United Airlines forcibly removes passenger from overbooked flight

[Merseysider]

Well there you go then.

It looks like it's only Ryanair which doesn't overbook.

Can confirm.

Ryanair, as a policy, does not overbook its flights. However, in the unlikely event that a seat is not available for a passenger with a confirmed reservation, we will seek volunteers to surrender their seats in exchange for benefits that we and the volunteer may agree upon before involuntarily denying boarding to other passengers.

 

[bb21]

If people don't show, you've still had their fare.

Not necessarily. If you read all posts in this thread you would find that someone had already explained how it worked with flexible tickets (Post 16).

 

[ivanhoe]

Airlines have to overbook in order to survive, profit margins are razor thin. And how do you propose airlines 'sort out' their rosters given that they can't force crews to live in every city where planes start and end their days.

If profit margins are razor thin, the Business Model is not working. Wait a minute, what were United's net profits in 2016?

 

[Howardh]

I can just imagine what would happen if the Westray - Papa Westray flight was overbooked. "Sorry, but we can't carry you, but you can see the airport, it's there, here's some swimming trunks."
Might be faster if the wind is against!!

 

[najaB]

If profit margins are razor thin, the Business Model is not working. Wait a minute, what were United's net profits in 2016?

No, that's a sign that the business model is working. If it wasn't working there wouldn't be any profit margin at all.

And overall net profit doesn't mean anything. You can make a ton of money off thin margins, you just need to sell a lot.

 

[edwin_m]

I think this answers whether EasyJet does overbooking... BBC story today

From the above link:

The final two passengers should not have been issued boarding passes at the bag-drop area in Luton airport. Their tickets had not been properly scanned and so the system thought there were enough seats on the plane.

I'm not sure this makes sense. Surely it would have been some earlier passengers whose tickets were not properly scanned? Surely a possible security issue if people can get on the plane without the computer knowing they are there? As far as I recall if you have bags on EasyJet you still have to check in online and show your boarding pass at the bag drop.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That description indeed does not make sense. I think what they really mean is that online check-in should have failed, unless these two did indeed do airport check-in, an option easyJet don't officially offer but do do if you ask nicely (for no fee), e.g. if you forgot or lost it.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If profit margins are razor thin, the Business Model is not working. Wait a minute, what were United's net profits in 2016?

If profit margins are razor thin, there could be many causes. But if they are routinely razor thin, then the most likely cause would usually simply be that it's a market where there is considerable competition, and consumers are very price-sensitive - so few opportunities to compete other than on price. That seems to me to describe the market for air travel quite well. It tends to be very hard to make much profit (as % of turnover) in that kind of environment.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Overbooking is not necessary. Airlines do it because there's nothing to stop them. They could use their yield management to have the last few seats at eye-watering prices without bumping lower-fare passengers- Ryanair do this- but the law lets them have their cake and eat it so they do.

Why take the financial risk of the seat staying empty when you can transfer the risk to the passenger and ruin their plans instead?

EU261 has gone some of the way towards making it less attractive to IDB passengers who've paid in good faith, but not far enough. The compensation needs to be more stinging.

 

[Bletchleyite]

EU261 has gone some of the way towards making it less attractive to IDB passengers who've paid in good faith, but not far enough. The compensation needs to be more stinging.

I'd suggest a split - a much lower sum along the lines of Delay Repay (but non-fault, as with Delay Repay, to discourage good quality operations and resilience) capped at the ticket price paid[1] for regular delays and cancellations, plus overnight accommodation if appropriate, and a much higher sum[2] in the event that overbooking is the cause.

Of course they could ask for volunteers for less money, which is also fine. If not in a hurry I'd volunteer for a relatively small sum particularly if the alternative was in some way interesting, but if in a hurry I want a *large* sum for the inconvenience, possibly one that might allow me to purchase an alternative such as a walk-up on another airline, a First Anytime Single, or a one way car hire.

[1] Air is by its nature more likely to be delayed than rail, so perhaps 50% of single fare for 3hrs+, full refund of single fare for 12hrs+, where the cause is not that there were more passengers booked on the flight (or attempted to be placed on the flight) than the number of seats on the aircraft originally allocated.

[2] Perhaps £1000 or 5 times the fare paid, whichever is higher, per passenger bumped.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I wouldn't, because EU261 only kicks in when the airline are to blame. The point of the scheme is to make doing the job properly cheaper than doing it badly, because airlines showed no intention to behave properly otherwise.

For too long airlines were just able to pass the cost of doing business badly on to their passengers or, in most cases, their insurers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wouldn't, because EU261 only kicks in when the airline are to blame

It depends what you mean "to blame". It would be easier to remove that distinction, really, apart from the one situation of deliberate overbooking or deliberate aircraft swap (i.e. not caused by a breakdown of THAT SPECIFIC aircraft).

I would also see a need for significant compensation for changing flight times by more than an hour or two, and for cancelling flights because they aren't full enough.

 

[najaB]

I wouldn't, because EU261 only kicks in when the airline are to blame.

The definition of 'to blame' is quite wide. The only exceptions are where it was due to factors completely outside the airline's control (e.g. an ATC strike, extreme weather event) or where there was a direct and immediate safety of flight issue that couldn't be averted through regular maintenance (e.g. the aircraft is damaged by a ground vehicle collision).

 

[najaB]

Overbooking is not necessary.

It is if your competitors are doing it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The definition of 'to blame' is quite wide. The only exceptions are where it was due to factors completely outside the airline's control (e.g. an ATC strike, extreme weather event) or where there was a direct and immediate safety of flight issue that couldn't be averted through regular maintenance (e.g. the aircraft is damaged by a ground vehicle collision).

Personally I wouldn't exempt the latter, I'd just make it part of the contract with the ground handler that in such an event they are paying.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is if your competitors are doing it.

Hence the need for legislation to create a level playing field. I wouldn't ban it, though, I'd simply make getting it wrong (i.e. an involuntary bump) *very* expensive for them.

 

[backontrack]

I can just imagine what would happen if the Westray - Papa Westray flight was overbooked. "Sorry, but we can't carry you, but you can see the airport, it's there, here's some swimming trunks."
Might be faster if the wind is against!!

The current is strong, however, so it's the Kirkwall flight you'd beat. It'd at least be cheaper than a Flybe journey!

 

[AlterEgo]

United and Dao have settled.

Dao's Lawyer:

Dr. David Dao has reached an amicable settlement with United Airlines for the injuries he received in his April 9th ordeal, which was captured on video and viewed worldwide. The settlement was negotiated by Dr. Dao’s lawyers, Thomas A. Demetrio of Corboy & Demetrio and Stephen L. Golan of Golan Christie Taglia, and the legal representatives for United. A condition of the settlement includes a provision that the amount remain confidential. Dr. Dao and his attorneys agreed to that condition.

Demetrio praised Mr. Oscar Munoz:

“Mr. Munoz said he was going to do the right thing, and he has. In addition, United has taken full responsibility for what happened on Flight 3411, without attempting to blame others, including the City of Chicago. For this acceptance of corporate accountability, United is to be applauded.”

The settlement was reached on the same day United Airlines announced multiple positive changes to improve the customer experience. According to Demetrio, “Dr. Dao has become the unintended champion for the adoption of changes which will certainly help improve the lives of literally millions of travelers.” In addition, Demetrio stated, “I sincerely hope that all other airlines make similar changes and follow United’s lead in helping to improve the passenger flying experience with an emphasis on empathy, patience, respect and dignity.”

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/04/27/united-airlines-bump-settlement/

The heat seems to be off Munoz.

Time will tell if he is able to mould United into an airline that isn't crap.

EDIT: I note United have posted a detailed, if self-flagellating report on the incident. I have not seen a company do this in quite this way before. https://s3.amazonaws.com/unitedhub/United+Flight+3411+Review+and+Action+Report.pdf

 

[Howardh]

United and Dao have settled.

Dao's Lawyer:



http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/04/27/united-airlines-bump-settlement/

The heat seems to be off Munoz.

Time will tell if he is able to mould United into an airline that isn't crap.

$5m?? That would be my best guess! Basically, if you criminally assault someone in the USA you can get away with it by paying them off.

 

[AlterEgo]

$5m?? That would be my best guess! Basically, if you criminally assault someone in the USA you can get away with it by paying them off.

UA haven't really got away with it though, have they? They suffered a huge stock devaluation and a lot of "flaky" customers (like me) would have refused to consider using them.

 

[Howardh]

UA haven't really got away with it though, have they? They suffered a huge stock devaluation and a lot of "flaky" customers (like me) would have refused to consider using them.

Yes, but they don't go to the nick or get a criminal record. If I dragged someone off their seat and pulled them down an aisle against their wishes I think I'd be facing a day opposite a magistrate at least.

 

[Tetchytyke]

One consequence of this is what happened on a BA flight to Jamaica the other day. Old man "self upgrades", refuses to move, gets abusive, gets restrained, gets dumped in the Azores. Demands compensation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4450576/British-Airways-kick-couple-demand-upgrade.html

I'd love to know how drunk the businesswoman was to get chucked off too...

 

[Domh245]

They did however manage to kill a "celebrity" rabbit the other day though, which isn't going to help them out...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/us/united-airlines-rabbit.html?_r=0

Less than three weeks after a passenger was dragged off a United Airlines flight at the Chicago airport, the carrier found itself facing another public relations fiasco on Wednesday after a three-foot-long rabbit died on a flight from Britain.

The continental giant rabbit, Simon, which was bound for O’Hare, had a veterinary checkup three hours before takeoff from Heathrow Airport near London and was “fit as a fiddle,” his breeder said. The animal was travelling to a buyer in the United States.

 

[Failed Unit]

It is if your competitors are doing it.

I would look at this as a positive difference from the airline rather than a race to the bottom we currently are witnessing.

I have suffered the consequences of overbooking twice in the last 6 months.

In both cases the airline basically said. "Welcome to long haul flying - everyone does it so it is OK" and gave an insultingly low level of compensation.

I asked the airlines in question why they didn't warn me at the time of booking - they didn't reply just stated it keeps fares low.
I asked why I can't purchase a ticket at a higher price and get what I have paid for? - Declined to answer.

If airline A - charge £1000 and you would get what you have paid for I would use them over airline B which charges £850 and overbooks. I am sure if airlines were more honest with overbooking rates (1:3 passengers were off-loaded in my first example) then I am sure it would hit thier pocket. The CAA say most people take it on the chin. But I don't understand why airlines can't base a service on quality, rather than the race to the bottom with in my personal experinence I 1 in 3 chance of getting offloaded.

My experience.
Flight 1 - return journey overbooked - 33% of passengers offloaded.
Flight 2 - return journey overbooked - 20% of passengers offloaded.

These are both in the last 6 months - surely long haul flying doesn't need to be that unpleaseent? Would I use either airline agian - no? But then as everyone is doing it will the next airline treat me any better. The reason I won't use them again is because they just said you need to accept this as part of travelling with us.

 

[tspaul26]

I would look at this as a positive difference from the airline rather than a race to the bottom we currently are witnessing.

I have suffered the consequences of overbooking twice in the last 6 months.

In both cases the airline basically said. "Welcome to long haul flying - everyone does it so it is OK" and gave an insultingly low level of compensation.

In my experience, it is possible for volunteers to negotiate some pretty generous benefits in return for rebooking, especially on long-haul routes (e.g. round the world flights in first class, cash compensation, &c.).

I asked the airlines in question why they didn't warn me at the time of booking - they didn't reply just stated it keeps fares low.

I agree that they should do this if they have an overbooking policy. That being said, there's probably something buried in the Terms and Conditions somewhere - after all, everyone reads the small print before ticking the box, don't they?

I asked why I can't purchase a ticket at a higher price and get what I have paid for? - Declined to answer.

Many airlines will offer guaranteed travel as a frequent flyer perk.

I believe Cathay Pacific will actually book a top-tier frequent flyer onto a sold-out flight (including any overbooking) and bump someone else off.

If airline A - charge £1000 and you would get what you have paid for I would use them over airline B which charges £850 and overbooks. I am sure if airlines were more honest with overbooking rates (1:3 passengers were off-loaded in my first example) then I am sure it would hit thier pocket. The CAA say most people take it on the chin.

I suppose it depends on how flexible each passenger can be. Very few people have to travel on a specific flight. It's just inconvenient to change plans at the last minute.

I suspect more people would be willing to wait for the next flight if there was greater awareness of the mandatory compensation provisions (when flying from an EU airport or on an EU carrier) and the airline offers more than the legal minimum to volunteers.

By way of example, if the long-haul flight is over 3,500km and the delay will be more than four hours, the legal minimum for forcible denied boarding is €600. If an airline offers to upgrade me to First Class on the rebooked flight and gives me a couple of free return tickets to use in the future than I'd probably prefer that to the cash!

But I don't understand why airlines can't base a service on quality, rather than the race to the bottom with in my personal experinence I 1 in 3 chance of getting offloaded.

My experience.
Flight 1 - return journey overbooked - 33% of passengers offloaded.
Flight 2 - return journey overbooked - 20% of passengers offloaded.

These are both in the last 6 months - surely long haul flying doesn't need to be that unpleaseent? Would I use either airline agian - no? But then as everyone is doing it will the next airline treat me any better. The reason I won't use them again is because they just said you need to accept this as part of travelling with us.

That degree of overbooking is particularly high, I may say.

Even more reason to wring them for every penny in return for voluntary rebooking! They'd be gasping for volunteers, because it turns a bad PR moment into a success:

"We were overbooked, but they put us up in a hotel for the night, booked us on the next flight, upgraded us to Business Class and gave us £500 compensation. They handled it really well; nobody got dragged off the plane kicking and screaming."

 

[Failed Unit]

In both cases the process was follows.

1. Attempt to check in online - fail with a message about checking in at airport.
2. Turn up at the airport 2 hours before closure in case 1 and 3 hours before in case 2 - ie I wasn't the last passenger to be told I was the "lucky" one. Hearing people check in no-issues either side of me and not getting asked to if they wanted to change plans.

I was exceptionally irritated by the 2nd instance as if the airline was honest I could have done serveral things which would have benifted both myself and the airline.

As an example.
This flight was a A-B-C flight, if I had know then B-C flight was full I could have easily done the journey C-B-A. Would have make no difference to me.

I didn't need to travel on the dates I did, again if I knew the B-C flight was full on Friday, I would have planned my journey to travel on Thursday or Saturday. I could have even chance my plans mid-journey if they airline had bothered telling me.

The airline(s) even have the brass neck to imply that they are doing me a favour by getting me home at all.

Airline 1 (Virgin)- compensation - free return flight to anywhere they operate - better than a kick in the teeth.
Airline 2 (British Airways) - £75 pre-loaded mastercard - that is it!!!!! Needless to say the dispute is still going on with them.

I did smell a rat with the BA one when I attempted to reserve a seat and there were no any to reserve....

 

[tspaul26]

I was exceptionally irritated by the 2nd instance as if the airline was honest I could have done serveral things which would have benifted both myself and the airline.

As an example.
This flight was a A-B-C flight, if I had know then B-C flight was full I could have easily done the journey C-B-A. Would have make no difference to me.

I didn't need to travel on the dates I did, again if I knew the B-C flight was full on Friday, I would have planned my journey to travel on Thursday or Saturday. I could have even chance my plans mid-journey if they airline had bothered telling me.

This is what's silly about this kind of situation: it doesn't have to be a PR disaster, but they need to be proactive about it.

I daresay that you would have been a damn sight happier with an email in advance saying: "we might not be able to fit you in on this flight; if you rebook for the next day, we'll also give you some wonga".

The airline(s) even have the brass neck to imply that they are doing me a favour by getting me home at all.

This is something that has annoyed me in the past as well. I remember a flight from Glasgow to London a few years ago when the London City flight was cancelled and I was rebooked to Heathrow instead.

When I mentioned the cost of the transfer from Heathrow to the City the ground handlers didn't want to know. Subsequent correspondence with the airline's legal team quickly sorted that out, together with a little bonus for my trouble.

And yet I would have been perfectly happy if they had just arranged for me to get into central London!

Airline 1 (Virgin)- compensation - free return flight to anywhere they operate - better than a kick in the teeth.
Airline 2 (British Airways) - £75 pre-loaded mastercard - that is it!!!!! Needless to say the dispute is still going on with them.

That's not on at all! The absolute minimum compensation amount for denied boarding is €125, which is somewhat more than this poxy offering!

Let me guess: BA didn't give you a written notice setting out your rights to compensation, re-routing and assistance either? And I hope they offered you your two free telex messages?

Screw them for every penny! If necessary, you can join me in the 'I sued BA because they ignore their legal obligations' club. Sometimes it's the only way to persuade them not to be obstructive.

 

[Failed Unit]

Let me guess: BA didn't give you a written notice setting out your rights to compensation, re-routing and assistance either? And I hope they offered you your two free telex messages?

Screw them for every penny! If necessary, you can join me in the 'I sued BA because they ignore their legal obligations' club. Sometimes it's the only way to persuade them not to be obstructive.

Nope, already a member of that club

A few years back I had 2 cancelled flights - got as far a the small claims court. Once they got the summods they settled out of court.

At the time they were trying to claim that mechanical faults are extraordinary circumstances so I am entitled to nothing. I think they didn't want to have this tested in court. (this was about 15 years ago - I think a case did go to court after that an all airlines needed to stop that practice)

In this dispute the next stage is

CEDR - Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution International Dispute Resolution Centre

Then legal action if needed. Back on topic the united case has bought this back into the public eye. The press is full of examples. I got the impression at the airport the offloading conversations are daily occurances.

 

[tspaul26]

Nope, already a member of that club

A few years back I had 2 cancelled flights - got as far a the small claims court. Once they got the summods they settled out of court.

At the time they were trying to claim that mechanical faults are extraordinary circumstances so I am entitled to nothing. I think they didn't want to have this tested in court. (this was about 15 years ago - I think a case did go to court after that an all airlines needed to stop that practice)

Yes. Got all the way to the ECJ. Lightning strikes are the current battle.

In this dispute the next stage is

CEDR - Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution International Dispute Resolution Centre

Then legal action if needed.

Best of luck. When I'm next up in Stirling we could probably organise a whinge-a-thon!

Back on topic the united case has bought this back into the public eye. The press is full of examples. I got the impression at the airport the offloading conversations are daily occurances.

This is what was so bizarre about the United Airlines fiasco: of all the people on that plane, they chose to drag off a non-white doctor travelling back to his patients.

There is no possible way that couldn't have been a massive PR disaster for them, especially in the US! Pretty much anyone else would have been less controversial.

 

[Howardh]

When I book with a cheap cross-EU airline, such as Ryanair, Jet2 and Flybe, when I get close to departure day the pax is then expected to print their ticket, give their API and choose their seat. Often, for me, I'm not bothered about where I sit so don't pay the extra, so when I print my ticket there are just a few seats left to choose.

At some point, if the flight is "overbooked" won't that show up on the flight plan for someone trying to choose the seats when all have been chosen? Si if Ryanair sold 205 seats but only had capacity for 200, the last 5 will miss out even though they bought the flight?

Or do the budget airlines simply not overbook, so you pay peanuts but you get the seat?

And of course overbooking means passing your pax onto another flight, which may be overbooked and full, meaning pax will have to miss that flight etc etc.