[SamuelBRoberts]

(04-11-2017 09:46 PM)Only One Man Wrote:  

Fuck this piece of shit doctor. United obviously handled this situation terribly and it never should have escalated to the level it did, but I don't think it's unfair to expect a grown man not to act like a fucking three year old in a difficult situation.

What you're not taking into account here is that the man was being forced to spend an extra night in CHICAGO, and then go through the boarding process at O'hare TWICE. There's not enough money in the world to justify making someone go through O'hare twice, two days in a row.

No wonder he was screaming, "Please kill me!"

[Vaun]

He paid for his seat. He was kicked off for no good reason. His past makes no difference here. Scumbag doctor or not. Watching their stock tank $1.5B today was fun to watch. I wont fly United ever again.

Prediction: the CEO will resign.

[Only One Man]

I've gone through the boarding process at O'hare. Yes it's not exactly the height of pleasure but there are plenty of things that are worse. And yes there is absolutely enough money in the world to justify making someone go through O'hare twice in two days.

The airline handled this pretty badly as they probably should have kept upping the ante until it was good enough to get four takers. Forcefully removing someone from a plane like that is pretty bad form and they're rightfully experiencing a PR nightmare and I imagine it's gonna cost them dearly financially.

But fuck this guy for throwing a tantrum the way he did. That kind of reaction from a grown man is justified when you just found out your child was murdered or something else almost that horrific. Not when you have to wait until the next morning for your hour long flight home with quadruple the money you spent on the ticket in your pocket.

[Paracelsus]

(04-11-2017 09:46 PM)Only One Man Wrote:  

Fuck this piece of shit doctor. United obviously handled this situation terribly and it never should have escalated to the level it did, but I don't think it's unfair to expect a grown man not to act like a fucking three year old in a difficult situation.

Also, fuck these doctors who illegally or even legally over prescribe the shit out of powerful medications. These scumbags are a big reason why the US has a deadly painkiller epidemic.

Leaving aside the doctor's a dick, see it from his point of view: by the conditions of his practice he can only work 1 day per week, supervised, in an outpatient clinic, and he was due back there the next day. His best case scenario is that he doesn't get paid that fortnight, and like many "rich" professionals he's probably in debt up to his gills. His worst case scenario is that the Medical Board starts crawling up his ass again for why he didn't report for duty, and given his history will not be terribly inclined to believe that "he was asked to leave a flight because of overbooking."

I'm not defending the guy or his history, just working out what's going through his mind. Screaming "Please kill me" is not something you expect rational people to do, it's either drug use or a final collapse of all hope.

Well, that or xenomorph implantation.

[Only One Man]

(04-11-2017 10:16 PM)Vaun Wrote:  

He paid for his seat. He was kicked off for no good reason. His past makes no difference here. Scumbag doctor or not. Watching their stock tank $1.5B today was fun to watch. I wont fly United ever again.

Prediction: the CEO will resign.

Supposedly he was kicked off so some mechanics could get to a plane to prevent that flight from being delayed. Inconveniencing four people to avoid inconveniencing a hundred people is a wise decision. I wouldn't call that "no good reason".

Like I said, it was handled terribly and whoever made that decision should be fired, United should rightly lose money from this, and this doctor should and will get some good money out of this.

Still, fuck this scumbag doctor for being a piece of shit drug peddler and fuck him for acting like he did.

[Vaun]

(04-11-2017 10:28 PM)Only One Man Wrote:  

Supposedly he was kicked off so some mechanics could get to a plane to prevent that flight from being delayed. Inconveniencing four people to avoid inconveniencing a hundred people is a wise decision. I wouldn't call that "no good reason".

Not his problem. United is doomed, the CEO will resign, and if they go out of business who really cares. Its a crap company, with terrible planes and service. I can't wait to see its stock take an even bigger dump tomorrow. Sell sell sell!

[Only One Man]

Agreed that it wasn't his problem initially but it became his problem when nobody volunteered, they started randomly selecting people, and he was selected. Once it was his problem he could have acted like a respectable member of society and dealt with his problem like an adult instead of acting like a deranged lunatic.

And yea I don't really care about United either although I have found some pretty damn cheap flights on there at times.

[Delta]

Well, I guess we should've seen this coming:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/opinions/d...index.html

[Last Parade]

(04-11-2017 03:27 PM)C-Note Wrote:  

This story is starting to be part of the current culture wars. I'm noticing on social media that since it is coming out that this guy was gay, a bad doctor, and generally shady character, the SJWs are getting defensive about it. I see some good trolling opportunities ahead.

I'm a little surprised more people aren't drawing how this is tied directly to the current culture wars - even disregarding the guy's orientation or history, this is SJW fetishism that almost everyone in this thread is buying into?

When I saw this story blow up, I couldn't help but associate it with what else always happens: people being brazenly rude, disrespectful, and ignoring lawful orders; and when their actions are caught on photo or videos, get a shit-ton of virtue signalling done on their behalf online. So yeah, I draw a short line between this event, and the disrespect that SJWs show to authority or, as they would put it, white supremacist patriarchal cishet-normative power structures. And the massive social media pile-on leftists do against an organization they don't agree with.

Maybe I've grown far too authoritarian; but based on the system they had in place, he lost the lottery, he had to get out. When this guy refuses to leave, what are they supposed to do at this point? "Well, this gentleman is refusing to leave, I guess we'll randomly select someone else"? Then you'd be incentivizing belligerent, disrespectful, and anti-authority behaviour. Follow the rules.

Also, for people saying "they should've kept upping what they offer" - there needs to be a limit, once word gets out that there's no limit to airplane offers nobody would ever take the first or second offer, defeating the entire purpose.

Ultimately United fucked themselves by boarding the entire plane before kicking people off, of course, but still: this story's blown up, and this guy is being made famous, for a situation of his creation - and I can't help but think of so many BLM protests and riots that resulted from situations of a person's own creation.

And guess what? Now this story has gone massive and everyone's mad. How many people are going to stir up shit, not just in this case but in other kinds of situations in the future? Rebel against that eeeevil corporation (or law enforcement entity!), kick up a huge fuss, cry and scream with no shame? Create a tense and possibly violent situation because they know it will go viral and they can leverage it for fame, maybe even a lawsuit and payout?

What happened to law and order, and respect for that law and order? Or even respect for your fellow man? 4 people being inconvenienced (and pretty well-compensated) so 80+ won't be due to a missed flight?

The CEO's original statement was right: the passenger was disruptive and belligerent, and of course he had to walk that statement back because of the world we live in. Society functions based off following the rules; I know this is a severely unpopular take, but I respect a normally-functioning society too much to really support someone that creates this kind of situation. I think. I'm probably a hypocrite or will be in the future but not aligned to the consensus on this case.

[Delta]

^I agree with most of what you wrote, except:

(04-11-2017 11:44 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  

Also, for people saying "they should've kept upping what they offer" - there needs to be a limit, once word gets out that there's no limit to airplane offers nobody would ever take the first or second offer, defeating the entire purpose.

This flies in the face of basic game theory. Anyone who passes up a favorable offer because they believe it will go higher risks another person scooping up the offer. For the compensation to climb to an unreasonable level, all passengers would have to collude to pass up the initial offers. Obviously an extremely unlikely scenario.

[worldtraveler3]

I think the FAA puts a limit so that they don't want the airlines loose so badly. 1400 voucher, the max allowed in this case isn't really enough if there are many restrictions to it.

At the end of the day, united doesn't want to loose power/control tô some random customer. They wanna show they have the upper hand.

Think about it this way, if the doctor complied to leave the plane, would there still be any news? They just got away with it one more time...and no one cares. So we should all thank the doctor. However I geared that he will be getting 500k-1million dollars in compensation. So not sure if he's really smart or what. In Thailand he will prob get nothing.

[Paracelsus]

(04-12-2017 12:22 AM)worldtraveler3 Wrote:  

However I geared that he will be getting 500k-1million dollars in compensation. So not sure if he's really smart or what. In Thailand he will prob get nothing.

That's because when he was thrown off the plane, it happened to be standing on the soil of the country that produces literally half of the planet's legal profession.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(04-12-2017 01:03 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(04-12-2017 12:22 AM)worldtraveler3 Wrote:  

However I geared that he will be getting 500k-1million dollars in compensation. So not sure if he's really smart or what. In Thailand he will prob get nothing.

That's because when he was thrown off the plane, it happened to be standing on the soil of the country that produces literally half of the planet's legal profession.

In most of Europe he would have gotten 2000-10.000$ at the utmost after a long lawsuit. The US is great in that respect and it pays to be a lunatic while a company does stupid things.

[DrugAdvisor]

Wait... So an Asian American journalist writes about an Asian telling them it's a race issue, and that they need to be protected, summons white females and "other minority" to join BLM???

So much long there my Asian ass can't even lite plopelly....

[Rawmeo]

Imagine you have an important surgery coming tomorrow. For the past month you've been taking your medication, preparing for that, following restrictions, and the day of the surgery, they announce you that your doctor got bumped off a flight because an employee was tired. You would probably be the one suing the airline.

[Paracelsus]

Oh, and by the way, for those of us who think being rich solves these problems?

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-upd...471b1c50a2

Quote:

AS United Airlines scrambles to explain why it manhandled passenger David Dao off a flight and left him bleeding, new claims have emerged over the airline’s treatment of travellers.

In the week before David Dao was dragged off United Airlines flight in scenes that drew worldwide condemnation when the video went viral, another passenger was threatened with handcuffs if he didn’t give up his seat for a “higher priority” passenger.

Geoff Fearns paid about A$1300 for a full-fare, first class ticket to Los Angeles from Hawaii, the LA Times reported

He had boarded on the island of Kauai, and taken his seat when, he claims, a United employee informed him that he had to get off.

When he asked why, he was told the plane was over capacity.

Like Mr Dao he refused, saying he was already seated and should not have to get off.

“They told me they needed the seat for somebody more important who came at the last minute,” Mr Fearns told columnist David Lazarus.

“They said they have a priority list and this other person was higher on the list than me.

“I understand you might bump people because a flight is full, but they didn’t say anything at the gate. I was already in the seat. And now they were telling me I had no choice.

“They said they’d put me in cuffs if they had to.”

Mechanical problems meant the plane originally due to fly was swapped for a smaller one, with less first-class seats.

It made no difference that Mr Fearns was a frequent flyer who’d paid a full, first-class fare.

The “compromise” was a downgrade to economy class, to a middle seat, between a couple who he said refused to be seated next to each other and “argued the whole way” of the six-hour flight.

Once home he spoke to his lawyer and asked United for a full refund, and a $25,000 donation to the charity of his choice.

In reply, a United corporate customer care specialist emailed back, apologising for Mr Fearns’s unpleasant experience, but offered no refund, nor a donation.

A week later they offered to refund the difference between the first class fare and the economy ticket, and A$660 credit to fly with them again, assuring him his business was “especially important” to them.

When Mr Lazarus contacted United for a comment on Mr Fearns’ experience, nobody replied.

Mr Fearns, head of an investment firm that handles more than half a billion dollars in real estate holdings, said three crew members apologised to him during the flight, presumably leaning over the arguing couple to do so, but said they were unable to do anything.

He’s now considering a lawsuit against United. And has no plans to use that credit by flying with them again.

Kona needs to explain why he's forcing people onto United aircraft.

Incidentally, has nobody cottoned on to the awesomeness of this guy's last name being Dao? As in, the Chinese sword? "Hello, my name is David Dao. I am literally (((the sword of David)))."

I understand Dao can also be translated as "knife".

His name is Dr. Knife.

[Duke Castile]

Last Parade,

It sounds like you are arguing heavily in favor of letting corporations and authority fuck you up the ass at their whim.

I don't know if you missed it but the man was taken from his seat after the ticket agent falsified the reason claiming overbooking (as far as I can tell) in order to put some other employees on instead.

If you buy the story about mechanics or pilots or whomever thats fine but it's also United's problem under those circumstances not his.

I doubt I'd ever agree with this man on any topic but I am tipping my hat at a guy that said he wasn't willing to be fucked on that particular day.

Yeah, other people may act like assholes because they saw this man's video but that is also not this man's fault.

To put it succinctly it's United's fault because they chose to fuck with the wrong man on that day. If they had followed their own rules and honored his ticket they wouldn't be in this position, he wouldn't be in this position and your worries about others wouldn't exist.

And really, the reason this situation exists is because more people DON'T stand up to these people and say "go get fucked".

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

If United Airlines had such an urgent need for mechanics in Louisville, they could have:

A) offered more money until they got enough interested people
B) sent their mechanics to Louisville with a private car transfer, a 4 hour drive compared to a 2 hour plane loading/flight/unloading
C) sent their mechanics to Louisville with another company's flight

Conclusion: fuck United Airlines.

[Phoenix]

(04-12-2017 12:00 AM)Delta Wrote:  

This flies in the face of basic game theory. Anyone who passes up a favorable offer because they believe it will go higher risks another person scooping up the offer. For the compensation to climb to an unreasonable level, all passengers would have to collude to pass up the initial offers. Obviously an extremely unlikely scenario.

Yeah and like I mentioned before the best solution would've just been to use a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction

Its a pretty standard "volition versus force" question really. When you go to a computer store and the salesman says "it's $1000", and you say "well sorry I'm only willing to pay $900", everyone can see the fundamental wrong in the salesman taking out a baseball bat and saying "no, actually you're willing to pay $1000". Except the spergs of course. It's clearly caveman, brain-dead thug style thinking. "HGhhg, no comply!? Me smash!!".

Pretty straightforward stuff:
"Hello everybody. We are sorry to inform you all that we have overbooked this flight, as we have 4 mechanics that we need to fly on this airplane for maintenance reasons.
Since this cannot be avoided, we need to find a customer willing to leave their flight. Until we do, the plane cannot take off. You will be compensated, and put on the next flight which is [flight time]. We will start the reverse bidding for compensation at $5,000. If you will accept this, call out and raise your hand.
OK we have $5000, can I hear $4000?
Etc.
"

I doubt that price would end up exceeding $1000. Instead the retards just go the "no agreement?! hmm how to fix... baseball bat!" route.

And for anyone ripping on the fact the guy is a wierdo with a multitude of problems, so what? That's precisely how these "ticking time bombs" get triggered. Not by subservient little sperg dipshits (or as Leonard put it "gammas" ) who think "he should just get off the fucking plane or its trespass!". The airline can keep wronging people week in week out, and most people will say "huh alright then". But eventually they try it on one of these guys and it explodes and the fuckers get their payback.

[Suits]

(04-12-2017 06:56 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

Its a pretty standard "volition versus force" question really. When you go to a computer store and the salesman says "it's $1000", and you say "well sorry I'm only willing to pay $900", everyone can see the fundamental wrong in the salesman taking out a baseball bat and saying "no, actually you're willing to pay $1000". Except the spergs of course. It's clearly caveman, brain-dead thug style thinking. "HGhhg, no comply!? Me smash!!".

I have a question for the point of argument.

Imagine if the computer store had a sign on the door in tiny letters that stated "Customer who enter premises and engage in negotiating with store staff are required to pay whatever price the store staff members demand. Customers who fail to comply will be beaten with a baseball bat. Anyone entering through this doorway agrees to these terms and conditions."

Would the staff member/meathead behind the counter be justified in using violence to extract money from customers?

[Phoenix]

Well firstly there would be no customers after the first one.

But from what I've gathered from law it seems the more serious the possible consequences, the more clear it needs to be that you agreed to that contract. E.g. if a software EULA you click agree to has a clause stating "you surrender all your worldly property to us", there isn't a single judge in the country who would enforce it. If you are instead given a password to use it in a sealed envelope after signing a contract detailing the specific property you are handing over in the presence of neutral witnesses, judges would enforce it.

So in that example the judge would just declare there had been no contract because no reasonable person would've agreed to that had they seen it, and then put the batsmen in jail.

[churros]

Interesting account of why US airlines are so shitty:

Quote:

There is no mystery why air travel has gotten so ugly. Four large airlines — American, Southwest, Delta and United — commanded nearly 69 percent of the domestic air-travel market in 2016, up from about 60 percent in 2012, according to government data. Those numbers actually overstate how much competition there is. Many people have only one or two options when they fly because the big airlines have established virtual fortresses at their hub airports. United, American Airlines and three regional airlines affiliated with them served nearly 80 percent of passengers at O’Hare last year.

...

Much of the blame for the increased industry consolidation rests with antitrust officials in the Obama and Bush administrations who greenlighted a series of megamergers between airlines like American and US Airways; United and Continental; and Delta and Northwest. In addition, the Department of Transportation has historically been reluctant to regulate the industries it oversees — an unwillingness that persists in the Trump administration. Just last month, the secretary of transportation, Elaine Chao, put on hold a much-needed Obama-era proposal to require airlines to more clearly disclose extra fees for things like baggage. She delayed for a year another rule to require companies to disclose information about the mishandling of wheelchairs and motorized scooters for disabled passengers.

And given that Trump just banned laptops from middle east carriers, things don't look likely to change. It's protectionism alright, but for the corporations, not for you!

[Leonard D Neubache]

The principle of "we are the authorities and we have the power so do as we fucking tell you or else" is interesting to watch on this small scale because I get the sense that one day soon we're going to be seeing this little drama play out on a much larger scale, only losses wont be measured merely in stock prices and social media backlashes.

In any case, fate sometimes works in mysterious ways when choosing martyrs.

[Ironbutt62]

This is another typical United story, http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/...story.html
I have had it play out like this for me, bumped from first class, but I got a comp hotel, and a refund of my ticket. So there is no consistency in their personnel's ability to negotiate.
I haven't flown United in the last three years though. And I certainly won't now.

[BrewDog]

(04-12-2017 08:10 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  

Well firstly there would be no customers after the first one.

But from what I've gathered from law it seems the more serious the possible consequences, the more clear it needs to be that you agreed to that contract. E.g. if a software EULA you click agree to has a clause stating "you surrender all your worldly property to us", there isn't a single judge in the country who would enforce it. If you are instead given a password to use it in a sealed envelope after signing a contract detailing the specific property you are handing over in the presence of neutral witnesses, judges would enforce it.

So in that example the judge would just declare there had been no contract because no reasonable person would've agreed to that had they seen it, and then put the batsmen in jail.

I agree. I was just on a flight and reading the news, and the article says the United contract you agree to is 40,000 words. Who in the holy fuck is going to read that shit before clicking ok online for a plane ticket? It could say, "I agree to eat the pilot's shit" and it won't hold in court. A goddamn contract can say anything. A reasonable person isn't going to read through 40,000 words before clicking "Yes" for a ticket.