美國聯合航空超賣，暴力拖走機艙乘客

原來唔係隨機抽，揀中係因為依4個乘客張機票買得最平

有冇各品牌PR抽水合集

我覺得上到法庭 應該甩到身
條款係寫左就係寫左
間公司又無犯法

公司仆唔仆街 做法有無錯
之後法律洗唔洗規管 係另一回事

低能，佢非法打9佢點甩呀？

我覺得上到法庭 應該甩到身
條款係寫左就係寫左
間公司又無犯法

公司仆唔仆街 做法有無錯
之後法律洗唔洗規管 係另一回事

低能，佢非法打9佢點甩呀？

打9佢好似係police?

我覺得上到法庭 應該甩到身
條款係寫左就係寫左
間公司又無犯法

公司仆唔仆街 做法有無錯
之後法律洗唔洗規管 係另一回事

低能，佢非法打9佢點甩呀？

打9佢好似係police?

如果係職員打9佢就甩唔到

但我意思係overbooking方面

是美國人一定坐American Airlines - Casey Neistat, 2013

轉咗jet blue

原來所謂賠800USD,係800USD services coupon, 每張50USD, 每次限1張


多撚謝呀

是美國人一定坐American Airlines - Casey Neistat, 2013

轉咗jet blue

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/alaska-named-top-airline-annual-ranking-us-carriers-46704186
An aviation dean and a marketing professor ranked the 12 largest U.S. airlines by analyzing 2016 U.S. Department of Transportation figures for on-time flights, lost baggage, the number of passengers bumped off flights, and complaint rates:

1. Alaska Airlines (ranked 5th in 2015)

2. Delta Air Lines (3)

3. Virgin America (1)

4. JetBlue Airways (2)

5. Hawaiian Airlines (4)

6. Southwest Airlines (6)

7. SkyWest (7)

8. United Airlines (8)

9. American Airlines (10)

10. ExpressJet (9)

11. Spirit Airlines (13)

12. Frontier (11)

Here's the salient points

>But when there aren't enough volunteers, airlines can involuntarily "bump" confirmed passengers off the flight.

>If you are bumped in this manner, Department of Transportation rules require that you be compensated, and the compensation is generous. Indeed, in 2011 the agency doubled the eligible compensation that involuntarily bumped passengers are entitled to receive. If the airline is able to get you to your domestic destination within two hours of the original arrival time, you are entitled to a cash refund of twice the cost of the one-way ticket to a maximum of $650.

>If the involuntary bump lands you in your destination more than two hours late, you are due an amount equivalent to four times the cost of your ticket to a maximum of $1,300. The rule is the same for international flights, except that the DOT defines "short" international delays (which net up to $650) as those that get you to your destination within four hours of the original arrival time. Those that get you to an international destination more than four hours late entitle you to $1,300.

>**It's worth noting that most airlines will try to pay this fee in travel vouchers, but you can demand a check. The DOT regulation requires the airline to give you cash compensation if that's what you prefer**, Hobica said.

From Reddit

即係賠 coupons 唔係一個合理賠償方案喎
United 今鋪賠唔足
仲趕人落機
大把律師排隊幫個客打官司啦

以前係fb同到個朋友話永遠唔會搭UA,
而家知點解啦

From reddit:

First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSALES", specifically defines as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to denying boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.

其實因航真係咁差咩，我搭好多次咩事都無

大把人 未搭過淨睇東方就話cx 點差

佢個預約拿位係好 但起碼你fight，佢地係做到野，另外，佢地真係cut人cut得利害，checkin，寄倉已經玩diy，利申，上星期去新加坡

原來所謂賠800USD,係800USD services coupon, 每張50USD, 每次限1張


多撚謝呀

笑撚死
咁撚孤寒肉酸
抵啦
睇佢蝕幾千萬 心都涼埋

純粹好奇
如果各位係在場乘客
會唔會出手阻止？

老老實實，會開聲屌
但有差佬係度真係唔夠膽郁手
美國差佬你唔知佢幾時發癲

啲差佬高幾個頭幫佢打飛機就有份

話人唔郁手嘅都on9
美國黑警唔係人咁品 你估香港班鵪鶉呀？
仲要係機場黑警 十幾廿碌都有得你痞

出手阻止
Chicago PD呀
你估香港猶太人咩
全美最暴力城市之一既 Chicago
而連登仔要制服Chicago 黑警

最暴力唔係Detroit咩

原來所謂賠800USD,係800USD services coupon, 每張50USD, 每次限1張


多撚謝呀

笑撚死
咁撚孤寒肉酸
抵啦
睇佢蝕幾千萬 心都涼埋

初時以為現金，點知係啲死人terms coupon ，執左去啦

純粹好奇
如果各位係在場乘客
會唔會出手阻止？

老老實實，會開聲屌
但有差佬係度真係唔夠膽郁手
美國差佬你唔知佢幾時發癲

啲差佬高幾個頭幫佢打飛機就有份

話人唔郁手嘅都on9
美國黑警唔係人咁品 你估香港班鵪鶉呀？
仲要係機場黑警 十幾廿碌都有得你痞

出手阻止
Chicago PD呀
你估香港猶太人咩
全美最暴力城市之一既 Chicago
而連登仔要制服Chicago 黑警

最暴力唔係Detroit咩

仲有人住咩

係咪開始爆緊個事主d黑材料？

From reddit:

First of all, it's airline spin to call this an overbooking. The statutory provision granting them the ability to deny boarding is about "OVERSALES", specifically defines as booking more reserved confirmed seats than there are available. This is not what happened. They did not overbook the flight; they had a fully booked flight, and not only did everyone already have a reserved confirmed seat, they were all sitting in them. The law allowing them to denying boarding in the event of an oversale does not apply.

Even if it did apply, the law is unambiguously clear that airlines have to give preference to everyone with reserved confirmed seats when choosing to involuntarily deny boarding. They have to always choose the solution that will affect the least amount of reserved confirmed seats. This rule is straightforward, and United makes very clear in their own contract of carriage that employees of their own or of other carriers may be denied boarding without compensation because they do not have reserved confirmed seats. On its face, it's clear that what they did was illegal-- they gave preference to their employees over people who had reserved confirmed seats, in violation of 14 CFR 250.2a.

Furthermore, even if you try and twist this into a legal application of 250.2a and say that United had the right to deny him boarding in the event of an overbooking; they did NOT have the right to kick him off the plane. Their contract of carriage highlights there is a complete difference in rights after you've boarded and sat on the plane, and Rule 21 goes over the specific scenarios where you could get kicked off. NONE of them apply here. He did absolutely nothing wrong and shouldn't have been targeted. He's going to leave with a hefty settlement after this fiasco.

如果係咁 應該大把律師爭住做呢單CASE了