United Airlines Flight

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

Noted ... but not disciplined.

None of that absolved Dao for his behavior anyway. As I've said before and will state again for clarity ... if he doesn't run back on the airplane the SECOND time (violation of Fed Law the first time!), we don't have this thread.

He's not a hero either. It was a bad situation with which the staff had to contend.

I'm sure there are lessons learned. None of em suggested here about an auction about vouchers prior to boarding, about having Fed law legislate something perceived as "fair" are effective for anyone but the govt and wailing wallers

Just one guys opinion but...
Dao was in the wrong legally. UAL and their subordinate organization were legally in the right. But let's face it, The airline industry hasn't done themselves any favors in the last two decades and in particular the last few years with the baggage fees, seat adjustments, tarmac delays and routine overbooking. Flying sucks these days. If I have to go more than three hours, it's business class or nothing.

I'm not convinced some of the tweaking they've done was necessary to make a profit. I am pretty confident that it made the traveling public a lot less willing to accept incidents like this. Just because the airlines have a legal right to deplane people doesn't make it right that they ROUTINELY overbook flights. $800 may sound like just compensation, but if you've planned a vacation and that one day delay/bump means you lose 20% of a 5 day vacation, maybe $800 isn't enough. The airlines should honor their side of the deal better.

I do agree with the post above that says essentially "right or wrong, you better mind the law enforcement personnel". There's almost always time to scrutinize the LE folks about how well they did their jobs after the fact. People should follow their instructions all the time, whether they agree with them or not. If you don't listen to Johnny law, you deserve a busted nose.

 

[Seattle Husker]

SH,

you reveal how little you understand.

This wasn't a planned/scheduled deadhead. It was necessary BECAUSE of response to the weather event which made this flight necessary. That deadheading crew was to have min rest (probably less in REAL time)

When these "off schedule operations" start time is absolutely of the essence. The "reserves" are already being used to a full extent. That's a result of the pilot shortage ... arguably from the "fake" bankruptcies/fallout.

So ... I'm just telling you what's happening and the probable results of efforts to further regulate the BUSINESS of the industry.

Go fly someone else ... oh ... not available? Most flights are full ... wonder why???

While you talk about driving the business around operational issues I'm talking about customer service. See the disconnect?

Should Starbucks make their employee scheduling/customer volume problems their customer's problem? That's essentially what you are doing here. UA's crew scheduling needs/constraints are preempting the customers needs. You appear to be defensive about simply increasing the voucher to a point that the customer needs are being met.

Could it be that UA needs to be more customer focused which is the root cause of this blowup? You must acknowledge that Delta just changed their policy to do exactly what I'm recommending to ensure the customer is happy.

So, carry-on telling my why you can't do something your competitor just agreed to do and throw up the operational hurdles as justification. Let's talk in 3-5 years to compare an operational driven company vs. more your customer-centric rivals.

 

[Statalyzer]

I am holding both Dao and United responsible. Dao should be charged with violating whatever laws he broke such as resisting the instructions of a police officer.

These were essentially bouncers. They were not police officers. Chicago PD actually asked them to take "police" off of their shirts. It may still be law to comply with them, but they are not police officers.

The need to vacate 4 seats came to be known AFTER boarding began. AFTER BOARDING BEGAN

I realize that.

3x the fare purchased plus food/lodging is reasonable ... otherwise, if that "auction" is held, it's quite possible NO ONE goes as the pilots expire their legal duty limit.

First of all, 3x/fare isn't necessarily reasonable ESPECIALLY if it's just a freaking voucher and not actual money - plus, the fare of the flight has very little to do with the loss to the passenger. I've had flights that I wouldn't have even voluntarily taken a $5,000 offer to get off of, and I've had others I would have volunteered to fly a day later for $200.

For another thing, the "OMG nobody would have ever taken the offer" is just hyperbole. Keep increasing the amount and someone will bite. Calling a amount reasonable that exactly zero people thought was fair is a nonsensical position to take.

So ... all y'all experts just keep chunking rocks. You demonstrate your lack of knowledge. EVERY time.

The only bit of "knowledge" you interjected there was that the need became known after boarding began, and even that is something most of us realized. The rest was your own opinions infused with agenda, but was not facts or knowledge

Go fly someone else ... oh ... not available? Most flights are full ... wonder why???

There were other flights available on other airlines that weren't full. Random people on social media were able to browse airline sites and figure this out, but United apparently couldn't.

 

[ShAArk92]

I'm not convinced some of the tweaking they've done was necessary to make a profit

I will not argue the point the published fiscal numbers are the sum of the whole ... but anyone who has any rational analysis can see that flying commercial is so stinking cheap these days ... this "tweaking" as you've called it has surely been the method to profitability. Well, that and abusing bankruptcy law to stiff contracts with labor and vendors. Hmm, more regulation backfiring on those it's supposed to "protect."

legal right to deplane people doesn't make it right that they ROUTINELY overbook flights

Two things here ... and it returns to the base fare issue and includes the issue of no-shows. If fares were set where the break-even point wasn't 80+%, then the overbooking wouldn't be a significant factor. The market would dictate 15-20% empty seats with profitability attained even with those empty seats. As late as the end of the 90s, the "break even" was in the low 70s. We're flying the same airplanes. Bernoulli hasn't revised his law. If there wasn't such a consistent and significant no show rate, then your point would be valid ...

Another "unintended consequence" could easily be .... non refundable on most if not all tickets. That'd ruffle a feather or two, reckon?

But however this plays out ... increased regulation of the business shouldn't be sought. It will not bode well. It just won't.

but if you've planned a vacation

It seems you've assumed all passengers on that flight were subject to the "random selection." They weren't. Those who'd paid the uber cheap fare were subject to removal. If your vacation is that important so as to not lose "20%" ... then find a few dollars more to secure the seat against such possibility. This could probably be better advertised on the websites when the purchase is made, but it's there to see in the contract of carriage. The uber cheap fare is one step above a non-revenue standby.

"right or wrong, you better mind the law enforcement personnel".

As painful is it is to have one's rights violated ... agreed. There's a right way and a lotta wrong ways to handle one's perceived injustice. Dao chose one of the wrong ways. But hey ... we're having a great time chewin on it, ain't we? Thanks.

 

[ShAArk92]

You must acknowledge that Delta just changed their policy to do exactly what I'm recommending to ensure the customer is happy.

Must I?

Delta is a great company. I was one of their "bag chunkers" when I was matriculating at The University ... this is window dressing. They shrewdly took advantage of this situation and your post underscores how effective it's been. Delta has had to make similar accommodations ... they didn't have "a Dao" to throw a wall-eyed fit to make theirs "newsworthy."

You appear to be defensive about simply increasing the voucher to a point that the customer needs are being met.

Not really ... I simply have witnessed the time it takes to get 12 folks to volunteer just to check the bag as overhead bin space is predicted to be full by group umptysquat ... I've also seen how long it takes ... prior to boarding .... to get volunteers to be rebooked with the voucher, et al.

Look at it like relative importance of golf shots ... the closer to the hole, the more important the shot because there's less opportunity to "recover." Tee shot on the par 5 is the least important shot of the round. Making that 6' putt means Par or Bogey. The closer to departure time, the less flexible changes become (those not safety related, I mean; I have and will stop the show for those items). In a scenario like this one where weather events have already created delays (which mean longer crew duty days, btw), yes, expecting a delay to engage in a mini auction with no limit, enforced by law, empowers the bidders, yes? Good for them, until this process goes beyond the pilots' duty day limitation.

While not the mini-auction we're "proposing," I've seen/experienced similar events result in this very thing; pilots "went illegal." I've even seen passengers grandstand in the terminal about "having seen this movie before." No, it's not "customer happy," but neither is deplaning from a cancelled flight, eh?

The answer seems so simple ... more pilots, right? RIGHT. Who is aware of the shortage? Who is aware of the reduced ability of the Republics/Envoys/SkyWests to operate 12 flights/day between ORD and SDF? Who knows that the 10-year period from 03-13 saw the FAA issue the fewest commercial pilots licenses than any 10 year period since WWII?

Anyway ... We have all had our experiences and we all think we know based upon our experience. I recognize that not even I know it all with regard to the airlines, having worked for two and over 23 years in the business, but I know enough to know beggin for legislation to address this ticketing issue is the wrong way to handle it. If overbooking is a problem for ya, pay enough to avoid being in the potential removal pool ... all market like.

 

[ShAArk92]

The rest was your own opinions infused with agenda, but was not facts or knowledge

You're probably right, completely right and couldn't possibly be enlightened.

Have a great Longhorn Day, Stat.

SMH.

 

[ShAArk92]

ION ... seems American has now had an episode at the gate.

2 in a week/so ... oh man ...

no one ever films/posts the good trips. Funny that. But this is just my opinion infused with agenda.

Carry on.

PS ... might also read about restrictions on photography aboard airliners (keep it to you and your party) ... your zeal to be a youtube hero might land you in the pokey or at least separated from more of your hard earned dollars.

 

[ShAArk92]

It's like this guy said deplaning yesterday ... "best ride of the flight was the landing"

I tried to take it as a compliment, but it was clearly a shot about the cruise portion. FO DID roll it on!

Guess he wasn't paying attention to the PAs I made about our situation (weather, traffic, etc, trying to balance being informative, being directive about safety ... and being sensitive to avoid being overbearing on the PA) ... starting at the gate. Guess he didn't appreciate the work.

We've become so selfish and negative, it's just amazingly sad.

Just to prove, however, I'm not padlocked on the "bad," there were plenty of compliments about arriving early, the F/A's jovialness ... and yeah, "bubba's" outstanding touchdown.

 

[ShAArk92]

Well ... here we go ... I was just informed that my outfit will no longer make crews "positive space" with less than 45 minutes prior to scheduled departure. There is some confusion on this as the message wasn't clear as to whether this meant a "scheduled deadhead" for which the pilot must sign-in 30 minutes prior ... or if this was only in regards to non-scheduled deadheads.

There will be cancelled/significantly delayed follow-on flights as a result of this policy; courtesy of the mob mentality. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Oh ... no excuse for bad behavior (see MCI and the AA pilot who was assaulted). Folks need to breathe.

 

[ShAArk92]

I heard tonight Dao was on a UAL "buddy pass"

That is ... a UAL employee furnished him a space-available pass and he didn't have a revenue ticket at all.

Searching for confirmation ... but the source is almost as sound as the one which told me Dao reboarded twice.

Hmm

 

[UTChE96]

Not really ... I simply have witnessed the time it takes to get 12 folks to volunteer just to check the bag as overhead bin space is predicted to be full by group umptysquat ... I've also seen how long it takes ... prior to boarding .... to get volunteers to be rebooked with the voucher, et al.

ShAArk, you are obviously knowledgeable regarding the industry, but when you say things like this it shows that you do have a bias. The incremental time required to increase the voucher offer to get volunteers will not be significant unless the airline is intentionally going slow to save cost. I could have gotten four volunteers from that flight in less than a minute if you let me go up to the cap in Delta's new policy. If you offered $10k there would have been a stampede of passengers down the aisle.

 

[ShAArk92]

shows that you do have a bias.

Sorry for the delay ... great day to mow the pasture weeds ... 46 acres down, 22 more to go.

Perhaps ... but to use your own estimation, to be objective means to also be less than informed.

So which is worse? Informed with a possible degree of bias or presumed objectivity ... and certainly a condition/degree of being less than informed?

I've re-read the quote and I'm trying really strong-like to understand "bias." I'm simply testifying to what I've witnessed a the gate while doing my flight planning. Help me out here. Given my experience in repeatedly having these consistent observations, it's my opinion holding an auction with no limit will prove to be detrimental in the long run.. Sure, a few will make-out like bandits (if they actually redeem the voucher) ... but the greater impact will be upon the operation and hundreds, if not thousands more passengers.

BTW ... did you know Dao was a "non-rev?" He was apparently on a "buddy" pass from a UAL employee. I'd NOT like to be THAT employee. This means Dao didn't pay a red-cent ... zippo. Nadda! I'm still trying to confirm this ticket status ... but if this is true ... sahn ... what a complete MISS and FAIL by the media and by too many in this thread.

 

[ShAArk92]

If you offered $10k there would have been a stampede

Well shoot ... why not offer 10 million/piece? Just start offering 10K vouchers on tickets which MIGHT be $300 for the entire trip ... due to circumstances beyond the company's control? (weather/traffic management (govt) delays)

Mitigate cost is a legitimate factor. IDK what you're perceiving as reasonable, but I've stated mine. 3x the cost of the fare, all other things being equal, is certainly reasonable. I'm not sure you'd be compensated a gift card at Ruth Chris for 3x the value of the meal you didn't like or the cut you couldn't have because they were out in spite of your reservation.

 

[UTChE96]

Well shoot ... why not offer 10 million/piece? Just start offering 10K vouchers on tickets which MIGHT be $300 for the entire trip

$10k was roughly the cap in the new Delta policy that I referenced in my post. I was making a point that getting volunteers can be a very quick process if the airline is not concerned about cost. The only thing that makes the process time consuming is that the airline is trying to get the required number of volunteers at the absolute minimum cost. To be clear, I don't blame the airline for trying to save costs but arguing that the process is inherently time consuming is absurd.

I'm not sure you'd be compensated a gift card at Ruth Chris for 3x the value of the meal you didn't like or the cut you couldn't have because they were out in spite of your reservation.

Do you really think the inconvenience caused by a bad steak is anyone near the inconvenience caused by being involuntarily bumped from a flight? One is a slight downer while the other may result in missing a critical business meeting, part of your vacation, losing days of precious time with your family, etc. Not even in the same neighborhood.

 

[Phil Elliott]

I'm not sure you'd be compensated a gift card at Ruth Chris for 3x the value of the meal you didn't like or the cut you couldn't have because they were out in spite of your reservation.

But if you pitch a fit and have to be dragged out of the place by cops, some folks will say Ruth Chris was stupid for not giving you 10x the cost of the meal.

 

[ShAArk92]

if the airline is not concerned about cost.

I followed your reference RE Delta's policy ... you are either ignoring mine or missed it. What business is not concerned with cost? Why should cost be dismissed? Are you begging for a cancelled flight or what for the same market which has produced this ridiculously cheap fares WILL ALSO create this auction atmosphere with no caps.

You're living in a dream world, Che. "I want it all and I want it now" good luck with that.

One is a slight downer

Whatever you think of my comparison, the point is valid. making the flight a loser over all because you think we should legally require the airline to continue upping the ante will result in cancelled flights. That would be more fiscally prudent than losing money.

since we're being horsey .... tell my brother he was simply inconvenienced by spoiled food (actually it was the shrimp) ... and unable to obtain 3x the price of the meal.

That entire list of things which is far more critical than one's health in your mind (yeah, I know, I added to the example, but since we favor the BBS tactics of presumption and projection, I thought I'd give it a whirl)

... yeah, being chosen for removal is avoidable ... PAY UP. If you don't think that list is worth a few dollars more to remain out of the "selectee" pool, then why should the airline think your need to avoid being bumped is substantively greater than being a non-revenue standby (like Dao was) You shouldn't expect to have your cake and eat it, too. You'll be disappointed in a great many things in life, sir.

 

[UTChE96]

What business is not concerned with cost? Why should cost be dismissed?

It shouldn't. But the process itself is not inherently time consuming, doing it in a way to minimize cost is the time consuming part. You conveniently left that part out of your original statement that started this entire discussion.

Anyways, I once again credit you with superior knowledge of the industry. But this reminds me of discussions I have had with doctors who adamantly feel that they are exempt from social norms of punctuality. They make good points about the logistics of their industry but it's generally just excuses from a biased POV. Come to think of it, it's ironic that it was a doctor dragged off the plane.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Come to think of it, it's ironic that it was a doctor dragged off the plane.

I agree with ShAArk on this discussion, but I did get a kick out of your point here.

 

[ShAArk92]

it's ironic that it was a doctor dragged off the plane.

Evidently the doctor is about as much doctor as I am ... afterall, I DID stay at a HI last night!

No sir ... I didn't omit the time ... in fact, that was the central issue in my admonition to resist the urge (of all like you) ... The only way to "minimize time" is to precipitously offer a value higher than would have been needed if not for the press of time ... and the presumptive requirement to be "sky's the limit." Again ... and I cannot overstate this ... don't want to be bumped ... pay up. Literally and philosophically.

My job is all about TIME: time of day, period of time, number of times.
time/distance/heading. Time in holding. Time on approach, time on the runway, time on the "tarmac." Fuel gauge equals TIME remaining ... time is everywhere in my job and in my industry. Time Zones. etc etc etc.

I probably missed a few references, feel free to identify 'em for me.

If not completed in 5 minutes, someone (s) is getting picked for ya.

again ... AT THE TIME

Time.

This isn't a fund raiser event with a volunteer auctioneer. When seats need to be opened, they need to be opened quickly. Particularly on a deal like this, time is of the essence. So, the offer was 3x the price of the affected passengers' fare. No takers ... so there was a selection process.

I imagine the Captain of this flight was involved at this point

I think this is a move to accomplish a move.

I think what will happen going forward is the policy regarding travel vouchers at all/most carriers will be modified to emphasize avoiding passenger misbehavior at the expense of delaying/inconveniencing other passengers ... and possibly of those of a subsequent flight ... as HorninChicago mentioned ... pilots are now required by FAA regulations to have an 8 hour sleep opportunity ... that has increased the time required on the "layover" between days of duty and it relies upon timely local ground transportation.

So ... keep dickering with the rules ...and like the hair-trigger cancellation thanks to the DOT 3 hour rule ... passengers and crew alike will be inconvenienced more than they were previously.

The market says we GOTTA have a flight between city pairs every 90 minutes/less

... and delay increased by the very authority which instituted the fine in the first place.

having to overcome/otherwise contend-with the delay unwinding of the Federal Government's traffic management ... that is ... the Federal Government decides

metering the "wheels-up" times

to give sufficient time to close-up and push back before the gate has to receive its next inbound flight.

return to the gate because of the excessive delay

What was unique about this "United Express" flight was the available TIME.

SH ... yes it was. In fact, it was enough to allow Dao time to deplane to receive his voucher

THEN enough time to depart from there.

but toilets overflowing at the 3-4 hour point and having expired

But sitting a few hundred feet from the terminal for over 8 hours

not only "no limits" on vouchers but direction to keep the auction going, time is ticking.

AFTER BOARDING BEGAN

I'm sorry we can't stomp our feet and get what we want whenever we want it.

I simply have witnessed the time it takes to get 12 folks to volunteer just to check the bag

 

[UTChE96]

The only way to "minimize time" is to precipitously offer a value higher than would have been needed if not for the press of time ...

Now that I agree with. Every situation is different, if you have hours before take-off then take all the time you like to get volunteers. But if boarding has already started then open the damn purse up.

I believe I saw that United had about 3700 passengers who were involuntarily bumped last year. Let's assume it took a conservative average of an extra $2k to get volunteers on those flights - worst case is an incremental 3700x $2k = $7.4MM of travel vouchers (not cash). That's a pretty small expense for a multi-billion dollar company like United to have avoided the national PR embarrassment they just endured. As Oscar said, this will never happen again on a United flight. Not because United is such a wonderful company or because Oscar has a big heart, it's just good business.

 

[ShAArk92]

Your example of 2K is something quite short of 10K, Che. And "hours" before is impractical to declare for agents aren't even present at the gate before 1 hour. Sometimes not even until 45 minutes. Perhaps agent should change ... perhaps if "hours prior" then agents are working two or three flights/shift rather than 5 or 6. What do you think that will do to ticket prices?

or ... we could see that 3700 in the light of 80+ million as an exceedingly rare occurrence even for a fare which is contractually subject to denial/removal.

The removals WILL happen again, unless operations cease because "stuff happens." Denials/Removals will likely happen the very day of whatever Oscar's change is made effective. The way they are handled will be substantively UNchanged. What MIGHT be different is the response from the passengers who bought the ultra/uber/whatever cheap fares subject to the removal/denial (depending upon the point at which it is known seats need to be vacated.)

Who wants to be drug off the airplane like that??? "They really mean business!" ... OK ... somewhat TIC and if you don't appreciate the humor, that's ok ... but really. When the need for higher priority seats is made (as in the referenced case) ... those seats WILL be vacated and the "show must go on" because ... schedule. TIME.

It's not SIMPLY that affected flight, it's the potential to affect several flights following as the aircraft has subsequent flight assignments, the flight attendants AND the pilots. It's exceedingly complicated as to WHY the aircraft, flight attendants and pilots are not "co paired" for a day of domestic flying, but there are clearly 3 subsequent flights operating more/less simultaneously which are potentially delayed on account of a single flight's being delayed.

... don't want to be subject to denial/removal ... pay more. These selected passengers for denial/involuntary deplaning-'re-accommodation' have paid the least. They declared their time to be the least important in the selection of their ticket paid compared to the rest of the passengers on the flight.

 

[horninchicago]

@ShAArk92 I'm very interested to know the non-rev status of Dao's ticket as well.

 

[UTChE96]

Your example of 2K is something quite short of 10K, Che.

I was being hyperbolic with the $10k to make a point and it was also the cap that Delta has implemented. I suspect $2k is a much more realistic number to easily get volunteers. At least that is probably what it would take to get me to volunteer and I am probably one of the more stubborn people to get to volunteer. At $10k, you better not be in the aisle because here I come!

 

[horninchicago]

I am really doubting that Dao was on a buddy pass or similar. United and/or Republic would have shouted that from the rooftops.

Several weeks ago when UAL initially caught flack for "banning" leggings and making some teens change clothes, it wasn't too long that UAL let it be known they were non-revs and have to follow a strict dress code.

So, this whole story would be diffused really fast if Dao was a non-rev. They would have just called him initially. Hell, my wife is a SWA pilot. My 1 1/2 year old, at the time, and I were summarily asked to come off a flight in HOU when they needed the seats. We had obviously boarded. We smiled, got up, and got off.

 

[ShAArk92]

I agree, but I was told this by a rep who is reputable. It's possible this person was misinformed ...

Nevertheless, Dao had a ticket which put him in the potential "denied boarding". If his need was "that great" he should have backed it with green and bought himself out of the pool as late as check in time.

As one who has used the privilege, you know the managements are sometimes ... horsey ... about the existence of the benefit. So, while the leggings incident DID see that non rev status revealed, that doesn't mean this one necessarily would.

 

[horninchicago]

Yeah, you're right, they can be horsey. Just would really nip it in the bud IMO to say, hey, lay off our asses, this ******* was riding on an employee's free pass.

 

[Seattle Husker]

I agree, but I was told this by a rep who is reputable. It's possible this person was misinformed ...

Nevertheless, Dao had a ticket which put him in the potential "denied boarding". If his need was "that great" he should have backed it with green and bought himself out of the pool as late as check in time.

The premise that a customer should know that their cheaper ticket puts them in jeopardy of being bumped off a flight is absurd. Who finds a good deal on a travel site and thinks "I'd better pay more to avoid being involuntary bumped off the flight". You already know that you'll get lower seating priority. Paying more isn't even an option. The lack of customer service awareness being displayed with this line of logic is astonishing.

As one who has used the privilege, you know the managements are sometimes ... horsey ... about the existence of the benefit. So, while the leggings incident DID see that non rev status revealed, that doesn't mean this one necessarily would.

As some who has used this benefit extensively I understand separate rules and risks for non-revenue passengers. It's a benefit that the pass holder is receiving specifically to save money with the knowledge that a paying customer always gets priority.

 

[ShAArk92]

The lack of customer service awareness being displayed with this line of logic is astonishing.

Really?

Haven't we already addressed this?

You get that for which you pay. Pay the clearing house fare, get to board before a standby; revenue or otherwise. Pay a refundable ticket fare/first class, become exempt from a denial.

What's astonishing about that other than the desire to decidedly whine about the inability to have cake and eat it too.

Is it inconceivable there really is a difference in the fares? After all, in spite of what "the blonde" said ... the entire aircraft is going to the same place, will experience the same air/ride quality and will be treated with the same respect; whether you want to believe that or not.

BTW, @SeattleHusker ... I was in your fair/rainy city on Sunday. $15 6" Subway. I bought the same samich in Valley Mills Texas on Friday for $9 ... and got a cookie in Valley Mills. ... oh ... and no reward points in Seattle. VM: points

Strange how the standards of value differ in various industry and geography.

 

[BrntOrngStmpeDe]

Really?

Haven't we already addressed this?

You get that for which you pay. Pay the clearing house fare, get to board before a standby; revenue or otherwise. Pay a refundable ticket fare/first class, become exempt from a denial.

What's astonishing about that other than the desire to decidedly whine about the inability to have cake and eat it too.

Is it inconceivable there really is a difference in the fares? After all, in spite of what "the blonde" said ... the entire aircraft is going to the same place, will experience the same air/ride quality and will be treated with the same respect; whether you want to believe that or not.

BTW, @SeattleHusker ... I was in your fair/rainy city on Sunday. $15 6" Subway. I bought the same samich in Valley Mills Texas on Friday for $9 ... and got a cookie in Valley Mills. ... oh ... and no reward points in Seattle. VM: points

Strange how the standards of value differ in various industry and geography.

I think it's fair that there is a bumping priority but I doubt most people know that their cheap seats are first in line. While you can contend that this should be obvious, I fly a fair amount it wasn't something I had ever given much thought to. If they take this approach, then they should conspicuously label them as such "This ticket is subject to seat availability" during the purchase and mark the tickets as such when printed/emailed.

3700 involuntary doesn't seem like a lot except that that's a number of people that decided not to take UAL up on the voluntary and compensated version. That's at least 10 people a day that didn't think that the voucher and such were just compensation to voluntarily forego their trip. That's out of potentially thousands of people that had the option. I would say that if I have a plane of a couple hundred providing feedback that my number was too low, then I either need to up my number for compensation or I need to quit overbooking so much.

 

[ShAArk92]

I've agreed this should be noted upon checkin, and maybe even a commitment to a required voucher value "if the need arises" ... or ... opportunity to "buy out" of the possibility.

Neither do I disagree with the market generating such practice ... my caution is against relying upon government to provide something it shouldn't. Because the govt which can provide that can also remove it.