Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sluissa]

The funniest part about it all is that they got into it by being so damn cheap. If the figure they'd tossed around that Sluissa was talking about had been $8000 instead of $800, they'd have had volunteers biting their hand off, and it'd have cost them much, much less than all this shitshow.

There's a cap of $1300 or so. Don't ask me why there's a legal limit to how much they can offer, but there is.

Legal limit is on how high the minimum they have to offer a passenger can rise. They CAN pay as much as they want, but they don't have to legally go over that $1300 amount.

[smjjames]

And the CEO's 'apology' which sounded like he was apologizing to his shareholders for having to re-book passengers, certainly doesn't help things.

[sluissa]

And the CEO's 'apology' which sounded like he was apologizing to his shareholders for having to re-book passengers, certainly doesn't help things.

He was wording things carefully to avoid admitting fault. There is no fault on UA's part, so I don't blame them there.

[Criptfeind]

And the CEO's 'apology' which sounded like he was apologizing to his shareholders for having to re-book passengers, certainly doesn't help things.

He was wording things carefully to avoid admitting fault. There is no fault on UA's part, so I don't blame them there.

I mean, no fault other then the situation as a whole, which they totally caused with shitty booking practices. So. Only all the fault actually.

Also I don't feel any sympathy with the argument that ohhh, 800 is the minimum required by law so it's perfectly okay that that is what they offered. That's pretty bullshit. They gamble with peoples times in an effort to squeeze out every last cent they can with their booking practices, when this gamble turns out against them they should be the ones to pay whatever the require costs are to satisfactorily resolve the situation. Their passengers shouldn't be paying in blood for gambles they make for money.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Guy refused a legal order by 3 police officers. Guy gets beat down. Nothing surprising. I hope he spends a night in jail for public disturbance.

Bow a little deeper, I don't think you've quite GOT ON THE GROUND enough to tickle every cop in America's compliance fetish.

Honestly. If this is the kind of society we're going to have, where the letter of the law is given preference above all else and a reflexive need for controlling people is lauded, we're all fucked. There is some serious sickness in the way we all treat each other if anybody can look at this incident and think "gg, should'a complied, not sure what you expected".

[smjjames]

Honestly though, they didn't do anything legally wrong.

That the law is fucked up is a whole other issue.

Legally, true (though the officer may be in trouble), but in the court of public opinion (and relations), they've majorly screwed up.

They're definetly at fault for choosing to go the route that they did though.

[nenjin]

Yeah, airlines have been overbooking for decades now because they'd rather kick people off a plane or put them on a different flight than they asked for, just to avoid losing even a single seat worth of revenue.

Add to the fact they're too fucking cheap to put their own employees on a different flight, or use a smaller craft to get employees where they need to go....

But this basically reaffirms American business policy. You have the right to pay money, and get off the fucking plane. Anything in between is the sole purview of the company. Because fuck consumers. "Just go to a different airline then" pro-business people will say, as though you will ulimately get treated any different anywhere else.

Also: I've been flying at least once a year since I was 13 or so, about 6 times a year in the last 5 years. I've watched many instances of airlines overbooking and trying to bribe people into getting off the plane. I've never actually seen them eject someone from a plane though because they needed space. I wonder if some higher up policy has changed, or if whoever was in charge at United Airlines that day just went fucking ballistic.

[sluissa]

Guy refused a legal order by 3 police officers. Guy gets beat down. Nothing surprising. I hope he spends a night in jail for public disturbance.

Bow a little deeper, I don't think you've quite GOT ON THE GROUND enough to tickle every cop in America's compliance fetish.

Honestly. If this is the kind of society we're going to have, where the letter of the law is given preference above all else and a reflexive need for controlling people is lauded, we're all fucked. There is some serious sickness in the way we all treat each other if anybody can look at this incident and think "gg, should'a complied, not sure what you expected".

There becomes a necessity for people to follow procedure and authority when you start cramming hundreds into a small aluminum tube and shoot them into the air. To quote Firefly: "You ever see cattle stampede when they got no place to run? It’s kinda like a meat grinder." People MUST follow procedure and authority in these situations. There is no argument to be made otherwise.

[Shazbot]

Muslim blowing Christians up on a holy day in a church: Meh. Muslim runs down people in a truck including an 11 year old girl: Meh. Guy refusing to give up his seat is dragged off a plane: INTERNATIONAL OUTRAGE!!!!!!! WTF UNITED IS EVIL!!!!!!

Can we talk about important subjects and not a drama queen who pulls the same limp-limb trick a four year old uses?

[Max™]

I think presuming tear gas exists because your dad is a racist is a bit of a stretch. Unless your dad was a Frenchman in WWI and he was racist against Germans, or your dad was black and wanted to gas all the whities in the 1932 Bonus Army.

My dad was a psycopath and happily enough is dead, but I don't think it's a stretch to argue that specific exceptions pushed for largely by the US during a period when those sorts of exceptions were largely desired in response to events which one could largely call "the civil rights movement" means one could largely pin the justification on racist boomers. Water hoses and rubber bullets didn't need an exception to avoid being classified as a Geneva or CWC violation, after all, else I am arguing they would have them too.

[nenjin]

Muslim blowing Christians up on a holy day in a church: Meh. Muslim runs down people in a truck including an 11 year old girl: Meh. Guy refusing to give up his seat is dragged off a plane: INTERNATIONAL OUTRAGE!!!!!!! WTF UNITED IS EVIL!!!!!!

Can we talk about important subjects and not a drama queen who pulls the same limp-limb trick a four year old uses?

Someone got triggered.

[Frumple]

... y'know, I think it's been a bit since I noticed someone busting out the "it's not literal murder so you shouldn't care" argument. Weird thing to remember not running into for a time, now that I think about it.

[Folly]

Even Hitler did not use chemical weapons.

/facepalm

[Strife26]

Even Hitler did not use chemical weapons.

/facepalm

He ain't wrong. Chemical weapons weren't used against military forces in WW2, despite pretty much everyone having the capability.

[Draignean]

Even Hitler did not use chemical weapons.

/facepalm

Oh. Um. Dear me.

Which rule is it that everything inevitably gravitates towards Hitler?

There is a report of poison being used at the battle of Kerch, and a cursory look around shows that German's would have used nerve gas if they could- they were just too afraid of hurting their horses.