A PR expert with the correct response for United (not necessarily the CEO resigning, but the steps leading up to it): http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/11/it-m...e-accommodate-ceo-oscar-munoz-commentary.html
If theyre gonna go that route then you cancel the flight in Louisville and let the timed out crew rest. You can't make 60+ passengers wait 5 hours for a crew to drive in.
you mean manager, from reading that reddit thread, he said the other employees were baffled at what was happening and the manager was the one demanding people off
Regardless of the specifics of this incident, it seems clear that there is something wrong with the policy. In this case, United stopped upping the compensation at either $800 or $1000...perhaps someone would have taken it if they were (a) offering cash--I'm not sure about it in this case--and (b) went up to the MAX of $1350. But if no one wanted $1350 in cash? We're right back at this incident. It's crazy that airlines are simultaneously allowed to (1) overbook knowingly (albeit partially an issue because of legacy systems interacting together), (2) are capped by law in how much they can offer, and (3) can then boot people involuntarily. It seems like such a simple fix to either eliminate (1), or otherwise kill (2) and (3). But if they allow these things together, this lose-lose situation is bound to happen again. Source on the 1350 cap: https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/250.5
There are quite a lot of Chinese living in Vietnam that adopt Vietnamese names to blend in. Try again.
He's a felon who got a slap on the wrist, maybe he felt he was above the law. Again, United did not drag him off the plane ... security did.
Not that it matters if he is real Chinese or not. This is the #1 trending topic in weibo, United does a lot of business in China these days.
Right? United let a couple planes be hijaked if we're playing the "let's bring up facts that have absolutely nothing to do with this case" game.