A lot of people sure were quick to back the drug selling felon in this case. All the facts haven't been presented yet a vast majority are siding with the felon. Not the side I'd take until everything has been made public.
46,000+ people are involuntarily taken from a flight from what I read. Yet we don't hear about any of those stories. You pick one felon who refuses and as a result airport security is called in and all of a sudden it's a problem and we must support the felon.
Then keep bumping up the price. The manager don't know how to think? And guess what? People were pissed to begin with. How do you keep the people happy? Compensate them with the right amount.
No, they initially tried to lie and pass it off as an overbooking and got caught. They then had to backtrack and admit it wasn't an overbooking. They arent doing it as a PR move, by definition fitting in their own employees (who are non-paying) to a fully booked flight does not make it overbooked. As many articles and posters have cited, in that situation they are not supposed to favor their own employees over paying customers. But they didn't want to cancel the Monday flight after the original crew screwed up and couldn't fly due to mandatory rest rules, so they tried to get a replacement crew there by kicking off paying customers they had no reason to kick off.
Okay, and what happens when you hit the cap and still no one volunteers? Then you have the exact same ordeal if you are unlucky enough to pick an emotionally unstable felon to be one of those to exit the plane.
All they had to do was raise the accommodation. That's it. Everyone has their price. I don't think this guy went in thinking he would be a millionaire after (he will be now), but I'm sure that two bit felon as you like to refer to him would have gladly given up his seat for $2000. Hell, it could have been a bull **** $2000 in travel vouchers on another flight, not even cash. We disagree on whether or not the guy was in the wrong, but come on United, be the bigger person... because remember, corporations are people too.
The cap would be the millions they did lose in this PR nightmare. I guarantee you, you offer $2000 and someone is taking that.
Ironically, you're doing a very similar version of what that customer did. Refusing to listen while being uselessly belligerent due to some deep rooted values/beliefs. I guess you're a bigger fan of his practices than you realize... all you're missing is a public physical thrashing and you may just get the same amount of support.
So in your mind, they were authorized to offer someone 50 million dollars to exit the plane and take the next flight? LOL, well that's one theory anyway. Of course there is a cap on what they are willing to offer. Airlines deal with issues like this all the time, they can't be offering everyone tons of money every single time a conflict comes up. The tickets cost maybe 150 bucks and they were already offering $1000....how much more should they have gone up to? $10,000? $100,000? $1,000,000? $10,000,000? There has to be a cap you hit and if no one volunteers, you just pick people.
That's not a policy that you can have and stay in business. You simply can't give people blank checks for minor inconveniences.
You've taken your side. yeah why? people just like the felon? people are paid by the felon? why? maybe people are all Chinese? ..... Do you ever have doubts on yourself ...that your are different from people????
Correction: a lot of people were quick to back the BLOODY PAYING CUSTOMER who was forcibly dragged off an airplane because a multi billion dollar company was too cheap to rectify their self-induced ****-up. That clarify it for you???.
You know how to avoid it? Have a corporation that is organized well enough to book flights for it's employees without having to eject passengers. Being inefficient is also not a great way to stay in business either. Also, incentives help airlines, not hurt them: http://reason.com/blog/2017/04/10/why-should-police-help-united-airlines-c
