United Airlines takes seat away from child, forces him to sit on moms lap | Hacker News Reader

United Airlines takes seat away from child, forces him to sit on moms lap

m.sfgate.com

44 pointsfergbrain23 comments

I haven't flown United since the David Dao incident. Anecdotally, most international airlines are orders of magnitude better in terms of quality of service, cleanliness, flight crew friendliness, and so on. As a person of color, the latter attributes are quite important for me, since I'd rather not get singled out for wilful mistreatment on a transatlantic flight.

Delta has been good to me so far over the years.

"We are providing compensation as a goodwill gesture."

As a "goodwill" gesture?? This makes it sound like she is lucky they might be providing any sort of compensation at all to her. Seems to me that she is due a full refund, since her son was not able to use the seat that she paid for. I don't think the article reveals the age of the child, as I think that would provide some bearing as to the airline's responsibility to provide full refund or not? Once again, airlines (or is it just United) making boneheaded decisions.

"Once again, airlines (or is it just United) making boneheaded decisions."

This is a United problem. I've refused to fly them for several years now (and even paid more because of it). I'm not surprised this happened again. Their employees simply do not care about passengers, period.

I suspect this is a cultural issue mixed with some self-preservation because of the merger.

Needless to say: I will continue to not fly with them.

Article does mention the child is 2 years old; not sure if that changes the scope of their refund policy/responsibility. However, I would imagine that if this mother wanted to hold the child in her lap for the duration of the do flight, she presumably would not have purchased an extra $1000 ticket. I imagine they'll for sure give her a full refund and then some after the media flack, whilst still making it seem like their actions were acceptable.

Parent of 3 kids that fly a lot here. Airlines force you to buy a full seat as soon as your child turns 2. This woman was most likely forced to buy a full ticket for her child.

This is properly inacceptable. I don't understand why this woman complied.

I would not have in her situation and would have made a terrible scene had I been asked to relinquish a seat I paid for.

Except, that mother almost certainly knew of the recent excesses of violence played out on behalf of, if not explicitly the direction of, United Airlines, and made a judgment call about reducing risk that her child would be beaten up by a cop or air-steward (or that her child would be taken from her in a strange city if she were arrested).

As much as United shed crocodile tears over the David Dao beat-up incident, the more power-hungry / Milgram-normalized flight crews probably secretly appreciate the implicit threat of violence that now accompanies their seating suggestions.

United better hope that the child in question was under the age of 2. If the child is 2 (or older), that's a clear violation of 14 CFR 121.311. It's unlikely that the air crew will face a suspension, but United is likely to be fined if the kid was over 2. (From the picture, it sure looks like they were.)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/121.311

I wonder if the downturn in customer focus is correlated to the end of ESOP, or whether it's irrelevant.

It seems as if at least some of the employees just don't excercise common sense in sensitive situations.

FWIW, other sites are reporting they are indeed refunding the child's ticket and more.

http://fortune.com/2017/07/05/united-airlines-shirley-yamauc... http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/35811846/hawaii-teacher-f... http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/united-airlines-forces-m... http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2017/07/05/united-airlines-giv...

Even so, their self-congratulatory attitude that refunding a customer because they were unable to deliver the service purchase is somehow them offering "goodwill" shows an astounding level of cynical arrogance.

Oh, by no means am I endorsing it as being sufficient. I just wanted to update the info since I know some people read only the comments on submissions.

On a side note...

> The FAA recommends havinga child strapped into a seat for the duration of a flight.

...have the people who wrote that _ever_ flown with a toddler? I mean, yeah, I agree, but good luck with that!

If the child is 2 or more years old, the FAA doesn't merely recommend that they have a seat, it requires it.

Oh believe me, I know; we visited as many family members as we could before my son hit the cutoff. Doesn't mean they stay in that seat though, they're still all over the place.

Back in 2009: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Breaks_Guitars

"Rob Bradford, United's managing director of customer solutions, telephoned Carroll to apologize for the incident and to ask for permission to use the video for internal training. United claimed that it "hoped" to learn from the incident, and to change its customer service policy accordingly"

Didn't help apparently

In the last 30 days, I've flown international on 4 airlines... United, Alaska, China Eastern, and Korean Air.

United was easily the worst, Korean was easily the best.

China Eastern wasn't great either - yet it still had better customer service, amenities, and a more comfortable seat and landing.

korean is also the only airline i've ever flown where i thought the food was good (not just "good for airline food", which a handful of other airlines do manage, but good as in i'd have been happy to eat it at any time)

i'd add Swiss Airlines to that list too! sadly you don't really have much choice of destination if you're flying Swiss

I thought Malaysia Airlines had pretty good food.

Singapore Air has quality meals IMHO.

From my experience, Dubai Air has the best food I've ever had on an airplane, bar none. Korean Air and Asiana also have good food, as long as you choose the Korean meal. Their western meals are sometimes hit-or-miss.

Turkish also has good food.

I don't think it's coincidental that Korean is rarely the cheapest ticket. And they have the worst frequent flyer rewards program.[1] They were one of the latest to have a co-branded credit card, I think. In other words, they focus on a consistent, quality product, without trying to hide the ball.

I think they've begun adding more frequent-flyer frills, which I expect to be detrimental to overall quality. I don't doubt it'll boost revenue. They have a long way to fall and hopefully they'll stop short of mimicking the typical industry model.

[1] They're part of SkyMiles but given their point valuations I never found it worthwhile to upgrade. It's been a few years since I cared to check, though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com