Apr. 11th, 2017

fallenpegasus: amazon (Default)
I've been following the saga about the confirmed and seated passenger being dragged off United Flight 3411, and two details leap out at me. I'm going to post this in two parts. Here is the first part.

It is being claimed that the compensation that can be offered to a "bumped" passenger is capped by law. Not true. What the law says is what the *minimum* compensation has to be. There is no rule against the gate agent manager offering more and more $100 bills until they get enough volunteers. That UA didn't was purely a company decision, made by the gate agent manager, and probably guided by a poorly written corporate policy manual.

On vouchers.

The gate agent manager offered "vouchers" "worth" $400 and then $800 to try to get volunteers. It is widely known by experienced travellers that airline vouchers are usually little more than a worthless joke. Vouchers expire, often in less than a year. They are good only for the fare, not for any taxes or "fees", which can be a significant part of the cost of a ticket. They have pages and pages of fine print of "blackouts", such that they are usually not good on in-demand flights or on in-demand days. When you try to fly with a voucher, often the flight is suddenly and mysteriously "full" or "not available". When when you do manage to buy a ticket with a voucher, and you do manage to make it to the gate, you are at the top of the list to get bumped AGAIN. I've received vouchers that I let have expire, because they were just too much of a pain in the ass to use. The first few vouchers I received were because I did volunteer, until I wised up to how shitty a deal a voucher is.

Vouchers are an even shittier deal for business travellers.

I would not have taken the $800 "voucher" to give up my seat either.
fallenpegasus: amazon (Default)
I've been following the saga about the confirmed and seated passenger being dragged off United Flight 3411, and two details leap out at me. I'm going to post this in two parts. Here is the second part.

The Chicago Police Department.

The cops that dragged him off and then roughed him up were not officers of the Chicago Police Department, but were instead employees of the Chicago Aviation Police.

Completely different agency. The CAP are nothing more than cheap security guards who get to wear a fancy shirt, and are not allowed to carry weapons. Their remit ends at the end of the jetway, and they have zero authority on board an aircraft. If an airline wants to have a passenger forcibly removed, they have to call the real police.

But, that is not the actual problem I have here. The real problem is, right after this happened, the press mistakenly thought they were Chicago Police Department. (I don't blame them for this mistake, my first snap assumption was that they were CPD as well, because only real cops are allowed to forcibly remove a passenger).

So, the media called up the CPD for a statement.

What the CPD *should* have said was "The incident did not involve CPD officers. We have no statement about incidents that do not involve the CPD."

What the CPD said instead was a transparent lie about how the man "fell" and "hit his face". Think about that for a minute: the CPD has a set of go-to lies to vomit up, is easier for them to say, then it is for them to figure out that they are actually innocent!

Of course, that should be completely unsurprising, we are talking about the Chicago Police Department here. The spokesman probably tells that same lie 3 times a week.

Profile

fallenpegasus: amazon (Default)
Mark Atwood

August 2017

S M T W T F S
  12345
678 9101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 19th, 2017 07:20 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios