual suit will be filed. I think the lawyers are talking now and will agree to a settlement behind the scenes. United wants this over with asap.

Yes, United is most probably settle with this at the onset.

The problem of the whole thing (FOR UNITED) is not what they actually do, Department of Transport did actually said the right is within United to remove the passenger, but how the Airport Authority did it is questionable,

For United, the right move should have been side with the passenger from day 1 and issue an apology on behalf of the situation and how it went down, and side with the investigation.

But in reality, the Stone Cold response issued by United at time even blamed the passenger. Yes, the passenger is at fault for not following the instruction of the captain, and he can be removed from the plane for it, the problem is, should United Babble about it when we can clearly see the social reaction is going to another direction?

The question is not whether or not United have the law on its side, sometime Law is not enough, in today world, a lot of case are judged by media before we can talk about it in a court room, and when you are judged by media, then nothing is make sense according to the law, because normal people like you and me don't know about law, we only know what we see, and if we projected them in our image, then we can think "Oh, that could have been me" and I will start thinking "It should not be like that" and in the end, as people don't know about the law, they would think Dao is right, even after he actually broke a federal law.

And don't forget, when in an actual trial, the people who make up the jury is people like you and me, but not a lawyer.

 

[gambit]

I don't think the majority of people are mad about him getting kicked off, I think it's more about how he was taken off.

You make up half of the equation. If the police tells you to leave the room, your response is a provocation to theirs.

If you obey and leave the room under your own power, their response will be minimal. They will simply follows you.

What do you think will happens -- as in escalation -- if you get angry, then wave your arms, then start insulting the officers ?

If you chose the route of passive resistance, as in just lay down and not move, that is also provocation. Your laying down provokes the officers to take the issue a different path, that of manhandling you to get you out of the room.

Dr. Dao had the initiative. Very seldom will the police act first. One officer tried persuasion, a fact that have been conveniently omitted. Say you get violent and then subdued. Even so, the officers will still try to get you to leave the room under your own power once you calmed down. They will be alerted and readied to restrain you again, but if you are willing, they will closely escort you from the room.

How Dr. Dao was taken off the aircraft ? He had a hand in it.

 

[jamal18]

Every single time I've traveled with United they overbook, and some customers are offered alternatives. I simply can't understand with computerized booking systems how this is even possible.

Once a air hostess asked me 'how was dinner'.
I replied 'absolutely terrible'.
She smiled and said, 'the longer you eat it, the better it tastes!'.

United airlines can gain $2billion of they kill a hijab woman tomorrow.

At least Trump will fly them!

 

[My-Analogous]