You obviously can though, like this guy did and (apparently) was allowed back on it when they reboarded that plane. You know what definitely doesn't get you what you want? Being a massive pushover.
Yeah, the reddit comments sections is just competing stories of much United sucks.
That's no reason to obey any demand they give.
If you refuse to leave a flight upon being told to then you obviously run the risk of being forcibly removed. If you want to run that risk (and deal with the consequences) then fine. Most normal people would probably prefer not to be dragged off a plane though.
Say that bit out loud, sully, so you realize how ridiculous that sounds. Fat lot of good lodging a complaint will do when you're missing your flight because US Marshalls are dragging you from the plane when you've done nothing worthy of that. feck off. You actually do. People choose to make bad decisions that get them kicked off flights. I'm struggling to see what this guy did, other than stand up for his rights as a paid fare.But then most people are massive pushovers. It's people like the gentleman who go roughed up here who ultimately get their way.
Alright, sully. I'm an Admin. Leave redcafe now, just log out and don't come back. You've done nothing wrong, we just have too many members. If you don't comply in the next two minutes, I'm going to permanently ban you.
I'll leave redcafe if you give me $50
No, Ebs. It wouldn't be the same without you.
Well I certainly hope he does.
It defies belief that people are willing to stand up for their rights and what they paid for? Yeah, you know what's likely coming your way but that doesn't make it right.
Ah well I didn't say it was fair on the guy, the overbooking policy is crap. Refusing to leave was always likely to make things worse though. You can be arrested unfairly too but that doesn't mean resisting arrest will end well for you.
OK, good stuff. I feel like you're coming around. I totally agree that in certain situations (rowdily drunk, groping a flight attendant, shouting Allah Akbar, etc) one US likely to be removed from a flight and should comply with the Marshall's Service but those situations all have some form of probable cause. This situation doesn't and to end up losing a random lottery and being removed from a flight you've paid for and when you have good reason to need to return home on time requires more tact than United Airlines has shown here. This is why they're catching it from observers.
For the rarest of the rare incident where there aren't enough no-shows as opposed to losing money by flying empty seats the whole time? Makes no sense.
Or any other airline. Find me one that doesn't overbook every flight by double digits. It's the norm in the industry, and well justified.
You obviously have not seen too many videos of what American cops do when you don't obey their orders.
Again, you don't disobey an American cop's order. You fecking fight for your rights in court. If you disobey their order, you might not live long enough to "fight for your rights" as you stated.
But if you're a massive pussy when demanding your rights you'll be laughed out of the room.
Nobody is really arguing that the airline behaved well though, just that refusing to leave the plane was in and of itself a stupid thing to do, which is why people are generally advised not to do it.
Haven't the no-shows already paid for the seat, doubt they will get a refund.
Of course, but like I said, if a passenger is struggling to understand why and the airline can only say "uh, we overbooked and nobody else wants to get off the flight and we picked you at random". I'd hope that more people would tell them exactly where to go.
Why would they get a refund for not showing up?
The US Marshalls are a lot less trigger happy than your average US law enforcement officer.
The empty paid for seats can be booked again for someone else and they can still earn and fly a full plane, which they do.
Because they earn double for the seats that had been booked twice and one of the passengers didn't turn up.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What are you on about? You are clueless on how every single airline operates. Not getting the extra revenue they can generate is considered a LOSS. You do know that the overbooking is usually done at -5 at the expected showing, right? And most of the flights fly with empty seats after overbooking. This was a standard off-loading which was overblown due to the passenger's lack of co-operation. It wasn't the first one and it won't be the last, except the percentage of this happening is far below what would alarm any change in this reservation policy, obviously. You clearly seem to have come across the concept of overbooking for the first time going by your posts but any airline or a service industry professional will tell you that it's as standard a procedure as it can be, and one of them is doing that right now.
Everyone does it so it's fine, it only happens now and again so we don't need to look at the system.
What happens now and again? And how often?
The system looks very clear to me , over book the seats , make more money, feck the people and any plans they have. That's about right isn't it
Except that the ratio of people getting fecked to those flying normally everyday is below negligible. No one is going to let go of a huge amount of revenue because one guy in a rare incident was asked to travel the next flight, sorry to disappoint you. Common sense should dictate that.
Bit of a difference between being asked and being told. United fecked up, favoured their own non-revenue generating passengers over paying customers and are deservedly getting a good deal of flack over it.
In an off-loading you aren't given a choice. Different airlines have different off-loading policies and that obviously is something that can they can look at. But once you are listed for off-loading you need to get off, period.
Fine probably would not hold up in court since they are legally allowed to overbook and to remove passengers on the plane or have them removed by law enforcement.
