If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec
Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." United Airlines, Inc. Mr Oscar Munoz CEO Telephone +1 847 700 4000 Website http://www.united.com Social Media T Postal Address 233 South Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL, 60606M CIK 0000319687 United Airlines, Inc. (Customer Service and Complaints) Telephone (800) 864-8331 Website http://www.united.com Social Media T Postal Address 233 South Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL, 60606M CIK 0000319687 Oscar Munoz's Email Chief Executive Officer @ United Airlines Location Chicago Work Board Member @ United Airlines President and Chief Operating Officer @ CSX Chief Operating Officer @ CSX Education Bachelor's Degree in Finance & Strategy @ University of Southern California - Marshall School of Business Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.) @ Pepperdine University, The George L. Graziadio School of Business and Management * |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:51:45 +0200 (CEST), "Air Gestapo"
wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." United Airlines, Inc. All four evictees were Asian and AFTER they were allowed to board then seated? "Our" media are not reporting this, the Japanese media are -- Petzl Arguing with a woman is like reading the Software License Agreement. In the end, you ignore everthing and click "I agree" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. Sylvia. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On 12/04/2017 11:43 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. There is absolutely no excuse for overbooking flights and bouncing booked passengers with valid tickets. In this case they bounced him down the aisle |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:43:04 +1000, Sylvia Else
wrote: On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. Sylvia. As queried in another thread, are the airlines' budgets so tight that they are so desperate as to overbook flights just to insure that not a single seat is empty? What kind of **** poor business model are they using? It hasn't been very many years back that I flew on flights that were barely half capacity and the airlines still made their profit. If one or two empty seats on a flight is going to put them in the red then they need to seriously rethink how they are running their business. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On 4/11/2017 6:43 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. Sylvia. But United ****ed up the deal from the gitgo. The overbooking problem should have been solved before boarding. If $800 won't get 4 passengers to volunteer, then try $1000, etc. United should never have told boarded passenger that four had to leave to make room for employees. And then United just said to hell with it, let the cops throw the guy off. The cops are only interested in submission and compliance totally by the book. He's lucky LAPD wasn't involved or he would have been shot. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On 4/11/2017 7:08 PM, First-Post wrote:
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:43:04 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote: On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. Sylvia. As queried in another thread, are the airlines' budgets so tight that they are so desperate as to overbook flights just to insure that not a single seat is empty? What kind of **** poor business model are they using? It hasn't been very many years back that I flew on flights that were barely half capacity and the airlines still made their profit. If one or two empty seats on a flight is going to put them in the red then they need to seriously rethink how they are running their business. Agreed. When is the last time you took a flight that had even one empty seat. United wouldn't have had to kick the guy off if they didn't overbook to start with. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On 12/04/2017 12:06 PM, de chucka wrote:
On 12/04/2017 11:43 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. There is absolutely no excuse for overbooking flights and bouncing booked passengers with valid tickets. In this case they bounced him down the aisle If they didn't overbook, then there'd be many more flights with empty seats when people didn't show up. If you were an airline exec wouldn't you been looking at those seats, and wishing you could earn some money from them. The problem is not the overbooking, but how it's handled when, as occasionally happens, too many people actually turn up. Sylvia. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On 11 Apr 2017, First-Post
posted some : On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:43:04 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote: On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. Sylvia. As queried in another thread, are the airlines' budgets so tight that they are so desperate as to overbook flights just to insure that not a single seat is empty? What kind of **** poor business model are they using? https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/security-fees It hasn't been very many years back that I flew on flights that were barely half capacity and the airlines still made their profit. If one or two empty seats on a flight is going to put them in the red then they need to seriously rethink how they are running their business. I'm sure opportunism has nothing to do with it. http://quotes.wsj.com/UAL/company-people United Continental Holdings Inc UAL 2015 Executive Compensation Compensation $39,668,505 http://insiders.morningstar.com/trad...ion.action?t=U AL United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz returns to work on Monday only two months after a heart transplant. Was the airline exec’s speedy recovery spurred by a desire to get back to business, or did Munoz return earlier than planned because it was the only way to earn his full bonus? United announced last week that Munoz would return to the helm on Monday, weeks before his previously anticipated return date of the end of the first quarter. Los Angeles Times columnist David Lazarus uncovered a regulatory filing from the airline, made just a day after Munoz’s January heart transplant, that details an extensive list of what the airline head could get if he returned to work sooner rather than later. Spoiler alert: it’s a lot of money. According to the filing [PDF], the employment agreement between United and Munoz was signed on Dec. 31, just a week before his heart transplant, but two months after he suffered a major heart attack that took him away from his corporate duties. Under the agreement, Munoz would received a bonus of $10.5 million if he put in six straight months of work. If he works for a full year, he’ll receive a base salary of $1.25 million and a signing bonus of $5.2 million. He would also become eligible for an annual performance bonus of at least $3.75 million. All of these incentives and salary marks began with the start of the 2016 calendar year. And with three months already passed, that gives Munoz just nine months to meet the stringent requirements. For example, the $10.5 million six-month employment bonus stipulates that Munoz is not eligible for the bonus until “such date as he has been in continuous active service as President and Chief Executive Officer for a period of six months.” .... Munoz, who quickly began trying to repair United’s relationship with employees and passengers after taking over when former CEO Jeff Smisek abruptly stepped down, has a lot on his plate when he heads back to the office. The New York Times reported last week rumblings began to surface that some United shareholders were ready to shake the board up, tasking former Continental CEO Gordon Bethune as chairman to oversee Munoz’s performance. https://consumerist.com/2016/03/11/u...-millions-by-r eturning-early-from-heart-transplant/ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
United Airlines, We put the "Hospital" in "Hospitality"!
On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 04:09:54 -0000 (UTC), "P. Coonan"
wrote: On 11 Apr 2017, First-Post posted some : On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 11:43:04 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote: On 12/04/2017 7:51 AM, Air Gestapo wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STJQnu72Nec Find us on http://www.facebook.com/flightorg. On the 9th April, 2017, a man was forcibly removed from United Airlines Flight 3411 in Chicago, set for Louisville. While we'd normally say that until we have all the information, we have no information at all, the United response tends to confirm the incident as described by passengers. United Airlines said that ... "Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation." It's a difficult situation. If a person refusing to leave were allowed to stay, then passengers would never comply. If force has to be used to remove a non-compliant passenger, then that's what has to be done. Bumping passengers in favour of its own staff looks strange, but it may be that if those staff weren't carried, it would have knock on effects for other flights. To my mind, the proper solution to the overbooking problem is either to ban it outright (given that it's deliberate, not just a mistake), or to require that the airline just keep offering more and more money until they do get the needed volunteers. If that means they have to offer tens of thousands of dollars, then so be it - that's the price of overbooking. Sylvia. As queried in another thread, are the airlines' budgets so tight that they are so desperate as to overbook flights just to insure that not a single seat is empty? What kind of **** poor business model are they using? https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/security-fees It hasn't been very many years back that I flew on flights that were barely half capacity and the airlines still made their profit. If one or two empty seats on a flight is going to put them in the red then they need to seriously rethink how they are running their business. I'm sure opportunism has nothing to do with it. http://quotes.wsj.com/UAL/company-people United Continental Holdings Inc UAL 2015 Executive Compensation Compensation $39,668,505 http://insiders.morningstar.com/trad...ion.action?t=U AL United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz returns to work on Monday only two months after a heart transplant. Was the airline exec’s speedy recovery spurred by a desire to get back to business, or did Munoz return earlier than planned because it was the only way to earn his full bonus? United announced last week that Munoz would return to the helm on Monday, weeks before his previously anticipated return date of the end of the first quarter. Los Angeles Times columnist David Lazarus uncovered a regulatory filing from the airline, made just a day after Munoz’s January heart transplant, that details an extensive list of what the airline head could get if he returned to work sooner rather than later. Spoiler alert: it’s a lot of money. According to the filing [PDF], the employment agreement between United and Munoz was signed on Dec. 31, just a week before his heart transplant, but two months after he suffered a major heart attack that took him away from his corporate duties. Under the agreement, Munoz would received a bonus of $10.5 million if he put in six straight months of work. If he works for a full year, he’ll receive a base salary of $1.25 million and a signing bonus of $5.2 million. He would also become eligible for an annual performance bonus of at least $3.75 million. All of these incentives and salary marks began with the start of the 2016 calendar year. And with three months already passed, that gives Munoz just nine months to meet the stringent requirements. For example, the $10.5 million six-month employment bonus stipulates that Munoz is not eligible for the bonus until “such date as he has been in continuous active service as President and Chief Executive Officer for a period of six months.” ... Munoz, who quickly began trying to repair United’s relationship with employees and passengers after taking over when former CEO Jeff Smisek abruptly stepped down, has a lot on his plate when he heads back to the office. The New York Times reported last week rumblings began to surface that some United shareholders were ready to shake the board up, tasking former Continental CEO Gordon Bethune as chairman to oversee Munoz’s performance. https://consumerist.com/2016/03/11/u...-millions-by-r eturning-early-from-heart-transplant/ Very informative. Thanks. From the looks of their stock, that bonus may be the last one he sees for quite a while if they don't boot him. I haven't done the math myself but I've read articles that say so far United has lost around $700 million thanks to this fiasco that was effectively caused by their desire to make every single seat on every flight profitable. Their stock has fallen like a rock. The market can penalize screw ups worse than any court. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
aircraft - "National Museum of the United States Air Force.jpg" (1/2) 637.5 KBytes 204 KB | D. St-Sanvain | Aviation Photos | 0 | December 2nd 10 08:41 PM |
"Pop" Hotchkis bellys in a Bowen Airlines Lockheed Orion, 1920s. | Don Pyeatt | Aviation Photos | 1 | February 20th 09 10:51 PM |
"Chinese Land Attack Cruise Missile Developments and theirImplications for the United States" | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 8 | December 24th 08 01:32 AM |
Who remembers "Universal Airlines" my first flight many, many years ago | Observer | Aviation Photos | 1 | January 19th 08 04:21 PM |