Jump to content

United


rockinl

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, thc6795 said:

My point is officers put a man in a choke hold for resisting arrest. The man died. The officer were found not guilty. These officers were doing their jobs, he the good DR resisited he is at fault. They the cops committed no crime. Done with this one.

why was there no conviction is what you need to understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 wrongs here. The Dr was wrong  for not complying. Period. Whether they had a legal right to remove him, is another argument. You should always comply in the moment.  

The airport police were wrong for the ridiculous amount of force used. It definitely did not meet the force continuum. Broken teeth and a concussion for not complying? Ridiculous. He should have been subdued and cuffed on the spot. End of story. If they can't  do that without broken teeth and a concussion, they need to turn in their badges. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rockinl said:

2 wrongs here. The Dr was wrong  for not complying. Period. Whether they had a legal right to remove him, is another argument. You should always comply in the moment.  

The airport police were wrong for the ridiculous amount of force used. It definitely did not meet the force continuum. Broken teeth and a concussion for not complying? Ridiculous. He should have been subdued and cuffed on the spot. End of story. If they can't  do that without broken teeth and a concussion, they need to turn in their badges. 

fyi

 

they were not police

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rockinl said:

I only saw the original story and bit of others. Who were they? Security? 

yes

the one guy who was wearing the police jacket was told to lose it months ago

 

----------------------------------------

Seems to me, if you are not a cop but you insist on wearing a cop jacket you may not be the kind of person who should be working security... that's just my opinion. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, noonereal said:

yes

the one guy who was wearing the police jacket was told to lose it months ago

 

----------------------------------------

Seems to me, if you are not a cop but you insist on wearing a cop jacket you may not be the kind of person who should be working security... that's just my opinion. 

Agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/14/2017 at 7:48 AM, thc6795 said:

My point is officers put a man in a choke hold for resisting arrest. The man died. The officer were found not guilty. These officers were doing their jobs, he the good DR resisited he is at fault. They the cops committed no crime. Done with this one.

They killed a man for selling cigarettes and they did nothing wrong?  Who deserves to die for selling cigarettes?  Now multiply that by a very large number and you get "black lives matter". 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Drummer61 said:

Not quite true..    If your talking about that morbidly obese man from Staten Island,you should know that he was in bad condition,had heart problems and was a diabetic..  He was. An accident waiting to happen was on welfare or getting Govt assistance......He had been told by store owner  and police on several occasions to stop but DID NOT comply..  Usually,when you don't comply,you can die... Know all facts before you blame police or anybody else..

Good reasons to kill him? 

That is what you appear to be saying.

It was a tragedy.  Saying it was not is not acceptable. 

Even in the army, not complying to such activates is not a death penalty. 

You know why he was selling cigarettes illegally? 

He did not have the resources to sell them legally. He was being a capitalist within his skill set. Think about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Drummer61 said:

How much do you think he will get??? United may not want this to go to trial..

7 figure payouts by United, airport security and city of CHI town 

cumulative will be $25 million +

There will be a class action lawsuit since the dousbag CEO already admitted wrongful action by the events much to the dismay of some.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, World Citizen said:

They killed a man for selling cigarettes and they did nothing wrong?  Who deserves to die for selling cigarettes?  Now multiply that by a very large number and you get "black lives matter". 

World my point was if they can kill a man for cigarettes they ain't doing shit to these two officers for forcibly removing a guy breaking the law. I in no way condone what those police did

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, hardhit1 said:

7 figure payouts by United, airport security and city of CHI town 

cumulative will be $25 million +

There will be a class action lawsuit since the dousbag CEO already admitted wrongful action by the events much to the dismay of some.

 

 

 

How much would you like to bet on this?

if united contests this, the guy gets nada, because united is completely in the right.  One could argue that the officers used to much force (I disagree, but it's a debatable point), but all united did was call security when a passenger refused to disembark per protocol for the industry (not just united)

What would the basis be for a class action suit?  I'm not trying to be a smart ass but not sure you know what that means/ implies.  The ONLY basis for a civil suit is this guy has the PR high side -- he's wrong on every legal point (and, his personal life that is being suppressed by the mainstream media is fair game in trial)

im not sure why you are so down on united's ceo -- want to compare his background, accomplishments, and documented behavioral issues to Dr Strangelove?  I thought he went a bit far in apology, but am also sure he went exactly as far as he wanted and planned to go.  This event basically cost them 2 weeks of stock appreciation -- I doubt, and clearly so do their investors, that sales will be much or long term impacted 

this is already yesterday's news 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pops said:

How much would you like to bet on this?

if united contests this, the guy gets nada, because united is completely in the right.  One could argue that the officers used to much force (I disagree, but it's a debatable point), but all united did was call security when a passenger refused to disembark per protocol for the industry (not just united)

What would the basis be for a class action suit?  I'm not trying to be a smart ass but not sure you know what that means/ implies.  The ONLY basis for a civil suit is this guy has the PR high side -- he's wrong on every legal point (and, his personal life that is being suppressed by the mainstream media is fair game in trial)

im not sure why you are so down on united's ceo -- want to compare his background, accomplishments, and documented behavioral issues to Dr Strangelove?  I thought he went a bit far in apology, but am also sure he went exactly as far as he wanted and planned to go.  This event basically cost them 2 weeks of stock appreciation -- I doubt, and clearly so do their investors, that sales will be much or long term impacted 

this is already yesterday's news 

Dude you are one delusional fella out of touch with the mainstay 

just wait and see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, hardhit1 said:

Dude you are one delusional fella out of touch with the mainstay 

just wait and see

Being right and being in touch with the mainstay are 2 different things

im good with just being right and have never been motivated to follow the herd

here's an article detailing the history of wrongful death settlements in the aviation industry -- I picked out a section that the average compensation for 2,100+ claimants was $363k -- if you think this guy is going to get 75x the average wrongful death settlement for refusing to leave his seat, Id like you to send me whatever it is that you smoke 

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2007/R3421.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Pops said:

Being right and being in touch with the mainstay are 2 different things

im good with just being right and have never been motivated to follow the herd

here's an article detailing the history of wrongful death settlements in the aviation industry -- I picked out a section that the average compensation for 2,100+ claimants was $363k -- if you think this guy is going to get 75x the average wrongful death settlement for refusing to leave his seat, Id like you to send me whatever it is that you smoke 

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2007/R3421.pdf

First of all I don't smoke 

united just made a policy where all employees must report to the gate at least 60 minutes before departure and any passenger in their seat can not be removed from the flight

is that an admission of guilt  or are they doing WTF they should have been doing

and new in Delta employees will now offer up to $10,000 per ticket for an overbooked flight

see where this is going?

smoke another one and make believe 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pops said:

Being right and being in touch with the mainstay are 2 different things

im good with just being right and have never been motivated to follow the herd

here's an article detailing the history of wrongful death settlements in the aviation industry -- I picked out a section that the average compensation for 2,100+ claimants was $363k -- if you think this guy is going to get 75x the average wrongful death settlement for refusing to leave his seat, Id like you to send me whatever it is that you smoke 

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2007/R3421.pdf

He will get what a jury awards him, and a settlement will be colored by whatever United thinks a jury will give.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hardhit1 said:

First of all I don't smoke 

united just made a policy where all employees must report to the gate at least 60 minutes before departure and any passenger in their seat can not be removed from the flight

is that an admission of guilt  or are they doing WTF they should have been doing

and new in Delta employees will now offer up to $10,000 per ticket for an overbooked flight

see where this is going?

smoke another one and make believe 

That is not an admission of guilt

Committing to a change in law/ policy is not the same as violating one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Bormio said:

He will get what a jury awards him, and a settlement will be colored by whatever United thinks a jury will give.

Agreed mostly

United will pay a premium for this to go away quickly and quietly

Think it's an offer that should be accepted because Dr Strangelove will look less sympathetic in a courtroom than a newsroom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad that Dr. Dao didn't comply or else we wouldn't even be having this discussion and this crew and airline would be emboldened to break their contractual agreements with passengers without retribution. I hope that Dr. Dao actually takes this thing all the way to court so we can finally find out what the definition of boarded is. That seems to be the real question in this case. If he settles, there is usually wording that keeps him from releasing the terms and amounts in the settlement and we will never know what the definition of boarded was before this date. I think we can assume there will be some changes to the contract of carriage to cover these bases in the future.  

As I have read it, the contract of carriage of United lays out pretty specific reasons why a passenger can be denied boarding, either voluntarily or involuntarily, and for one, they every one include the wording "over-sold flight". So if the flight is over-sold, then they can deny boarding, but not until they have looked for volunteers. If there have been no volunteers, then they pick passengers to deny boarding to, but they have to comp them for it. 

Dr. Dao's flight was not over-sold. Being that every reason to deny boarding to a legitimate ticket holder/passenger included the wording "on over-sold flights", it would seem that the contractual obligation by United was to allow Dr. Dao to board, which they did.  Or did they? 

Can we get a definition of boarding? Is it once the ticket has been scanned at the gate and the passenger is allowed onto the plane? Is it once the passenger is in the seat? Is it after the door to the plane is closed? Is it after the wheels are up? The contract never gives a definition for boarding, although it seems like once the passenger is aboard the plane, they have boarded. Aboard, board, aBOARD, BOARD? 

Anyway, I guess, if United clears the threshold, that crew needing transport but not holding tickets equates to "over-sold flight", then the primary argument becomes the definition of boarding. Actually that entire section of the contract is called: Denied Boarding Compensation.

Once a passenger has boarded, then there is no wording in the contract allowing them to bump the passenger. They then have to "refuse to transport" which has an entirely different set of rules that are outlined in the contract of carriage. 

 

Obviously, once United attempted to breach it's own contract with Dr. Dao, to which he refused to allow, the airline's legal/contractual avenues of removing him were nil, They basically attacked him thereby causing him to become belligerent and defensive, which finally gave them cause to actually remove him per the "refuse to transport" section of their own contract.

The entire premise of this case ultimately comes down to whether the flight actually was "over-sold", and if it passes that threshold, what the actual definition of "boarded" is. 

 

The definition of over-sold as defined in United's own contract of carriage: Oversold Flight means a flight where there are more Passengers holding valid confirmed Tickets that check-in for the flight within the prescribed check-in time than there are available seats

 

The definition of passenger from the same document: Passenger means any person, except members of the crew, carried or holding a confirmed reservation to be carried in an aircraft with the consent of the carrier.

To that end, the employees aren't passengers, and the flight wasn't over-sold which effectively ends the argument anyway.

 

https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec21

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2017 at 4:15 AM, noonereal said:

I strongly disagree.

This leads to systemic abuse. 

Isn't the alternative anarchy?

i understand your Uber-liberal 60s right to protest, but that doesn't mean that defying civil authorities whenever you disagree ought to be sanctioned

btw, UAL market cap up a half billion today

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Pops said:

Isn't the alternative anarchy?

i understand your Uber-liberal 60s right to protest, but that doesn't mean that defying civil authorities whenever you disagree ought to be sanctioned

btw, UAL market cap up a half billion today

We have rules in place for civil disobedience. Even the Chinesse tanks stopped in the face of protest. A democracy has higher expectations for handling a peaceful protest.  

Off topic, if Trump stops alternative news, he is doing great. And I do not agree with his agenda. I however will give credit when it's due. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, noonereal said:

We have rules in place for civil disobedience. Even the Chinesse tanks stopped in the face of protest. A democracy has higher expectations for handling a peaceful protest.  

Off topic, if Trump stops alternative news, he is doing great. And I do not agree with his agenda. I however will give credit when it's due. 

Am not sure the tank is a great analogy -- no one even knows the identity of that guy who was never seen again and is feared to have been executed

united and the cops were just trying to enforce our infinitely more humane rules to deal with civil disobedience

fwiw, had dinner last night with one of United's most senior pilots and one rumor she shared that I haven't read anywhere is that Dr Strangelove's protests were because he was a wanted felon and he assumed that his name was being called in that regard so freaked out 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Pops said:

Am not sure the tank is a great analogy -- no one even knows the identity of that guy who was never seen again and is feared to have been executed

united and the cops were just trying to enforce our infinitely more humane rules to deal with civil disobedience

fwiw, had dinner last night with one of United's most senior pilots and one rumor she shared that I haven't read anywhere is that Dr Strangelove's protests were because he was a wanted felon and he assumed that his name was being called in that regard so freaked out 

 

there is always more to every story

I am not in love with this DR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...