No United airlines thread ? VOL....Delta won

They bankin on ppl never using those vouchers

True. Once you have such a frustrating experience with them, do you REALLY want to go on another flight with them anytime soon? The vouchers expire within a year anyway, which makes it harder to use for international travel if you're busy during that time period.
 
Last edited:
Pretty much every major Asian/Middle Eastern airline treats customers like royalty, even those in economy class (I would say most European ones a decade ago, but their standards have been falling a lot in recent years as well). It's only these trash US based ones that put grumpy cabin crews that come by with one cup of water and offer one bag of peanuts on 6 hour+ flights (shout out to Delta
indifferent.gif
).
SFC, is that for Sergeant First Class?
 
So officials and executives unanimously agreed it was handled poorly across the board but the pleb will still fight and justify for the consumer to be mistreated. This is why Trump won.
:lol: I guess you're referring to me, I never said he deserved to be mistreated, I said the cop handled it poorly every single time but people act like a United employee walked over and knocked him out. Here we go with the Trump talk (not a Trump supporter before you even say it)
MF Gooze is wondering what new essay to write to defend United. I don't care what he says, he's definitely on United's (or at least an equally @#$@ US airline company like American, Delta, etc.) payroll
:lol: I been said I work for an airline, just saying they have the right to ask you get off a plane even if you arent a threat or security risk and you have the right to refuse and get the cops involves, those are the rights here. Officer did not have the right to bash his face in but honestly I dont give a damn one way or the other because he's getting paid but no one ever wants to hear another point of view, yall just wanna come in here and have everyone agree with you.

You come off as the airline has the rights to kick Dao off but he doesn't have the right to say no. Police should have never been involved. United could have and should have found another solution other than to calling the cops, something everybody in this thread is agreeing to while you're just saying they should have been called.
 
Can you imagine if every industry operates like United Airlines?

Best buy:
-I've come in to get my computer fixed.
-Well we're happy to help, sir. *examines computer * ok we'll fix the computer sir. It'll cost 300 dollars
*The guy pays
Ohhh! Wait. Sorry sir. Your computer has to wait. We got to fix my co-worker's computer first.
-But, I have to go!
-Please leave sir, get to the back of the line
-No, I won't leave!
-K, we callin the cops on yo ***
*cops beat up paying customer

Best Buy, getting things done the United Way :pimp:
 
You come off as the airline has the rights to kick Dao off but he doesn't have the right to say no. Police should have never been involved. United could have and should have found another solution other than to calling the cops, something everybody in this thread is agreeing to while you're just saying they should have been called.
Im not debating right vs. wrong here, but I think yall have rights and privledges confused. They have the right to get you off of THEIR plane if needed and have no "right" to refuse. You can try to negotiate with them or you can flat out refuse like this man but you're coming probably coming off that plane, again... Not debating right vs. wrong here, I agree that it should always be handled before boarding but in some cases things come up last minute and someone gets royally boned. That using other airlines for the crew is a brilliant solution but there probably a reason (stupid as it may be) that they didn't do that.
 
You seem to agree that it should be handled at the gate

You also seem to agree that the airline goofed and realized there weren't enough seats AFTER everyone was seated

Why you feel a paying customer should take the L for the service's mistake is beyond me. That's like kicking out a diner after he was served the wrong meal
 
You seem to agree that it should be handled at the gate

You also seem to agree that the airline goofed and realized there weren't enough seats AFTER everyone was seated

Why you feel a paying customer should take the L for the service's mistake is beyond me. That's like kicking out a diner after he was served the wrong meal
Of course I realize what SHOULD happen but I also know what DOES happen. Everyone thinks Im cheering for United and that dumb*** cop, I'm not. I just understand the process these things go through, mistakes are made and if you think an airline is going to take an L on a whole crew missing a flight over displacing some customers, it aint gonna happen. Although this mistake is already costing them more than a few airplanes worth of cash :lol:
 
Lol point was, no one should have had to take an L. There was certainly better ways to get someone to give up his seat.

Sorry that you thought force was the only way
 
Last edited:
"Ald. Mike Zalewski (23rd), chairman of the City Council’s Aviation Committee, said Sunday’s embarrassing incident at O’Hare Airport was so “poorly handled from A-to-Z” that the officers have lost their argument to bear arms.

Zalewski said the aviation officer who is now on a leave of absence had no business getting involved in the incident, let alone boarding the flight from Chicago to Louisville.

It should have been handled by United, O’Hare’s flagship carrier, in the boarding area, before passengers ever boarded the flight, the alderman said.The flight was overbooked. They were looking for people to give up their seats. . . . This all should have been taken care of in the holding area — not on the plane,” Zalewski said Monday. “It wasn’t a shining example for aviation security officers on how they might react to future situations, especially if they were armed. . . . If it was their judgment that this was going to help their cause, just the opposite happened"



As mentioned plenty times in this thread, United & the police should have never asked Dao to leave after he was seated.

Read this post again gooze.

So how is united going to kick off a paying passenger when he declines?? Maybe the airlines shouldn't charge people before they provide the service.
 
Last edited:
Lol point was, no one should have had to take an L. There was certainly better ways to get someone to give up his seat.
Nah, United should have taken their L since nobody accepted their offer when they tried to play Deal or No Deal.
 
Everyone has a price. Shhhhid, if you had offered me at least a 1500k check. I would've fought to get out that door.
 
Read this post again gooze.

So how are united going to kick off a paying passenger when he declines?? Maybe the airlines shouldn't charge people before they provide the service.
I read it and I agreed that it should always be handled before boarding.

So people should pay after the flight makes it to the destination?

The only way to stop overbooking is to make every seat a non-refundable purchase.
 
Last edited:
Read this post again gooze.

So how are united going to kick off a paying passenger when he declines?? Maybe the airlines shouldn't charge people before they provide the service.
I read it and I agreed that it should always be handled before boarding.

So people should pay after the flight makes it to the destination?

I'm not sure. I'm sure if that's the case, united would still try to find a way to break the laws in order to have it its way.

Its pretty simple, if the police can't enter the plane and the man declined to united, then united should have taken the L.
 
Let it be clear: United airlines was prepared to rough up paying customers, because it wasn’t willing to pay for its own mistakes.
 
I read it and I agreed that it should always be handled before boarding.

So people should pay after the flight makes it to the destination?

The only way to stop overbooking is to make every seat a non-refundable purchase.
I'd be cool with that. We pay for products we pre-order when they ship not on the day we order it so could work the same way
 
Read this post again gooze.

So how are united going to kick off a paying passenger when he declines?? Maybe the airlines shouldn't charge people before they provide the service.
I read it and I agreed that it should always be handled before boarding.

So people should pay after the flight makes it to the destination?

The only way to stop overbooking is to make every seat a non-refundable purchase.

I read that overbooking actually keeps prices down so that can stay, but auctioning off seats at the gate is a must. They got to take that cap off.

And if a flight is overbooked potentially overbooked passengers should be known about that well before the fact

Like maybe an asterisk on the ticket : 'Attention passenger, this particular flight may be overbooked'as a courtesy so at least ppl are prepared going in


And of course, never ever remove passengers that are already seated. Buy your employees tickets if you have to :lol:
 
Last edited:
Let it be clear: United airlines was prepared to rough up paying customers, because it wasn’t willing to pay for its own mistakes.
this..... You just can't go around beating people up, whether as a person or as a Corp. And having someone else do the beating does not absolve you of the responsibility.
 
Last edited:
Gooze, it not as complicated as you make it out to be. There are several suggestions provided that are better than "re-accommodating" a seated customer. It's simple, if a company messes up, don't expect to make the customer pay for it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom