For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1529442
Cessna57 wrote:Their CEO is happy with how they acted.
...
Precedent has been set.


He is reconsidering that initial opinion. Bigly.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39572841

I wouldn't be so sure about that precedent just yet.
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1529453
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon announced Tuesday it had awarded a sole-source contract to United Airlines for work related to the forcible removal of President Bashar al-Assad from Syria.

The contract, worth $2.1 billion, tasks the airline company with locating Assad, grabbing him from his seat in the presidential palace, and “dragging him out of Damascus by his arms.”
By cockney steve
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1529456
^^^^^ latest on the Beeb website, is United dropped 4%, equivalent to 8oo million POUNDS, At close of play, this had recovered to 1%, so only a couple of hundred million frittered by arrogant incompetence..... A contract like that could paper over the accounts cracks nicely :wink:

CEO currently in full back-pedalling mode, probably having finally realised he's put a noose round his own neck.
By cockney steve
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1529458
Anyone got a sensible explanation, why overbooking has replaced "Standby"?

I'm sure the Standby fare could be tweaked,according to demand, I.E. Priority Standby, say 70% of fare, "take yer chances" standby, 30% of fare.... that way, there would be a lot less ill-will and acrimony.....what am I missing?
#1529467
Another one that had me chuckling.

"Not enough seating? Expect a beating!"

Having read a fair bit on this (I was stuck with my 3yr old in the car for nearly 2h yesterday), I have to say that Simon Calder over at the Independent comes across as nothing more than a a shallow and obedient lackey of the airline industry.
#1529470
Chap goes into a coffee shop, they take payment, hand it to him and he goes and sits down.

When he's sat down, they walk over and say they want his coffee for a member of staff who is on a break. Don't worry, he can wait outside for a day and they'll make him another one tomorrow.

Chap says he'd prefer his coffee. Coffee shop says that's acting "Belligerent"

Police turn up, give him a fat lip and drag him out of the coffee shop on the floor. Luckily they weren't carrying guns at the time.
#1529475
matthew_w100 wrote:Yes _ Simon Calder was of the view that an aeroplane captain has the absolute right to remove any passenger he chooses, just like a ship's captain. There may be civil consequences, but the removal is in his power. And he can marry people. Are these all urban myths?

Calder said something similarly rash on the Beeb link posted earlier but from what I remember of Av Law while the PIC might have final authority on the operation of the aircraft (eg, remove a pax or tell a controller to take a hike) but they might have to make a report and are definitely not above the law. The captain's report should make interesting reading especially if the company is leaning on him and it is goes to court. What's the betting that they try to finger the cops?
#1529479
Dave W wrote:
Cessna57 wrote:Their CEO is happy with how they acted.
...
Precedent has been set.


He is reconsidering that initial opinion. Bigly.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39572841

I wouldn't be so sure about that precedent just yet.


In accordance with standard UA policy, the apology had to be really dragged out of him.
#1529521
I think the "security agents" have most to answer for.

They effectively took the guy into custody, becoming responsible for his well-being until he is safely released.

So why do we later see the doctor, with an obvious head injury, apparently dazed, wandering around freely on the aircraft?