MAMEWorld Central >> The Loony Bin
View all threads Index   Threaded Mode Threaded  

Pages: 1

SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Nice job United
#365095 - 04/11/17 04:01 AM


Haha what a bunch of morons. PR nightmare over 1 lousy seat.



Hadou Ken
MAME Fan
Reged: 10/07/06
Posts: 48
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365099 - 04/11/17 06:02 AM


That's how greedy corporations are. So cheap and stingy.

Edited by Smitdogg (04/11/17 06:20 AM)



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Hadou Ken]
#365100 - 04/11/17 06:22 AM


What? Racism is not ok on mameworld. If you want to waste your life hating other people because they were born with a skin tone go ahead but don't drag my website into your stupidity.



gregf
Ramtek's Trivia promoter
Reged: 09/21/03
Posts: 6843
Loc: southern CA, US
Send PM


United Breaks Guitars new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365105 - 04/11/17 10:08 AM





United Breaks Guitars medley says it all since there have been numerous guitar casualties over time. I guess the airline is now underway with new marketing strategy of breaking other items.





btw: One of the entertaining moments in the movie Airplane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1Cpc8Vw-2A




RdW
MAME Fan
Reged: 02/13/05
Posts: 197
Send PM


Re: Nice job United - so what? new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365108 - 04/11/17 11:37 AM


> Haha what a bunch of morons. PR nightmare over 1 lousy seat.

http://fortune.com/2017/04/10/united-airlines-stock-passenger-dragged/

No1 really cares



Vas Crabb
BOFH
Reged: 12/13/05
Posts: 3725
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
Send PM


Re: Nice job United - so what? new [Re: RdW]
#365109 - 04/11/17 01:14 PM


> No1 really cares

Yeah, I have to agree. United already has the worst possible reputation for customer service. You only fly United when you have no other choice. This will just confirm the prevailing opinion. Also, completely unrelated, I got pneumonia flying United from LAX to Sydney.



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Nice job United - so what? new [Re: RdW]
#365113 - 04/11/17 02:21 PM


What a strange time we live in now.



Hadou Ken
MAME Fan
Reged: 10/07/06
Posts: 48
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365115 - 04/11/17 03:13 PM


Excuse me? English isn't your first language? Looked it up for you.

nig·gard
ˈniɡərd/
noun
noun: niggard; plural noun: niggards

1.a stingy or ungenerous person.

It was supposed to be a pun. No offense. Thought you were articulate. My mistake. Won't happen again.



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Hadou Ken]
#365116 - 04/11/17 03:18 PM


I knew it had at least a second, outdated by 200+ years, meaning but nobody in their right unracist mind would ever, ever ever ever use that word. It sounds exactly the same. I mean it's actually humorously close, like in Horrible Bosses 2 when they name their website "Nick Kurt Dale dot com". "Niggards" is even worse. If you use that in public good luck. Maybe look up some synonyms there Mr. Vocab.



Hadou Ken
MAME Fan
Reged: 10/07/06
Posts: 48
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365118 - 04/11/17 07:05 PM


You knew the meaning but you still cried racism where there is none. Who spells/types the n word with a "D"? You think I'm stupid? SJW much?



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Hadou Ken]
#365119 - 04/11/17 07:08 PM


> You knew the meaning but you still cried racism.

I knew it had a second meaning, wasn't sure what it was other than something negative. I'm not still calling you racist but a poor chooser of words in 2017.

>Who spells the n word with a "D"?

Lots of people spell it lots of ways. You apparently have never seen a youtube chat box.

> SJW much?

I don't know what that is.



Hadou Ken
MAME Fan
Reged: 10/07/06
Posts: 48
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365120 - 04/11/17 07:12 PM


social justice warrior
learned it from reading youtube chat boxes



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Hadou Ken]
#365121 - 04/11/17 07:15 PM


Oh yes I have heard of that. Anyway, I'm no longer calling you racist but I do think you're nuts to use that word, and if you're not then why not open up your window and start yelling it. Call a black guy it and when he gets mad just say hey stop being stingy and I'll stop saying it.



Hadou Ken
MAME Fan
Reged: 10/07/06
Posts: 48
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365122 - 04/11/17 07:20 PM


I did better. I showed him (African American) and we laughed.



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Hadou Ken]
#365123 - 04/11/17 07:22 PM


Cool head to the window now.



Haze
Reged: 09/23/03
Posts: 4367
Send PM


Re: Nice job United new [Re: Hadou Ken]
#365130 - 04/11/17 09:14 PM


> You knew the meaning but you still cried racism where there is none. Who spells/types
> the n word with a "D"? You think I'm stupid? SJW much?

It comes across as a kind of passive-aggressive racism 'I can get away with this, but I know it will piss some people off'

So yes, I think you're stupid if you expect it to be seen in any other way regardless of actual meaning.



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Just took a few hours new [Re: RdW]
#365133 - 04/11/17 11:45 PM


Looks like that was an early call, today they posted this:

http://fortune.com/2017/04/11/united-airlines-stock-drop/?iid=recirc_f500profile-zone1

Didn't end up as much though:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/uniteds...-cap-2017-04-11

We'll see if anything much comes of it but I don't know, I've heard multiple people say they won't fly with them anymore, mostly because they don't want to be forced off a flight. They should have never let people board and sit down, they know who is in the airport by the computers.



Haze
Reged: 09/23/03
Posts: 4367
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365134 - 04/11/17 11:49 PM


> Looks like that was an early call, today they posted this:
>
> http://fortune.com/2017/04/11/united-airlines-stock-drop/?iid=recirc_f500profile-zone1
>
> Didn't end up as much though:
>
> http://www.marketwatch.com/story/uniteds...-cap-2017-04-11
>
> We'll see if anything much comes of it but I don't know, I've heard multiple people
> say they won't fly with them anymore, mostly because they don't want to be forced off
> a flight. They should have never let people board and sit down, they know who is in
> the airport by the computers.

weird thing about this story is it's not even something new, I've heard of it happening in the past too, especially with the 'budget airlines'

I guess this time it made the news because somebody actually caught it happening on film?



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Haze]
#365135 - 04/11/17 11:55 PM


I don't know the answer. This is actually the first time I've heard that they force people to miss a flight. I've always assumed it was just that they pay up to a certain amount for people to give their seat up and then give up trying, and have flight attendant extras all over the place and can go 1 short on flights or 1 extra as needed according to algorhythms. Sort of how U-Haul works with trucks and trailers so you can take them anywhere and leave them there.



Tomu Breidah
No Problems, Only Solutions
Reged: 08/14/04
Posts: 6402
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365147 - 04/12/17 07:32 AM


> We'll see if anything much comes of it but I don't know, I've heard multiple people
> say they won't fly with them anymore, mostly because they don't want to be forced off
> a flight. They should have never let people board and sit down, they know who is in
> the airport by the computers.


Working at a hotel, if this was the case (getting overbooked) -- every time, the last person to show up is the one who loses out (on getting a room). The man they dragged off the plane.... You really have to wonder if someone else came aboard the plane and took his seat.

Unless United has that kind of "policy". From what I've heard, he first volunteered, but changed his mind when he found out the only other flight going to where he was going would make him late for what he needed to do. Whoever it was they had to have on that plane must've really had some pull with higher ups there at the airport.


I could type something else here, but that'd depend on knowing if that was coach, or 1st class.



cats love mameowrld | ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ CoG ɪɴ ᴛʜɪs ᴍᴀᴄʜɪɴᴇ ᴡᴇ ᴄᴀʟʟ ʟɪғᴇ. | 🎀 α 🍒 | 🍃 ♐ 🌙



TriggerFin
Gnu Truth
Reged: 09/21/03
Posts: 5082
Loc: Stuck in a hole
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Tomu Breidah]
#365149 - 04/12/17 08:11 AM Attachment: Embraer_170.jpg 109 KB (0 downloads)



> I could type something else here, but that'd depend on knowing if that was coach, or
> 1st class.

[ATTACHED IMAGE - CLICK FOR FULL SIZE]

Attachment



Tomu Breidah
No Problems, Only Solutions
Reged: 08/14/04
Posts: 6402
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: TriggerFin]
#365153 - 04/12/17 11:25 AM


So, most likely economy class....? The person that demanded they get their seat...

"I want my coach seat you g.damn maggot! Do you know who I am?! I've flown with every airline in the entire world, and this is the first time I've EVER been treated this way! Get me your supervisor! Get me the number for the president of Untied airlines, get me....." bla bla bla...


Or something like that.


eta: Also, I've seen that image, but part of the seats in economy are taken out, with an empty area there labeled 'Fight Club'.

Edited by Tomu Breidah (04/12/17 11:27 AM)



cats love mameowrld | ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ CoG ɪɴ ᴛʜɪs ᴍᴀᴄʜɪɴᴇ ᴡᴇ ᴄᴀʟʟ ʟɪғᴇ. | 🎀 α 🍒 | 🍃 ♐ 🌙



Robbbert
Reged: 08/21/04
Posts: 2459
Loc: Land of Oz
Send PM


Re: Nice job United - so what? new [Re: RdW]
#365169 - 04/13/17 02:13 AM


-



Vas Crabb
BOFH
Reged: 12/13/05
Posts: 3725
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Tomu Breidah]
#365189 - 04/14/17 07:38 AM


> So, most likely economy class....? The person that demanded they get their seat...

It wasn't a customer demanding their seat - United decided, after the customers had all boarded, that they needed to ferry four flight attendants on this plane. They kicked off four paying customers so they could ferry four of their staff.



BIOS-D
MAME Fan
Reged: 08/07/06
Posts: 1547
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Vas Crabb]
#365198 - 04/14/17 09:50 PM


> It wasn't a customer demanding their seat - United decided, after the customers had
> all boarded, that they needed to ferry four flight attendants on this plane. They
> kicked off four paying customers so they could ferry four of their staff.

I understand overbooking and removing a paid passenger from its seat is truly at fault here. But really, does that entitled spoiled child behavior some people have were any useful? Did he get to see their patients the next day? No, now he needs reconstruction surgery and excuses to demand the airline for millions (which is probably what he really wanted).

What's next? Disobeying any authority will be allowed as long as you are a minority? Are they worth to your obedience only when they're searching for flight threats on your own flight, just not when you're asked to get out not mattering the reason? Do customer complaint departments don't exist? How did he expect to disobey would work it doesn't matter what? That was some nice spectacle coming from supposedly an educated person, more like a 5 year child who doesn't want to visit a dentist.

In a fair world he would be penalized for not complying to authorized personnel orders. That is as belligerent as a criminal not stopping when asked to. So think about it the next time you get robbed but no one got caught because the criminal didn't stop. And they aren't allowed to use brute force anymore for them being citizens nor customers just like any other criminal.



Vas Crabb
BOFH
Reged: 12/13/05
Posts: 3725
Loc: Melbourne, Australia
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: BIOS-D]
#365203 - 04/15/17 03:59 AM


> I understand overbooking and removing a paid passenger from its seat is truly at
> fault here. But really, does that entitled spoiled child behavior some people have
> were any useful? Did he get to see their patients the next day? No, now he needs
> reconstruction surgery and excuses to demand the airline for millions (which is
> probably what he really wanted).
>
> What's next? Disobeying any authority will be allowed as long as you are a minority?
> Are they worth to your obedience only when they're searching for flight threats on
> your own flight, just not when you're asked to get out not mattering the reason? Do
> customer complaint departments don't exist? How did he expect to disobey would work
> it doesn't matter what? That was some nice spectacle coming from supposedly an
> educated person, more like a 5 year child who doesn't want to visit a dentist.

Why are bringing race into it? That's got nothing to do with it. And calling the customer complaints department? Don't make me laugh. At best you'll get a voucher to get a discount on another flight with the same airline so you can get screwed around again.

> In a fair world he would be penalized for not complying to authorized personnel
> orders. That is as belligerent as a criminal not stopping when asked to. So think
> about it the next time you get robbed but no one got caught because the criminal
> didn't stop. And they aren't allowed to use brute force anymore for them being
> citizens nor customers just like any other criminal.

Wait, you're equating not giving up the seat you paid for with to robbery? That's absolutely ridiculous But putting that aside, are you suggesting that you should immediately submit to your overlords even when their demands are not lawful? If no-one questions unreasonable and unlawful demands made by the authorities, they'll just keep extending their overreach.

The whole situation is ridiculous. US airlines overbook all the time - in the US you always hear calls for people willing to take a later flight due to overbooking, but you don't get this in other parts of the world. Something needs to be done about that. But this isn't even a case of overbooking and denying boarding to some passengers, it's United deciding they need to ferry staff after the passengers are seated on the plane. Whether they're within their legal rights to do this or not, there's no way this wouldn't have been bad PR. It shows that they have poor processes for managing staff availability/location, and complete disregard for their customers.

Then you've got the use of excessive force to remove the passenger from the plane. The thugs weren't even police, they were private airport security staff. You've got a real problem when your police and security guards go around acting like thugs. The passenger wasn't violent, he was just trying to contact a lawyer. There was no need to handle him like this.

I really hope this is a bit of a wake-up call for the US. US private security services have turned into gangs of thugs supporting corporate interests, and they face no repercussions when they exceed their authority or use excessive force. It's the land of the free, as long as you only care about the freedom to lick your corporate masters' arseholes.



BIOS-D
MAME Fan
Reged: 08/07/06
Posts: 1547
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Vas Crabb]
#365204 - 04/15/17 05:08 AM


> Why are bringing race into it? That's got nothing to do with it. And calling the
> customer complaints department? Don't make me laugh. At best you'll get a voucher to
> get a discount on another flight with the same airline so you can get screwed around
> again.
>

I bring the race card here because according to testimonies that was exactly the one he played for being computer chosen (because "he was Chinese" though he is from Vietnam) and before security came. Always failed rule one to being treated as equal: don't mark a distinction because you belong to a minority and expect special treatment only for that.

> Wait, you're equating not giving up the seat you paid for with to robbery? That's
> absolutely ridiculous But putting that aside, are you suggesting that you should
> immediately submit to your overlords even when their demands are not lawful? If
> no-one questions unreasonable and unlawful demands made by the authorities, they'll
> just keep extending their overreach.
>
> The whole situation is ridiculous. US airlines overbook all the time - in the US you
> always hear calls for people willing to take a later flight due to overbooking, but
> you don't get this in other parts of the world. Something needs to be done about
> that. But this isn't even a case of overbooking and denying boarding to some
> passengers, it's United deciding they need to ferry staff after the passengers are
> seated on the plane. Whether they're within their legal rights to do this or not,
> there's no way this wouldn't have been bad PR. It shows that they have poor processes
> for managing staff availability/location, and complete disregard for their customers.
>
> Then you've got the use of excessive force to remove the passenger from the plane.
> The thugs weren't even police, they were private airport security staff. You've got a
> real problem when your police and security guards go around acting like thugs. The
> passenger wasn't violent, he was just trying to contact a lawyer. There was no need
> to handle him like this.
>
> I really hope this is a bit of a wake-up call for the US. US private security
> services have turned into gangs of thugs supporting corporate interests, and they
> face no repercussions when they exceed their authority or use excessive force. It's
> the land of the free, as long as you only care about the freedom to lick your
> corporate masters' arseholes.

I couldn't agree more with that, private security is a problem everywhere and overbooking was totally at fault and the company deserves all the punishment for that. Yet it doesn't get any better for someone to stand still in the middle of a highway expecting not to be run over because everyone else must drive safe. I recall also many examples about official police forces using excessive force too. Do you want more taxes for police forces to take over airports?, fine... but that won't change anything because those who don't abide to the rules and don't respect any authority will defy any in front of them.

The flight won't take off unless 4 persons get down. You are a customer who's destiny totally depends on airport personnel orders: when to arrive, when to get on board, when to sit, when to leave your seat, where to go, how to go, etc. You aren't in your own property and totally at disadvantage because you paid to be in their hands to arrive safe. Then we have the security reasons, there's no one who can help you at thousands of feet in the air. You're supposed to comply to their orders because that was what you paid for. If you didn't like the treatment you choose another airline, put a lawsuit or demand your money back. You don't behave like a spoiled brat in front of everyone expecting the result to be any different when it's obvious that will not be the case. Let's see if you say the same when a drunk or violent passenger won't leave the plane because he paid for the seat and they can't touch him because brute force is now forbidden.

And again the airline is totally guilty and at fault, yet that doesn't excuse a belligerent customer who threw a tantrum only to get an even worse result. He doesn't deserve all the millions or thousands of dollars he will get from the lawsuit. A customer doesn't do whatever he wants, he does whatever the service he paid for allows.



Tomu Breidah
No Problems, Only Solutions
Reged: 08/14/04
Posts: 6402
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: BIOS-D]
#365205 - 04/15/17 09:31 AM


> I couldn't agree more with that, private security is a problem everywhere and
> overbooking was totally at fault and the company deserves all the punishment for
> that. Yet it doesn't get any better for someone to stand still in the middle of a
> highway expecting not to be run over because everyone else must drive safe. I recall
> also many examples about official police forces using excessive force too. Do you
> want more taxes for police forces to take over airports?, fine... but that won't
> change anything because those who don't abide to the rules and don't respect any
> authority will defy any in front of them.
>
> The flight won't take off unless 4 persons get down. You are a customer who's destiny
> totally depends on airport personnel orders: when to arrive, when to get on board,
> when to sit, when to leave your seat, where to go, how to go, etc. You aren't in your
> own property and totally at disadvantage because you paid to be in their hands to
> arrive safe. Then we have the security reasons, there's no one who can help you at
> thousands of feet in the air. You're supposed to comply to their orders because that
> was what you paid for. If you didn't like the treatment you choose another airline,
> put a lawsuit or demand your money back. You don't behave like a spoiled brat in
> front of everyone expecting the result to be any different when it's obvious that
> will not be the case. Let's see if you say the same when a drunk or violent passenger
> won't leave the plane because he paid for the seat and they can't touch him because
> brute force is now forbidden.
>


A passenger being drunk is their own fault. If they're a threat or nuisance to other paying passengers - then it is within the airlines right to have that drunkard taken off the plane or restrained in some manner. Being told you need to leave the plane and not providing some other reasonable option is on the airline. Not a good comparison. Also, it's not paying the airline to be treated as nice or shitty as they want to treat you. As a customer/passenger, you have an amount of trust you're putting into the staff. They can say "You'll need to sit here", "fasten your seatbelt" or something like "No passengers allowed in the captains cabin." "Don't attempt to open the bay doors while in flight"... Well, some things are obvious and don't need to be said. All of those are WITHIN REASON. There was no reason to resort to violence towards a person that wasn't belligerent or making a scene... The only reason for the "scene" was the actions of the security personnel. He only gets a license to be an violent asshole because of his title, or some card in his wallet. That still doesn't make what happened right.



> And again the airline is totally guilty and at fault, yet that doesn't excuse a
> belligerent customer who threw a tantrum only to get an even worse result. He doesn't
> deserve all the millions or thousands of dollars he will get from the lawsuit. A
> customer doesn't do whatever he wants, he does whatever the service he paid for
> allows.


You speak of the passenger/customer acting like a "Spoiled Brat". Yes, he did first volunteer, but it wasn't made clear that he'd be late for something IMPORTANT. Had he known that he'd be late he wouldn't have volunteered to begin with. It's within his rights to change his mind. No exceptions. Why isn't the security person labeled as a "Spoiled Brat"? Or whoever it was that gave him the order to forcibly remove the passenger? Couldn't they find anyone else to get off the flight? Why aren't the staff members that had a priority over this passenger called "Spoiled Brats"?



cats love mameowrld | ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ CoG ɪɴ ᴛʜɪs ᴍᴀᴄʜɪɴᴇ ᴡᴇ ᴄᴀʟʟ ʟɪғᴇ. | 🎀 α 🍒 | 🍃 ♐ 🌙



MooglyGuy
Renegade MAME Dev
Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 1530
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Tomu Breidah]
#365208 - 04/15/17 01:17 PM


> A passenger being drunk is their own fault. If they're a threat or nuisance to other
> paying passengers - then it is within the airlines right to have that drunkard taken
> off the plane or restrained in some manner. Being told you need to leave the plane
> and not providing some other reasonable option is on the airline. Not a good
> comparison. Also, it's not paying the airline to be treated as nice or shitty as they
> want to treat you. As a customer/passenger, you have an amount of trust you're
> putting into the staff. They can say "You'll need to sit here", "fasten your
> seatbelt" or something like "No passengers allowed in the captains cabin." "Don't
> attempt to open the bay doors while in flight"... Well, some things are obvious and
> don't need to be said. All of those are WITHIN REASON. There was no reason to resort
> to violence towards a person that wasn't belligerent or making a scene... The only
> reason for the "scene" was the actions of the security personnel. He only gets a
> license to be an violent asshole because of his title, or some card in his wallet.
> That still doesn't make what happened right.
>

>
> You speak of the passenger/customer acting like a "Spoiled Brat". Yes, he did first
> volunteer, but it wasn't made clear that he'd be late for something IMPORTANT. Had he
> known that he'd be late he wouldn't have volunteered to begin with. It's within his
> rights to change his mind. No exceptions. Why isn't the security person labeled as a
> "Spoiled Brat"? Or whoever it was that gave him the order to forcibly remove the
> passenger? Couldn't they find anyone else to get off the flight? Why aren't the staff
> members that had a priority over this passenger called "Spoiled Brats"?

Man, we seem to clearly disagree on a lot of political things, but I'm 100% with you on this one. THANK YOU for this reply. It's pretty much exactly what I was thinking.

The guy was being a "spoiled brat" by wanting to call his lawyer and figure out exactly what his legal options are? The guy was being a "spoiled brat" by wanting to get to his destination as expeditiously as possible in order to actually, y'know, help the patients he's supposed to help, because that's his job? Seriously? That's what we consider being a "spoiled brat" these days? Ridiculous.



BIOS-D
MAME Fan
Reged: 08/07/06
Posts: 1547
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Tomu Breidah]
#365210 - 04/15/17 02:21 PM


> A passenger being drunk is their own fault. If they're a threat or nuisance to other
> paying passengers - then it is within the airlines right to have that drunkard taken
> off the plane or restrained in some manner. Being told you need to leave the plane
> and not providing some other reasonable option is on the airline. Not a good
> comparison. Also, it's not paying the airline to be treated as nice or shitty as they
> want to treat you. As a customer/passenger, you have an amount of trust you're
> putting into the staff. They can say "You'll need to sit here", "fasten your
> seatbelt" or something like "No passengers allowed in the captains cabin." "Don't
> attempt to open the bay doors while in flight"... Well, some things are obvious and
> don't need to be said. All of those are WITHIN REASON. There was no reason to resort
> to violence towards a person that wasn't belligerent or making a scene... The only
> reason for the "scene" was the actions of the security personnel. He only gets a
> license to be an violent asshole because of his title, or some card in his wallet.
> That still doesn't make what happened right.
>
>
> You speak of the passenger/customer acting like a "Spoiled Brat". Yes, he did first
> volunteer, but it wasn't made clear that he'd be late for something IMPORTANT. Had he
> known that he'd be late he wouldn't have volunteered to begin with. It's within his
> rights to change his mind. No exceptions. Why isn't the security person labeled as a
> "Spoiled Brat"? Or whoever it was that gave him the order to forcibly remove the
> passenger? Couldn't they find anyone else to get off the flight? Why aren't the staff
> members that had a priority over this passenger called "Spoiled Brats"?

It's a given security guards and staff members didn't follow a proper behavior. My complain is this guy is playing the victim role and all fall for it because he is old and Vietnamese. There is also the right for the rest of passengers to take off an already delayed flight and their own reasons for not to leave the plane. So you are a doctor that needs to meet patients the next day? Big deal, everyone else could be an influencer like him that needs to save the world tomorrow too and they have to be believed only because they say so.

Now he spends three days at the hospital, and who knows how long more between surgeries and lawyers. It looks like he could in fact delay his "important" obligations without major problems after all. It's also not unheard of flights being delayed for many reasons, that should be into any person's schedule consideration. Sometimes is as simple as the weather, some others as complex as belligerent customers who won't follow authorized personnel orders and play the victim role when the situation could be handled in a civilized way from the start.

You are supposed to be in a first world country, make use of it. Where I belong cheap airlines don't give you $800USD and a hotel room, they simply kick you out and you have to look your own way. My family spent two extra days in Cancun with a family member because there weren't available seats to Mexico City.



TriggerFin
Gnu Truth
Reged: 09/21/03
Posts: 5082
Loc: Stuck in a hole
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: BIOS-D]
#365212 - 04/15/17 02:41 PM



> Now he spends three days at the hospital, and who knows how long more between
> surgeries and lawyers. It looks like he could in fact delay his "important"
> obligations without major problems after all.

Those obligations were destroyed when they dragged him off the plane. Less time doesn't restore anything, and you haven't looked at his patients to see if they've had any issues as a result.



MooglyGuy
Renegade MAME Dev
Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 1530
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: TriggerFin]
#365213 - 04/15/17 04:21 PM


> > Now he spends three days at the hospital, and who knows how long more between
> > surgeries and lawyers. It looks like he could in fact delay his "important"
> > obligations without major problems after all.
>
> Those obligations were destroyed when they dragged him off the plane. Less time
> doesn't restore anything, and you haven't looked at his patients to see if they've
> had any issues as a result.

Yeah, exactly! What the hell! We have no indication at all that he has been able to delay his obligations "without major problems at all". In fact there's no evidence whatsoever to indicate that. He could be in deep shit at his job right now, for all we know. His patients could well have suffered as a result of this. Just because the guy's personal life isn't being thrown into the public light yet - and thank fuck for that - doesn't mean that he hasn't suffered personal repercussions as a result of this.

I mean hell, BIOS-D, when a dyed-in-the-wool conservative like Tomu is on the same page as the self-described leftist, maybe it's worth considering the guy's standpoint.



BIOS-D
MAME Fan
Reged: 08/07/06
Posts: 1547
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: MooglyGuy]
#365216 - 04/15/17 06:12 PM


> Yeah, exactly! What the hell! We have no indication at all that he has been able to
> delay his obligations "without major problems at all". In fact there's no evidence
> whatsoever to indicate that. He could be in deep shit at his job right now, for all
> we know. His patients could well have suffered as a result of this. Just because the
> guy's personal life isn't being thrown into the public light yet - and thank fuck for
> that - doesn't mean that he hasn't suffered personal repercussions as a result of
> this.
>
> I mean hell, BIOS-D, when a dyed-in-the-wool conservative like Tomu is on the same
> page as the self-described leftist, maybe it's worth considering the guy's
> standpoint.

I really understand what you both mean, just because I'm blaming him doesn't mean I don't feel bad for the poor guy. Probably what gets me thrown off is this tendency some people have of making big an even bigger mess. Corporations are made of people like us, depending on how you talk to them they will talk back (most of the time, otherwise they lose customers). This would have ended differently without an adult throwing a tantrum and stand motionless while he gets dragged off like a big baby. Is it too hard to cooperate when it's obvious you're on the losing side and your removal is imminent? The other three persons removed from the flight (were they removed?) or any other recent removal didn't make it to the headlines with the same impact this guy did.

Officer: I'm just telling you, it's going to be a lot harder for you...
Dr. Dao: Yes I know that, I'd rather go to jail.


And yes, they indeed researched this guy's past right after it happened. I'm surprised at this point no one has posted their patient consequences. Probably there were none.



Allnatural
No Preservatives
Reged: 09/20/03
Posts: 924
Loc: Toledo, OH. USA
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: BIOS-D]
#365347 - 04/22/17 01:16 PM


> I really understand what you both mean, just because I'm blaming him doesn't mean I
> don't feel bad for the poor guy. Probably what gets me thrown off is this tendency
> some people have of making big an even bigger mess. Corporations are made of people
> like us, depending on how you talk to them they will talk back (most of the time,
> otherwise they lose customers). This would have ended differently without an adult
> throwing a tantrum and stand motionless while he gets dragged off like a big baby. Is
> it too hard to cooperate when it's obvious you're on the losing side and your removal
> is imminent? The other three persons removed from the flight (were they removed?) or
> any other recent removal didn't make it to the headlines with the same impact this
> guy did.
>
> Officer: I'm just telling you, it's going to be a lot harder for you...
> Dr. Dao: Yes I know that, I'd rather go to jail.
>
>
> And yes, they indeed researched this guy's past right after it happened. I'm
> surprised at this point no one has posted their patient consequences. Probably there
> were none.


I can't help but get a "if she didn't want to get raped she shouldn't have been dressed like that" vibe from that article.

I agree that his need to get home and see patients was probably not a life-or-death situation; more likely a self-important exaggeration in an attempt to keep his seat. However, it doesn't change the fact that he was a paying customer with a perfectly reasonable expectation to get home at the promised time (barring act-of-god events), and the practice of overbooking can go fuck itself.



MooglyGuy
Renegade MAME Dev
Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 1530
Send PM


Re: Just took a few hours new [Re: Allnatural]
#365348 - 04/22/17 01:54 PM


> I agree that his need to get home and see patients was probably not a life-or-death
> situation; more likely a self-important exaggeration in an attempt to keep his seat.

Meanwhile, more information has come out: The doctor in question, due to technically being a felon (not that I'd hold that against him - he's done his time), was in fact only able to see patients in an out-patient capacity once a week.

So while it's true, it may not have been a life-or-death situation, just as with anything this situation has much more nuance to it than that.



SmitdoggAdministrator
Reged: 09/18/03
Posts: 15680
Send PM


Apparently today...American Airlines flight attendant takes woman's stoller and hits her with it new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365362 - 04/22/17 08:07 PM


You couldn't make the shit up



gregf
Ramtek's Trivia promoter
Reged: 09/21/03
Posts: 6843
Loc: southern CA, US
Send PM


Re: American Airlines flight attendant takes woman's stoller (more info) new [Re: Smitdogg]
#365368 - 04/23/17 02:05 AM


In recent times, I would have guessed it was a satirical article piece by online site "The Onion", but these days nothing surprises me.

-
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/american...ancisco-flight/



American Airline Employee Challenges Passenger to a Fight after hitting women (FULL VIDEO)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7aELfjABsk
-

The video does not capture the initial moments of why the flight attendant got upset with the passenger.


*crosses fingers that Southwest airlines doesn't go downhill before taking a planned flight later this year*



More detail(s) of why things happened (ie: prior events not on captured on video).

I copied someone's post from DU political forum (ie not to be confused with our own DU ... Dumping Union ;-) in which that person had copied info from a thread post from TMZ web site.


If info is correct, the lady's (passenger) primary language isn't English, but the post that I read didn't indicate her language.....at least security wasn't involved or the security team would have treated her with the "riot act" response (ie: UAL flight incident).



--
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10141758637#post41

Sun Apr 23, 2017, 06:42 PM

TMZ posted an account of what went down based on another passenger's account of what

happened. According to that account and accounts related by other passengers included in the comments section of the article, they blamed the Mother for the incident. That response is in the exerpt below. Other passengers concurred and also reported that the mother had been told at the gate that she had to check the stroller and that they had tagged it and told her to drop it off on the ramp. Instead she took it on board with her, pushing one stroller with a baby in it down the aisle with another baby on her hip (looked like twins from the picture I saw) while pulling a second stroller behind her. The male Flight Attendant whose is in question was originally in the rear of the aircraft and saw what was happening and approached her and told her that she needed to check the stroller, (according to passengers, it was a large doublewide stroller she was dragging) and he asked her to turn around to take it back up front. She began walking back towards the front of the aircraft and then stopped and refused to go any further. That's when the FA picked up the second stroller she was dragging and took it back up to the front boarding door and put it out on the ramp.






http://www.tmz.com/2017/04/22/american-airlines-video-stroller-mother-twins-employee/#disqus_thread


From a passenger named Eric from where the incident actually happened:

I was on this flight directly across the isle from the woman filming the video. This is what I observed: 1.) woman gets on the plane pushing a car seat type stroller with one child in it, carrying a second child on her hip and dragging behind a very large folded stroller that was too big for the overhead bin or to go under a seat. 2.) the flight attendant shown in the video approached from the back of the plane and informed her in a calm manner that there was nowhere to store the stroller. The woman immediately escalated the situation and within about 30 seconds was screaming at him at the top of her lungs. 3.) the flight attendant evidently decided she was not fit to be on the flight (in my opinion the correct decision) and started to move her and her children towards the front of the plane. 4.) when they got to the front of the plane the woman decided she was not going any further. The flight attendant picked up the stroller and lifted it over his head to try and move past the woman. As he was doing this she pushed him and the stroller fell a bit and struck her in the face. She began crying loudly and dramatically. Shortly after this is where the video begins. 5.) The first class passenger then inserts himself into the drama with his faux chivalry but clearly has no idea what has transpired in the back of the plane since he was in a window seat in the first class section of the plane and could not have viewed the incident from his seat. 6.) after another 10 minutes or so the woman exits the plane only to be returned about 5 minutes later and taken to her seat. We wait another 30-40 minutes while various flight and ground crew come and go speaking to the woman. After about 40 minutes she deplanes again this time telling all of the passengers, who are now becoming vocal in support of the flight crew, that all she wanted was an apology from the flight attendant. Evidently that's what the 40 minute delay was all about. Then we waited another 10 minutes for the ground crew to find and remove her luggage from the belly of the plane. 7.) the flight finally leaves and arrives in Dallas an hour or so late. American representatives are waiting at the gate to speak with the first class passenger who made the threats. What I heard was a very apologetic tone coming from two American employees, as if the airline had done something to upset the first class passenger. 8.) when I entered the bag claim area the first class passenger was right in front of me and as soon as he made it through the revolving door there was a camera crew waiting for him on the other side to interview him. That's about as factual of an account as I can provide and I realize there may be other parts of this story that I do not know about or did not witness. From what I saw: a.) if anyone from American should have been punished it should be the ground crew who somehow letting this woman on board with a full size stroller. The flight attendant was put in a horrible situation by a passenger that most passengers in my immediate area thought seemed unstable. She escalated the situation, not him. b.) in my opinion, the first class passenger should have been removed. Had the flight been in progress he might very well have been arrested upon landing for threatening a crew member. Additionally, he could not have seen any of the back of the plane antics of the woman based on where he was seated. c.) I agree the flight attendant may have reacted too harshly in responding to the threatening customer in first class, but his actions with the woman in question were professional throughout the ordeal. I am disappointed American has chosen to punish him.

--

Edited by gregf (04/24/17 04:35 AM)


Pages: 1

MAMEWorld Central >> The Loony Bin
View all threads Index   Threaded Mode Threaded  

Extra information Permissions
Moderator:  Gatinho 
0 registered and 29 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is enabled
UBBCode is enabled
Thread views: 2054