In an actual trial I think this is the kind of situation where the defense is not to show that it was justified to remove the guy by force from the plane. Rather, the defense is to blame a different party for the failure. The passenger can't sue the entire world for what happened to him, he'll have to pick a target. If he targets the airline, they will try to frame it as a failure of the security staff. If he targets the security staff, they will try to frame it as a failure of the airline employees. Etc., etc. Arguing that the shocking violence was necessary and appropriate isn't a winning strategy. Arguing that you agree that it was awful, and that the relevant parties should be punished, and that the relevant parties are someone else, well that might work.

Right, but even then, the guy is suing both United and the Chicago Department of Aviation or whatever it's called. If you're one of those two entities, if this goes to trial, best case you're looking at a coin flip, but there's really nothing to prevent a jury from finding both parties liable. EZ game here is to settle for 7 million and get the hell out of dodge.

Yeah, agreed. The brand damage of continuing to fight this instead of just apologizing is awfully expensive.

I'd settle for 2.5M. After government and lawyers, that still leaves 1M for myself.

NRO: United Is Why People Hate Capitalism

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...m-theyre-wrong

National Review Online is a noted conduit of conservative ideology, so it's a bit surprising to read an article like this on their web site. However, the author makes a good point about why people - in the country that is supposedly the bastion of free enterprise - hate capitalism.

Add a digit. The potential market value drop is in the hundreds of millions. What happiness if it is determined the randomized negative seat selector was fixed? I am sure plaintiff can introduce past acts of bad behavior.

Neither side wants a trial especially when it is known that United is 100% going to lose. Even if United put up a valid defense, there would be riots over the confirmatory belief that for-profit-businesses can engage in violence. No juror of judge would even risk a small verdict. People would publish their addresses.

This will be confidential, non-disclosure in a month. The documents are done. It is down to "write the check" and move on from this PR disaster.

Considering that it was the Airport police that did all of the physical abuse I think United could certainly win at trial but it is still probably +EV to settle so it does not get brought up again all over the internet/media...

The first few pages itt are about as bad as human discourse can get so i'm grunching from there but lol @ United for having their max offer be an $800 voucher. If you're missing a connecting flight or even just a day of work there's no way you're taking that. You gotta keep upping your offer until somebody takes it imo.

The DR doesn't need to try and show any other problems with how he was chosen, United is going to have a difficult time proving they have a legal right to remove him from the plane once he had boarded since nothing in their contract of carriage covers what they did.

Yes, and United can't absolve themselves of liability and blame security/police. It is their plane.

Looking back though, what is United first response was, "We can't believe airport police and security did that to one of OUR passengers. That was totally uncalled for and we will be taking immediate action on behalf of our treasured passengers. Nobody comes on to OUR plane and grabs one of OUR passengers out of their seat."

You can't act surprised that eggs were broken when you order an omelet be made in your kitchen.

Very true. Saw the world through only their filter. "These are our planes and if you bothered to read the fine print, you would realize the limited rights you were granted in the contract once payment was accepted. You represent .0000001% of our daily revenue and it is of economic certitude that the seat that is ours in our plane is more valuable to our staff than is to you. Per federal regulations on forced re-accommodation, you will be receiving a ticket voucher of $1,350 to the address on file in the next 4 to 6 weeks. Good day."

The main cause of this is overreaction to 9/11 and airports and planes being turned into Civil Rights free zones. Symbiotic relationships have been formed between LE and airplane companies that dont exist in most other businesses. Companies are required to cooperate with LE to prevent terrorism and in return LE is eager to help Airlines with problem customers. I think most disputes between customers and businesses, cops are at least trying to mediate before resorting to physical action. But it seems in airports and planes, if the company wants someone removed the police immediately assume it's justified.

The tactics of overbooking and bumping people may seem shady, but it's the same thing as baggage fees and other extras. As long as most customers sort by ticket price without doing any further research, companies are gonna do these kinds of things.

Isnt this just standyby?

United is the second largest airline in the world. All they needed to do was assemble a single flight crew from anywhere reachable by their planes in essentially 16-24 hours (withstanding employment rules). This has to be super trivial and never require removing a person from a flight. They literally only needed ONE replacement employee from half the world to fly to Louisville.

In fact this stuff has to take place all the time given their size and logistics. They could have hired a limosuine to drive an employee from five hundred miles a way to fulfill this demand.

Oh screw all the above was going to figure out that Chicago and Louisville are 297 mikes apart. But I noticed they were not even making room for United employees but a partner airline.

So this happened because United had to get an employee of a partner airline 300 miles and nobody could come up with a better solution.

What you wrote is exactly why it happened. One passenger doesn't make a difference to them. One employee can serve 100 passengers.

Passengers are expendable. Employees that serve passengers are much more important.

There was never a thought of them doing something economically rationale from the passenger point of view. They just look at it as a trade-off between an employee and a passenger. Even the day after this fiasco, they never got beyond their internal view of the world. It was only when they were pounded by everyone else were they forced to make the recognition that passengers perhaps matter.

The policy is all in place. I think it is ~$1,350 credit for voluntarily leaving and then random number generator to choose the ones that are forced off. The mistake here was doing it on the plane. If this was done at the gate, there really would be no issue. It looks much different to be denied access to go onto the plane (especially if he started causing a scene) vs. being in your seat, with your seat belt on and being told to disembark.

Hey guys no worries, now that everyone has seen the video 100 times and we were just starting to move on, the "police" involved want you to know they only used "minimal and necessary" force. Just like it says in the handbook.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/201...nger/22054683/

The internet outrage machine burns white hot but burns out very quickly. Everyone is SO insanely outraged about something and then within a week or so everyone has moved on. People have short attention spans and there's always something new coming down the pipeline to be outraged about.

This social media outrage cycle passing quickly is both a good and a bad thing. Often times the hate mob is up in arms about something trivial and it passing quickly is a good thing. But sometimes it's something that people should rightfully be and stay outraged bout, but they never do.

Once you unleash the draconian security measures I don't see how you get them to stop, short of it severely impacting the airlines' bottom line. If a future congress were to roll back the security apparatus they would all lose reelection when the inevitable attack happens.

Apparently United killed the Easter bunny: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.3100979

Seriously, WTF?

Rabbits are awful pets and they should all die. Can't even imagine what a 50 pound rabbit would be like. All the aloofness of a cat with all the hassle of a dog. GOOD RIDDANCE

Good to see United rehab its image

O that poor Hare.

Despite the somber tone of events, this positively impacted my enjoyment of the day.