United passenger forcibly removed from flight after refusing to give up seat

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, Dakine10 said:

  Supposedly pilots are supposed to refuse to fly if something prevents them from getting rest, but it may not actually work that way.

 

http://nypost.com/2014/09/29/your-pilot-is-asleep-and-3-other-things-you-dont-want-to-know-about-flying/

 

    Pilots are stuck with the new rules, and no matter how fatigued a pilot may be, refusing to fly means big trouble. As a pilot, you don’t fly fatigued, you can’t keep your job. Don¹t expect things to get better. So, if you want a pilot who is fully awake after a full night’s sleep, don’t fly earlier than 10 a.m.. If you want to be sure your pilot’s performance is better than a drunk driver, steer clear of short flights after 7 p.m. Longer domestic flights and international flights that depart after 7 p.m. are not a problem in this regard because on such flights pilots are usually beginning their work day.

Exact same thing with doctors to be honest.

 

I have never encountered a hospital or department that had a safe, non-judgmental way for a doctor to say "Hey I am not well rested and don't feel comfortable working". Of course on paper they may say they always want doctors to report fatigue, but the culture and resources are set up in a way that you can't say anything. Especially in training. Residents/Fellows will work q3 24 hour calls (sometimes q2 in certain specialties) and if there is no support if they are too fatigued to work.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

This does not excuse anything but interesting:

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/doc-pulled-united-flight-previously-convicted-drug-crimes-article-1.3043210

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Last month, United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz was named U.S. Communicator of the Year by the magazine PRWeek.

Now he's being raked over the coals for his response to a violent passenger incident on a United Airlines flight.

 

Public relations experts say the CEO should have quickly offered an unreserved apology after a customer was filmed on Sunday being forcibly removed from his seat and dragged down an overbooked aircraft's aisle.

Instead, Munoz apologized only for "having to re-accommodate ... customers."

Many customers found the response to be overly callous -- and said so on social media, where video of the incident had gone viral.

But Munoz doubled down in a letter sent to United employees on Monday afternoon, describing the passenger as "disruptive and belligerent." He also said that "employees followed established procedures for dealing with situations like this."

View image on Twitter

 

 Follow

United 

 

✔@united

United CEO response to United Express Flight 3411.

9:27 AM - 10 Apr 2017 · Houston, TX

•  

 

 

 

Rupert Younger, a PR expert and director of the Oxford University Centre for Corporate Reputation, said that Munoz's response was a major disappointment, and that United should have moved much more quickly to limit damage from the video.

"The apology by the CEO was, at best, lukewarm or, at worst, trying to dismiss the incident," said Younger. "The CEO should make a better, more heartfelt, more meaningful and more personal apology."

Younger said that United should also address public concerns over industry policies related to bumping passengers from their flights.

The United response "looks uncaring and it looks like it's effectively trying to apologize for the incident without really addressing the core issue of how they deal with customers," said Younger, co-founder of the PR firm Finsbury.

 

United Airlines shows how to make a PR crisis a total disaster

 

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

being named us communicator of the year by prweek, is that like being named who's who in us business*

 

 

 

 

 

*subject to $1,000 entry fee

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1. Yes it does.  Duty time and flight time are two different metrics.  Duty time starts the minute you arrive at the airport, and ends 15 minutes after the passenger door is opened on the last flight of the day.

 

2. Yep. The crew will get deadhead pay for driving.  They won't actually be doing the driving, it will be a service that takes them.  But they will still be considered on duty.

 

3. Incorrect.  Airlines pay varying amounts for DH pay, ranging from 25-100% of regular pay.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Transborderwife said:

1. No it doesn't.  Even for those working the flight, flight time only counts the minute you pull away from the gate to the minute you pull into the next one.  Lay overs, delays etc do not count.

 

2. Nope

 

3. They don't get paid for deadheading

 

[Transborderwife 4,666]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

1. Yes it does.  Duty time and flight time are two different metrics.  Duty time starts the minute you arrive at the airport, and ends 15 minutes after the passenger door is opened on the last flight of the day.

 

2. Yep. The crew will get deadhead pay for driving.  They won't actually be doing the driving, it will be a service that takes them.  But they will still be considered on duty.

 

3. Incorrect.  Airlines pay varying amounts for DH pay, ranging from 25-100% of regular pay.

 

 

 

 

1.  Not for the airline I worked for but perhaps things have changed.

 

2. I remember expenses were included but that was it

 

3. Again, not for the airline I worked for

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 hour ago, Transborderwife said:

This does not excuse anything but interesting:

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/doc-pulled-united-flight-previously-convicted-drug-crimes-article-1.3043210

sort of says a lot about the state of justice in this country, now that this is out - he'll probably loose business. even though he's done nothing wrong except get caught up in a 'viral video'

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Which airline, and now long ago?

 

1 minute ago, Transborderwife said:

1.  Not for the airline I worked for but perhaps things have changed.

 

2. I remember expenses were included but that was it

 

3. Again, not for the airline I worked for

 

 

 

 

[bcking 3,157]

24 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

sort of says a lot about the state of justice in this country, now that this is out - he'll probably loose business. even though he's done nothing wrong except get caught up in a 'viral video'

I had an ugly suspicion that something negative was going to be discovered about the "victim". I actually wasn't going to be surprised to find out that he wasn't a doctor and he was just lying about it to make his case seem stronger.

 

I don't have any experience with how medical boards reprimand people (since I have done nothing wrong ;)), but just reading that article makes me very surprised he was able to get his license back at all. Trading prescription drugs for sex seems like something that should get your license revoked permanently. Maybe that's just me.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, bcking said:

I had an ugly suspicion that something negative was going to be discovered about the "victim". I actually wasn't going to be surprised to find out that he wasn't a doctor and he was just lying about it to make his case seem stronger.

 

I don't have any experience with how medical boards reprimand people (since I have done nothing wrong ;)), but just reading that article makes me very surprised he was able to get his license back at all. Trading prescription drugs for sex seems like something that should get your license revoked permanently. Maybe that's just me.

i mean yeah, that's crazy and gross, but this wouldn't be national news if only he'd done as told..

comply or pay the price. that's the lesson to be learned. police never do anything that's not in your best interest. do not question. obey.

 

[Teddy B 17,252]

The story below says that Dao had run back onto the aircraft at one point. So I'm guessing he was peacefully removed from the plane before this event took place? If that's true, I put most of the blame on the passenger for escalating the incident.

 

Quote

“This situation was unfortunately compounded when one of the passengers we politely asked to deplane refused and it became necessary to contact Chicago Aviation Security Officers to help,” CEO Oscar Munoz said in email to employees, reported by CNBC. “Our employees followed established procedures for dealing with situations like this. While I deeply regret this situation arose, I also emphatically stand behind all of you.”

In recounting the sequence of events, Munoz told employees that the passenger “refused” to deplane and “became more and more disruptive and belligerent” and faulted him for “running back onto the aircraft in defiance of both our crew and security officials.”

http://people.com/human-interest/david-dao-united-airlines-flight/?xid=socialflow_facebook_peoplemag

 

 

[bcking 3,157]

10 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

The story below says that Dao had run back onto the aircraft at one point. So I'm guessing he was peacefully removed from the plane before this event took place? If that's true, I put most of the blame on the passenger for escalating the incident.

 

 

Ya it seems the story is changing.

 

The whole "twitter/facebook news reporter" phenomena where everyone with a cellphone can be a reporter is something that can have huge benefits, but also huge repurcusions. Of course the videos of the guy getting dragging away were uploaded, but we haven't yet seen a video of him "running back onto the plane in defiance". 

 

This is the kind of news where knowing about it the minute after it happens is completely unnecessary. No one needed "up to the minute" updates on the story. It would have been far better if an old fashioned reporter investigated, obtained all the information, and then it was presented in one clean format.

[bcking 3,157]

18 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

The story below says that Dao had run back onto the aircraft at one point. So I'm guessing he was peacefully removed from the plane before this event took place? If that's true, I put most of the blame on the passenger for escalating the incident.

 

 

It seems like the "running back on the plane" happened AFTER he was pulled out. Or at least there is conflicting information. This article reads:

 

"He continued to resist after he was removed and ran back onto the airplane, face bloodied from the encounter." - The bloody face would suggest it happened after.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/investing/united-airlines-stock-passenger-flight-video/index.html

Edited April 11, 2017 by bcking

[Teddy B 17,252]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

It seems like the "running back on the plane" happened AFTER he was pulled out. Or at least there is conflicting information. This article reads:

 

"He continued to resist after he was removed and ran back onto the airplane, face bloodied from the encounter." - The bloody face would suggest it happened after.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/investing/united-airlines-stock-passenger-flight-video/index.html

Okay, thanks. This is the problem with scrambling to get the story out first, nobody cares if the story is factually correct, just that they got it out first.

 

The headline of your linked story is an eyeopener though.

 

Quote

United loses $1 billion in market value after man dragged off flight

That's a lot of dough.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

1 hour ago, IDWAF said:

Which airline, and now long ago?

 

 

 

 

 

Canjet about 6-7 years ago