https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

So United had even less right than we thought to bump that passenger

Apparently — and despite United's initial statements (which were picked up by the media), the flight in question was not overbooked (which in theory would allow United to trigger its carriage clauses around picking who to leave behind[1]). It was fully booked. The number of passengers booked matched the number of seats.

United simply decided it needed four seats freed up to transfer some personnel — flight crew — to the destination. And that isn't something covered by all the United fine print on the ticket as a reason to kick you off.

——

[1] Though that, in turn, has been questioned if the passengers have already boarded: http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/united-cites-wrong-rule-for-illegally-de-boarding-passenger/




United Airlines Did Not Have the Legal Right to Refuse Service to the Doctor Dragged Off Its Plane
A passenger was violently dragged off a flight, but it’s even worse than you thought.

View on Google+

65 view(s)  

13 thoughts on “So United had even less right than we thought to bump that passenger”

  1. +Ron Wrecker Four people were selected, ostensibly at random (United has an algorithm process for kicking people off for overbooking, that factors in ticket price and frequent flier status, etc., but it's not clear it was used here).

    The first three acquiesced unhappily (presumably, since they did not volunteer earlier). The fourth, Dr Dao, declined (and, it appears, not "belligerently" as United claimed early on).
    http://www.teenvogue.com/story/a-new-video-disputes-uniteds-claim-that-passenger-david-dao-was-acting-belligerent

  2. So:
    1) They cited rules about denying boarding, despite the customer already having boarded.
    2) They cited overbooking, despite their just wanting to save some money for transferring their own personnel.
    … what's next?

  3. Well, they can but only in specific circumstances. This wasn't one of them, and even if it had been, the physical abuse of Dr. Dao would have rendered that irrelevant.

    They don't have carte blanche and after this episode I suspect there will be further restrictions. At least one lawmaker will be submitting a bill that would prevent overbooking (although that wasn't​ actually the issue here.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *