Hacker News Reader

Comment by alehul | Hacker News Reader

> "Airlines are allowed to oversell flights. When they do, they typically offer travel vouchers to encourage some people to give up their seats. They can also bump passengers - force them off the flight - but there are rules and necessary compensation." > "Dao, who lost teeth and suffered a broken nose and a concussion."

I don't understand why we still allow overbooking when we regulate so much else in the flight industry.

Also, even with allowed overbooking, why is it not the responsibility of the airline — who initially offered travel vouchers per policy — to continually offer more until the offer is accepted? Why are they allowed to determine 'x' amount as justifiable, then forcefully remove people when the passengers disagree? Paying generously should be a penalty of overbooking, at the least.

View on HN

> Also, even with allowed overbooking, why is it not the responsibility of the airline — who initially offered travel vouchers per policy — to continually offer more until the offer is accepted? Why are they allowed to determine 'x' amount as justifiable, then forcefully remove people when the passengers disagree? Paying generously should be a penalty of overbooking, at the least.

It's actually the federal government that has determined what is appropriate for forced bumping from a flight.

* No compensation for less than one hour delay.

* 200% reward in cash for one to two hours delay.

* 400% reward in cash for two or more hours delay.

* This is all in addition to retaining your original ticket, which the airlines must continue to honor with a new flight. Or you can request a refund, though I'm unsure how that interacts with the rewards.

The vouchers are the airlines attempts to get volunteers for cheaper than the federally-mandated compensation.

https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/fly-rights#Overbo...

I thought there was something about how none of this applies once you've taken your seat. If you're seated, you can refuse to give up your seat (unless you're being removed because of your own behavior).

Some argued the contract of carriage only allows the airline to deny boarding, not to remove you after boarding. But that is a pretty narrow interpretation of the language. Plus, the airline can throw you off the plane for any reason at all, even if doing so is a breach of contract.

There is no explicit law that says you can't be asked to leave a plane you already boarded.

Incorrect. United has a contract of carriage that explicitly enumerates the circumstances in which they can remove you from the aircraft.[1] Overbooking is not one of those reasons, and there is no "catch-all".

[1] https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriag...

They can still remove you in breach of the contract. You could collect some damages, but they are allowed to do it.

A. You make it sound as if a common carrier violating its own contract of carriage is no big deal. Depending on how widespread and severe the violations are, there could be considerable repercussions from the DOT/FAA, in addition to civil damages.

B. It's no simple thing to forcibly remove someone. This is not "being asked to leave a plane you already boarded." but dragging someone out violently. If the airline is the one breaching their contract, why would the police assist in that breach?

You can read a bit more--

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/united-airlines-dr-dao-...

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43078.pdf

Typically breach of contract is no big deal. It happens all the time. Certainly, if airlines are being deceptive it starts becoming a consumer fraud issue and the government should step in.

The police wouldn't be assisting the breach, they'd be removing a trespasser. Once your invitation is revoked, you have no right to stay in a location. Having a claim for breach of contract gives you no right to try to physically force performance.

Unfortunately it's 4X, up to $1350 [1]

Which causes two problems.

1. For cheap flights, say a $200 flight, $800 compensation for possibly having to rebook for the next day is not really sufficient, particularly for business travelers, or people with time-sensitive itineraries

2. For people with expensive flights (say $1000) $1350 doesn't really cut the mustard at all.

Irrespective of the above, the airline is certainly allowed to offer more....and adding airline vouchers cost them almost nothing. They can and should do better.

[1] https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/05/27/2015-12...

Lets not forget the lobbyists that "asked" the Federal Government to put these limits in place, so the airlines could point their finger and say we're not allowed to offer more.

This was actually not an "overbooking" incident in the usual sense. United wanted the seats to move some of their own crew members (reference: http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/real-reas...).

This is my understanding as well. The "overbooking" terminology is specious PR spin.

>I don't understand why we still allow overbooking when we regulate so much else in the flight industry.

Because it's a good thing that results in a much more optimal outcome in the majority of cases. Fuller flights and travelers with flexible schedules get vouchers for other flights.

You'd have a lot more empty seats if you didn't allow overbooking. That's not good for anybody, or the environment.

begin hand waving efficiency, lower fares, it's what the market wants end hand waving

Reply on news.ycombinator.com