Who was in the wrong here?

Who was in the wrong here?

Other urls found in this thread:

bbc.co.uk/news/business-39715188
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

...

The old chink acting like a 4 year old

Both sides

Airline company, who in order to maximize profit sells more tickets than seats in plane

The Asian doctor not accepting 300% of his ticket value because he needed to go home and sexually assault some people for prescriptions.


United for kicking off paying customers to shuttle their employees around.

United stocks speak for themselves, the goyim can't predict what people will get angry at

The flight wasn't overbooked. There is plenty of information on that now.

then why did they remove him.

This. The passenger had no right to freak out, the airline security did not have to punch him in the face to get him off the plane. The passenger should have gotten off the plane willingly and simply told his story about what happened, which would have had the same effect on the airline and bypassed the part where he gets blown the fuck out.

the gook. get off the plane and catch the next one, crybaby.

United is at fault. If you use air travel constantly for work, then you know that there is no amount of money they can pay you to make you stay at the airport another 24 hours. And did they really have to give an old man a fucking bloody nose?

a real ching chong would have used kung fu and karate

Because of their size asians are easier to remove from the plane than some random 300 pound amerifat.
Look at the video, he was the most logical person to pick to throw out.

airline dun goofed but the gook should have left when he was told to and then settle the matter in court.

if an airlines crew member tells you that you are not flying then you are not flying so get the fuck off the plane and then call your lawyer.

if i sell something to someone on craigslist and for whatever reason they are not satisfied with the transaction they cant just sit on my lawn and refuse to leave when i tell them to get the fuck off my property.

United Flight was in the wrong and so was the police for listening to them (unless the police was lied to about the legality of the situation).

For those who say United wasn't wrong, I hope you get dragged of a plane unconscious.

"Oh but he wasn't white so it doesn't matter". Go away! The left has their morons and sadly the right has their morons too. We should get rid of our morons.

what were they supposed to do? sit around and continue to beg the guy to get off their property?

The gook. He was trespassing on private property which is a violation of the NAP. He is lucky they didn't use lethal force to terminate his violation of their territorial soverignty.

...

Just let the paying customer fly and get your employees there on your own dime

To give the seats to employees

and then what? cancel the flight in loisville because there was no crew?

Buying a plane seat is not like sitting on someone's personal property. Buying a plane seat is like buying a service. You can't sell the right to sit on a plane seat and then use violence to steal it back after you regret the transaction. It is both theft and assault.

He who spooked the gook deserves a stern rebuke.

the service is to get from A to B. cops are the ones that actually injured the guy.

point is if an airline says you are not flying then you are not flying. get off the plane and call a lawyer. thats how it works when a business wrongs you, you dont sit there and be a little bitch about it while the rest of the plane gets delayed.

I wonder why he didn't accept 300% of his ticket value in United flight credits that can be redeemed 40$ per flight and will expire in 2 months?

The compensation they offer for regular overbooking is ridiculous for casual travelers, I don't know if that was the case though.

Yes. If the only thing they could legally do was begging then they should have begged.
Yes. They should have apologized for their incompetence and offered refunds.

obviously it was or they wouldn't have had to forcefully remove passengers.

Dude plane is not a real estate.

If you're told to get off the plane, you get off the fucking plane.

>Ruin the flight with already boarded passengers
>Announce the cancellation or rescheduling of a flight next day
What a hard choice.

but who was phone?

But what if the snakes are ouside of the aircraft? It would be the classic sequel plot twist.

That is the airlines fucking problem for piss poor planning, now isn't it?

Put them on another flight, charter a flight, fucking drive them there. You fucked up and don't expect sympathy when you treat your paying customers like shit.

everyone

the airline under its rule was able to tell ppl to get off.. but the rule is fucking shitty... he shouldn't have to get off a plane hes on because some employ cunts want to get on.. but at the same time.. its their rules..

JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME JUS KIL ME

He didn't fly so good.

>better to sidetrack 200 people rather than 4

legally they can tell anyone to get off their property and they have to comply even though the airline dun goofed. guy decides to get on the phone with his lawyer when the cops are asking him to leave. cops are not there to hold a trial.

Why would you assault a man before throwing him out of a plane?

Legally: the passenger.
Morally: the company.

He didn't break any law.

He agreed to get off the plane and take the next one, but when they cancled the next one and stalled it to next day, he said he didn't want to get off, because he had to perform surgery the next day.

>better to sidetrack 200 people rather than 4
>Better to sidetrack 200 people 1 day before than 4 right before takeoff.
Delays, cancellations always happen in flights. Just accept it, it was terrible management in United's part and honestly it had no business with airport security, they shouldn't even got involved.

kek

From a civil perspective the company assumes fault because he was an invitee.

He didn't have a case. What the airline did was 100% legal. The gook did the smart thing. His endgame is much better for him.

>plane is not private property

So you won't mind when a hitchhiker refuses to leave your car? Can you refuse to leave a taxi cab?

It's you, Sweden

It's always fucking you

The guy will get millions from United. I hope United will go bankrupt for its stupid decision. The bad rep alone will dent the company in a bad economic mess that the airline busyness is currently in already. They should have handled it better. They didn't even give a proper apology to its customers.

He paid for his seat, he boarded and already sat down. He didn't do nuffing wrong and got forcefully kicked out. United could have driven the crew to their other destination, it was only 100 kilometers orso away and the crew wasnt in a hurry even since they had to be on the flight the next day.

a. offer passengers actual cash to take a later flight (not useless United credit) until someone takes the offer.

b. rent a car for the crew and have them drive the whopping 4 and a half hours to Louisville

c. beat the shit out of an old chinese man who paid for a ticket, and had already boarded the plane. Then murder some lady's rabbit a week later for good measure

what option would you choose?

Oh. I assumed you had air travel laws similar to ours. In EU it's 100% legal to throw you off the plane as long as they offer you free tickets for the next.

What's the rabbit thing about?

he refused to remove himself from company property when instructed to do so by representatives from the company. it doesnt really matter that he paid them, that is the courts job.

i dont think hes even allowed to perform surgeries. cause of his prior conviction he wasnt even allowed to be a full time physician. also dont think surgeons go out of town the day before performing a surgery.

>4 people get sidetracked 24 hours = 96 hours gone
>200 people get sidetracks 1 hour = 200 hours gone

not arguing that united goofed but when someone tells you to leave their property then you fucking leave. if i go to an all you can eat buffet and they tell me to fuck off them i am legally obligated to fuck off.

if the crew members had to drive to louisville then the extra travel time would cut into their rest time and they would not legally be able to operate the next day flight.

Personally C.

>if your government tells you that it is taking your house, job, wife, and young children and giving them to muslim refugees you get the fuck out of the house and shitpost on a mongolian throat singing forum. that's just the way it works

Haha no.
It's common practice.
Never be the last to check in.

Either I'm mixing up the storiesor we've gotten a crazy spin-off in Denmark. Has there been a similar case recently?

>cops are the ones that actually injured the guy.
Cops injured the guy because they were told by the company that the man was sitting there illegally. If he was sitting there legally, the cops were lied to and the company is responsible for the outcome.

>point is if an airline says you are not flying then you are not flying
You're describing what they can do technically. You're not describing what they can do legally or why we should accept such behavior without fighting. Imagine if you paid for surgery at an hospital and you were suddenly wheeled out of the hospital with your stomach cut open, citing arguments such as "you were on their property" or "if the hospital says you're leaving then you're leaving". Nope. These are not arguments. This behavior is not accepted in any business model, ever, anywhere at all. This is an extreme example but it puts emphasis on the fact that people can lose a significant amount of wellbeing by being deprived of a right or a service at any given time. A half-service can cause much greater harm than not being sold a service in the first place. Another example: booting someone out of a plane in the middle of the trip. This is also not allowed, and yet "you were on their property" or "if the airline says you're leaving then you're leaving" says it's fine to throw someone off a plane. Would you be sitting and whining like a little bitch for not accepting to be booted off a moving plane?

>So you won't mind when a hitchhiker refuses to leave your car?
Do I have a contract with the hitchhiker?

What I'm saying is plane is not a real estate. You can't refer to laws apply to real estates.

The airline sold more tickets than they had seats. Not uncommon, many hotels, theatres, cinemas, cruiselines etc. sell more than they can take because inevitably a certain number will cancel their booking.

Unfortunately in this instance not enough people cancelled and the plane was overbooked.

However I am 100% certain that within the terms and conditions of buying a plane ticket you agree to take the risk that if the plane becomes overbooked the airline will randomly select a passenger to remove, and there is a chance that it could be you.

The chink was also acting like an autistic child being removed from his parents. Literally REEEEing and going limp and so on. He could've made it much easier for himself by simply leaving when told instead of resisting the way he did which ultimately caused his injuries.

Both parties have some level of blame.

This. US carriers are the worst.

Both. United should have handled the situation better and the "doctor" shouldn't have acted like a spoiled child. He should have just got his belongings and said "Alright, I'll leave but you'll be hearing from my lawyer".

step 1: kick paying customers off one of your serially overbooked flights
step 2: beat anyone who resists unconscious
step 3: offer more United flight credits so all the satisfied customers can come back and fly with you anytime! Who would turn down such a deal

i guarantee you every person on that flight was thinking the same thing: I'm never flying Unted again

>if the crew members had to drive to louisville then the extra travel time would cut into their rest time and they would not legally be able to operate the next day flight.

sounds like a personal problem

that is a shitty analogy and not even in the same ballpark since medical institutions have more duty of care regulations.

customer has no right to interfere with a companies operations even if that company was in the wrong.


>b-b-but the hitchiker pitched for gas!!!

>never flying united again
>can no longer collect FF miles
>no longer flying star alliance airlines
not likely to happen

New evidence he had a bread knife

>The gook. He was trespassing on private property which is a violation of the NAP. He is lucky they didn't use lethal force to terminate his violation of their territorial sovereignty.

And you have every right to protect and defend your property right up to the point where you sell someone a ticket to rent part of it for a set period. Which was what the gook was peacefully and lawfully doing until he was told to fuck off by a United Airlines employee who had no contractual right and possibly not even a legal right (as they were still connected to the gate) to do so.

Gook acted like a fucking moronic idiot with the mental age of 4, but he didn't do so until United Airlines decided to wipe its arse on its own contract.

If anyone violated NAP it was United Airlines.

>2 wongs don't make a right

He should go back to rice land

Airline company that overbooked their flights in the first place.
Shouldve taken the $800 they tried to bribe passengers with and told the employees to rent a car and drive to Louisville.

if you use air travel constantly for work then you are probably a frequent flyer and therefore less likely to be selected for a bump.

>if a company has an unconstitutional clause in their terms, it's okay!

Nah. Sorry, brah. You cannot sell someone a proof of service and deny that service due to your own incompetence. The same way you can't stop in the middle of a taxi ride and decide you're not going to bring that person to their destination when they've done nothing that would warrant a removal from your vehicle. They can absolutely sue you for that, even if you put it in the terms that you can remove them for any reason.

People make business decisions and life decisions around flight. It's not something you can just handwave away. You need an actual good reason to deny the person service if you don't want a lawsuit. Overbooking is not a valid lawsuit proof reason to remove someone from a boarded airplane.

>What's the rabbit thing about?

United Airlines decided that assaulting gooks alone wasn't enough, so decided to start killing pets in transport as well.

bbc.co.uk/news/business-39715188

Poor fucking Mr. Simon Hoppity!

employess couldnt drive there because the extra 3 hours would cut into their rest time making it illegal for them to operate the flight they were going there to cover.

True. Personally I think I'd agree with you if push comes to shove, but I'm also wondering about how the courts might decide.

How do you reckon an american court would rule?

>The airline sold more tickets than they had seats. Not uncommon, many hotels, theatres, cinemas, cruiselines etc. sell more than they can take because inevitably a certain number will cancel their booking.
>Unfortunately in this instance not enough people cancelled and the plane was overbooked.

Nope. Not even close.

Even United have admitted that the flight was fully booked, but not overbooked.

It was United airlines on shitty planning that meant at the last minute they had to fit four employees who hadn't been booked at all onto the flight.

This whole incident arose because of that poor planning.

That's not the problem or concern of the paying customer.
Don't overbook flights or use the bribe money to put them on another company's plane.

This was the fucking father?! Da fuck is this abomination??

being a paying customer doesnt give you the right to do whatever you want if there is a dispute

Chink.
Once police/bouncers/whatever decide you have to go there's no turning back or negotiating, specially on places like a plane.
He and he alone decided to turn an inconvenience into a drama as if sitting on a plane was a fundamental human right.

Ah okay, fair enough, that definitely pushes the blame much further on to United airlines. That is very shitty planning.

Chink still holds some blame for being an autistic man-child.

>This was the fucking father?! Da fuck is this abomination??

Apparently it was in transit to be the pet of some celebrities kid.

They said that Simon would have grown larger than his father, so that would have been one large ass rabbit when it got older.

Now it is just another nail in the coffin of United Airlines.

A customer always has the right to interfere with a company operation if they are in the wrong. Otherwise any company could start committing illegal and harmful actions toward you and you would not be allowed to interfere. Of course you're allowed. You have told me three reasons, "he was on their property", "if the airline says you're leaving you're leaving" and "you have no right to interfere in a company operation". Each of these reasons would permit an airline company to throw a passenger off a moving plane. Should you be allowed to throw a passenger off a moving plane? Being allowed to interfere when a company sells a service and then abruptly denies it is either always wrong or always acceptable.

I disagree. You're a pussy if you let others step on you. He did the right thing.

The gook. He isnt even supposed to be in a white country. Fuck him.

United Airlines. But the guy didn't help his case.

Sad.

Ya, they wanted to put their own people on the plane which is worse lol.

Why didn't they just book the employees on the flight?

For fucks sake just buy them a seat and you won't have this problem.

To fight in court over this WITHOUT injuries would not change anything.

To be "peacefully" resisting, and get beat up and drug off will win big money, and put the airline in the spotlight, and maybe change things across the board..

I would have got off the plane, taken the money, fought for a full refund with the extra cash included, and gone to a different airline.

You also have to be realistic.

This guy put it quite wellAs unfortunate as it might be, once they decide you're not staying on the plane, you simply aren't staying on that plane. He could've made it much easier for himself, the passengers and the security personnel if he cooperated.

They cant make you leave onec you have boarded. They shouldve just not let him get on the plane in the first place.

>United Flight was in the wrong and so was the police for listening to them (unless the police was lied to about the legality of the situation).

Nope. The Chicago Airport Police (separate to the Nazi's of the CPD) have already suspended two of the officers involved in the incident.

It wasn't just because they assaulted a passenger, but they violated their own rules in boarding the aircraft which they had no right to do (except in an emergency, which this wasn't).

Basically the Airport Police had no right to go aboard the plane to deal with what was essentially a civil dispute (which they escalated into violence under colour of law), which United Airlines should have dealt with through their own processes and procedures.

>also dont think surgeons go out of town the day before performing a surgery.
Because you're a doctor you can't have a normal life outside of work? Most people I know that go on vacation don't come back until day before.

> rest time
All "rest time" is time they legally have to give you away from the duties of their job no one says they'd have to drive themselves. Also rest time is frequently lied about, just like truckers the company asks them to bull shit hours and they comply because money. L

Too fucking bad. You're a shitty company.

>acting like an autistic manchild

Do you know where you are?

>I wonder why he didn't accept 300% of his ticket value in United flight credits that can be redeemed 40$ per flight and will expire in 2 months?
>The compensation they offer for regular overbooking is ridiculous for casual travelers, I don't know if that was the case though.

This is the reason why the entire planeload of people refused to accept them, because the $800 vouchers are very time limited, can only be used on United Airlines, have restrictions and blackout dates and are fundamentally not worth the face value of $800

If the United Airlines stewardess had been walking up and down the aisle with 8 x $100 bills + hotel and another flight, then I am pretty sure someone would have accepted.

People have become wise to United Airlines tricks in this sort of thing and the other airlines are no better.