Why United Was Legally Wrong to Deplane David Dao
yahoo.com
yahoo.com
> Videos also show a clearly injured Dao returning to the plane, walking up and down the aisle and muttering that he needed to get home. He was then escorted off the plane a second time.
A gonzo journalist would write: "show Dao returning to the plane, walking up and down the aisles, then staring into space, muttering that he needs to go home, and repeating 'just kill me' over and over in an urgent tone, hair matted, toilet paper wedged against his bloodied face. He had the near-death shock of an asian tourist who'd gotten lost on the way back to his hotel after leaving a bar usually patronized by a "certain type" on the outskirts of Acapulco, only to be kidnapped, strip-searched, and terrorized for 48 hours by paranoid men with AK-47s snorting cocaine and sporting "ZETAS" tattoos. He was then escorted off the plane a second time."
Also - "vicious memes" ? Ripping someone out of their seat and dragging them through a plane can be vicious, but jpegs cannot.
Whether he knew it or not, good on David Dao for standing up for his legal rights.
With that said: by breaking the contract with Dr. Dao, it would seem that United is therefore required to pay up the cost of Dr. Dao's ticket.
It isn't too hard to come up with a situation where passengers are already boarded, but then are forced off the plane. (Ex: weather conditions change. Another airliner crashes in the runway, causing an unknown amount of delay, etc. etc.). Surely under such a situation, all the "already boarded" passengers will be forced off the plane, and probably refunded the full value of their ticket.
---------
But under no circumstances is there actually a requirement to fly every passenger. I'd expect that the absolute limit that can be forced onto United Airlines is the ~$1350 cash + Refunded Plane Ticket.
Well, aside from the broken nose and concussion. But that's the Chicago Police's problem, not United.
IE: Its the TSA who checks your genitals when you go into the airport. Not the private airlines. And that's a good thing: because in theory we have the ability to control the TSA. At least, more so than we have the ability to control any particular airliner.
The counter argument is that businesses should be expected to conduct their business such that they do not need to call on the police to use force. Especially if, by escalating to police, they are effectively avoiding the inherent costs of doing business.
In this case, they could have offered another $1,000 apiece to get those last two volunteers, but there's no need to do that when you can just call the cops to drag passengers off the plane at no cost.
Likewise, Wal-Mart has been widely criticized for not taking any steps to manage or problem-solve any issues in their stores, instead just relying on calls to police.
I have severe doubts that more money would solve the issue. The flight didn't cost more than $200 one way.
Calling the police worked for 3 of the four passengers. There was just one last guy who continued to refuse even after getting his nose busted.
Its as if you think you have an entitlement to fly or something. Aside from the costs you put up for your ticket (and a little bit more to pay for the hassle of getting off the plane), I think the 400% of ticket cost cap is very reasonable.
>its as if you think you have an entitlement to fly I think the 400% of ticket cost cap is very reasonable Isn't this what a ticket is? In any other business, once you buy something it's yours unless someone buys it from you.
> I think the 400% of ticket cost cap is very reasonable
If some one needs to conduct important business then making 600 extra dollars isn't enough to incentivize that person to give up their seat. Making it a percentage of the flight cost is arbitrary because it's not related to the amount of your time they are wasting or your opportunity cost of not taking that flight.
I also think you are greatly underestimating the power of the dollar. As others have said, a few hundred dollars more, and I feel confident that multiple volunteers would have come forward. Also, they might try offering actual cash instead of vouchers.
To be clear, the situation would also have been entirely different if they had dealt with it BEFORE they fully boarded the plane. It would have been much easier to find volunteers and deny boarding if needed when everyone was still in the terminal.
> 10.Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
As far as I can see, Dr. Dao is in the custody of Law Enforcement. Its pretty damn clear from the video that Law enforcement is removing Dr. Dao from the plane.
---------
Come on man, its trivial to come up with easy ways to meet a legal document. The document is written in all sorts of ways to remove passengers and keep United in the right.
IE: You are typically under (limited) Police Custody during a Breathalyzer test. Although the details of this custody vary from state to state, the fact of the matter is you are NOT free to leave and your rights are restricted.
In any case, Dr. Dao is obviously under Police Custody. Now the officer was probably wrong for putting the man under custody, but its clear that the Officer is dragging the man out of the Plane, and that Dr. Dao is not allowed to freely go about his business.
The Officer probably didn't follow his proper duties at 3:30am (and his suspension from the Police Force indicates that something wrong happened from a Police perspective). But regardless, Dr. Dao is CLEARLY under Police Custody at the time. At least, now that we know the man dragging Dr. Dao out of the plane was an officer.
Normally, you're supposed to show your badge and give Miranda Rights (proper procedures and everything). But needless to say, there were a lot of mistakes made at that time. IMO, most of them seem to be Police-level mistakes however and not necessarily United Airline's problem. (Despite what the court of Public Opinion believes...)