Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
United Airways Lawyers digging dirt to smear his cred, in litigation.
Now you know why Progressives in both parties, pushed the Patriot Act and NDAA.
To dig dirt on Americans. Susan Rice proved that.
I got the dirt on you. You better do what I say, or else.
OMG.
NO ONE from United had to do any digging at all.
As soon as his name came out, reporters from multiple outlets began searching PUBLIC RECORDS to find out if David Dao really was a doctor, what was his specialty, had he ever had any legal problems, mental issues, etc. PUBLIC RECORDS. This did not come from United.
Do we know that the flight was overbooked? The press keeps saying it was. However, I was under the impression that four flight crew members suddenly had to reach another destination. Which would not be a case of overbooking. Which is it, does anyone know for sure?
PS. Regardless, the CEO is a jerk, I'm never going to fly with them.
There was no real reason. Wow... that was ****ing quick.
There's a ****ty, vile practice in the airline industry that calls for intentional overbooking, under the assumption that not everyone will make their flight. When everyone does, the plane it too full to fit all the passenger, so people are asked to leave. Occasionally, people will. But here's the thing, if you bought a ticket, you are presumably reserving a spot on an airplane. That is what a ticket does. If I go to a movie theater and buy a ticket, I won't walk in and find the theater completely full because a ****ing movie theater, who's service is purely entertainment, tracks the sale of their tickets based on availability of space. Why then should we be ok with an airline, who's service provides an valuable utility, just sells tickets to make money without much consideration to space?
Yes, UA was within their legal rights (probably becasue they've purchased the ability to have their disgusting profiteering practice that is obviously anti-consumer protected), but that doesn't mean what they're doing is morally right. The outrage over this is entirely justifiable. Yeah, it's a private body doing as they please on their private property, but what they're doing reveals that they're pieces of ****.
Unfortunately thats mostly legal. And again, my point is that it is not up to the passengers or the police to litigate the situation real time. You abide by the rules in place as explained by law enforcement. If you disagree, most police are willing to discuss and explain the situation and listen to your side of the story. Once you flat out refuse to do what they request, they are left with nothing other than to enforce the law. It probably didn't require that much force, so I place the blame on the police as well.
When he bought his original ticket was he buying a voucher for a future flight or was he buying a ticket on the date specified?
We all know how the airline industry operates, and they have been regulated in a way that makes it legal. I'll say it again, I don't agree and I think its horrible policy but it is currently how the system works. As a grown adult this man needed to be more aware of that, and not throw a tantrum. Unfortunately regulations are in favor of the airlines so they get away with these practices.
Yes it does. If one cannot accommodate a customer for whatever reason before payment is rendered, either party can reject the transaction.
BUT, when payment has already been rendered for a good or service, such as what happened with this United flight and boarded passenger, the business then loses the right to reject their obligation for delivering such goods/services as sold and for which such payment was received.
It really doesn't "change everything" though. United is running a private business, they had a decision to make and they made it. 4 paying customers were getting off that plane before it left. 3 did so with no incident, one refused and was physically removed because he was incapable of dealing with the situation like an adult. While the decision might not be "popular" its up to the courts to decide if it was illegal. Its not up to the passenger or the police to debate at that point. The police are there to protect private property rights, be them my own in my own home, or those of a business, big or small. If everyone thought they had the option to act like this man did when they thought the law wasn't fair, we would live in complete anarchy.
United made a series of horrible decisions before and after this event, and that is on them to deal with. BUT, that passenger is just as much to blame as the police and United in this entire situation.
Everybody? Do not represent others when you don't qualify.
Get over yourself.
The story has exploded all over the media.
Journalists are scrambling to find out who this guy was, whether he really did need to be on that flight, why he behaved the way he did, why the airline acted as they did. And this information is PUBLIC RECORDS. All they needed was his name.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
