Tough **** for United. They screwed up their logistics. They should pay for it. A random passenger shouldn't be inconvenienced for the company's mistake. That's bad business.
Yes they have the right but doesn't mean they couldn't have handled this better. CNN interviewed the guy sitting in the row in front of the doctor. Said that the stewardess asked for volunteers just once offering the money and when no one took, just pointed out "random" persons. She never asked a 2nd time for volunteers, offered more money (which United allows them to do), or even just asked people individually. Grant it she was not required to do any of this but probably would've been better had she given it a shot.
I am sure people in United Airlines public relations and consumer relations are celebrating that stock news... United Airlines shows how to make a PR crisis a total disaster http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/news/united-passenger-pr-disaster/ oh wait... United’s stock is falling 3.7% and wiping $830 million off the airline’s market cap http://www.marketwatch.com/story/un...illion-off-the-airlines-market-cap-2017-04-11
They should have handled it better and had it been an actual United flight crew instead of Republic Airways then it would have been. But like the Gulf Oil spill BP took the blame for Transoceans negligence.
They should have offered more cash money in my opinion. 800 might not be enough, but you start getting into 4 digits, and people gotta start thinking. The deal was go on standby or catch the next flight out (ticket is paid for by United) + cash/credit + hotel stay right?
United stock down 4%. It's still higher than when Trump announced the electronic ban a few weeks ago.
Well the CEO says they offered $1000 but according to eyewitness only once was money offered in exchange of seat. So, it's possible they only offered the $1k to the DR ... which is dumb cause there had to be someone on that plane would have done cartwheels down the aisle for $1k.
I just had to give you props for this post. Very few people actually realize it was actually Transocean (and failed BOPs from Cameron) that basically caused the oil spill. BP, of course, as the operator is legally liable for the mess, but a lot of people (and the media) don't realize Transocean f-ed up the most. On United: they messed up. The policy is messed up, and the business practice is lame of overbooking flights. It is, however, a symptom of the overall demand from the public for cheap flights. The cost of flights has not kept up with inflation and there is a ton of competition. Airline margins aren't particularly big and many take losses from time to time. As long as people want $300 - $400 flights forever, you are going to get full/overbooked planes, worse and worse service and more issues.
I'm fascinated with this story from a reputation management point of view. Airlines have a lot of exposure because their rep rests with thousands of low-paid, low-educated, frontline workers. They make decisions every day that carry the potential for a PR incident. But generally airlines manage, probably because the guys up the food chain in the company will take the necessary remedial action to make problems go away before they're disasters. But not United. They'd rather be right. You'd think the CEO at least would know when it was time to kneel and scrape so he can protect his stock options, but he doubles down instead.
You are 100% correct. In past lives I worked in corporate communications for very large companies and a big part of the role of public relations is crisis management and damage control. A good general rule to follow is "when on thin ice... don't dance, get off fast". You want the story to go past as fast as possible. United, for whatever reason, decided to be "right" on both stories (girls wearing leggings, passenger being removed from the plane) and in doing so extended the damage. Short of "the passenger was asked give up his seat so that a courier with a heart for a little girl's transplant" there was no way this story would go well for United. The CEO should have apologized, offered the doctor free flights for the rest of his life and this would have not shown up on social media, late night TV, and news reporting for a week. Instead, they felt compelled to appear right...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aled.html?ito=social-facebook#article-4401444 For those wondering whether or not he's a doctor.
Read that the offer was only $800 but guess the CEO could've included hotel cost within that statement. CNN reported that United can offer as much as $1300. Don't know why $800 was their cap in this particular situation or why you wouldn't announce a higher offer if possible. $800 may not have been worth it for a 70 year old internal medicine doctor with scheduled appointments the next morning. But like you said, there had to have been someone willing to take $1000 cash.
That guy shouldn't have had to vacate his seat. He paid- and the airline should've kept upping the ante until someone volunteered to leave. No excuse at all for what they did. When you start accepting things like this, you accept a police state in which it is OK to assault people with no justifiable provocation. When you think about what you've written, you should really be ashamed that you've allowed yourself to tolerate this type of behavior.
He was an old man in his late 60s. Flight attendants messed up picking a cranky old man They're lucky he didn't die from all that.
