Some Misunderstanding

So, I'm a pretty smart guy.

 

(Oh boy, here we go….)

 

Oh stop. I am and you know it. I've been the beneficiary of: a good education, from kindergarten on up through my masters and doctorate degrees; nearly twenty years of occupational education and experience; and a helluva lot more life experience than for which I desire to claim ownership. So, yeah, I'm a pretty smart guy.

 

(*sigh* Fiiiiiiine. We'll ask – so?)

 

So… Even though I'm a pretty smart guy, there are just some things I will never understand. Take, for example, the recent debacle on a United Airlines flight wherein the airline overbooked a flight by four and demanded that four passengers, paying passengers, give up their seats for four United employees who needed to get to their destination in time for their next assignment. There is so much with this I don't understand. First: If the plane was already full why did you overbook in the first place? I get that the airlines will gamble that some won't make their flight, will cancel, etc., but that didn't happen in this case. So you're kicking paying customers off to accommodate employees? Employees, from what I understand, that could have been driven to their destination instead of flying. So… do I understand why this became an issue in the first place? No.  

 

Secondly, when no one volunteered, shockingly, the airline randomly selected four people to get booted from the flight, one of which was a doctor that claimed he needed to return home for his patients the next day. So instead of finding someone else, or bumping up the airline credit to entice people, what do they do? They have the police come aboard and forcefully remove the man from the plane. Based on interweb video, the man may or may not have been knocked unconscious, and was definitely bloodied in the process.

 

Forcibly removed from a seat he paid for. Violently removed.

 

No, I don't understand that.

 

BUT….

 

Here's the thing: It may not be just, but resisting authority in such a case is going to get you nowhere. In this case, it got a man possibly concussed and injured. Was what they did right? Not by any means. Should it have come to that, though? No, I don't think it should have come to that in the first place.

 

If a cop comes aboard the plane and tells you to move, you move, end of story.  

 

This may seem callous, but I also don't understand why people exacerbate situations unnecessarily. Now, I don't know all the facts, but it seems from the reports that the doctor had booked this flight intentionally, i.e. he didn't get bumped from another flight, nor did he get rescheduled to take that flight. So, knowing that there are often delays with flights, I don't understand why he cut so close if he knew you had to get back for patients.

 

I know, I know, there's probably about a dozen and a half different variables about which I don't know, but seriously…

 

If a cop says move, move.

 

Repeating my sentiment: this in no way justifies the police officer's actions.

 

The ultimate question is this: Was United entitled to kick the guy off the flight?

 

The answer:

 

Yes.

 

(Wait, what?)

 

Any time you fly, you're bound by the Contract of Carriage for the airline. In this case, United's Contract of Carriage specifically says "If a Passenger is asked to volunteer, UA will not later deny boarding to that Passenger involuntarily unless that Passenger was informed at the time he was asked to volunteer that there was a possibility of being denied boarding involuntarily and of the amount of compensation to which he/she would have been entitled in that event. The request for volunteers and the selection of such person to be denied space will be in a manner determined solely by UA."

 

Passengers were so informed, no one volunteered, and then United chose randomly. Does it suck? Yes. Do I understand such a shitty policy? Not really, but he agreed to it when he bought his ticket.

 

Do I understand why he was upset? Of course.

 

 Do I understand why he'd put himself in a position to be physically removed from the plane? No. That's just stupid on his part. Again, not justifying, but…

 

This is the second big airline story to hit recently, the other being an airline's enforcement of its dress code for stand-by fliers flying on the special passes. Two young girls were initially refused boarding because they were wearing leggings, against the stand-by policy. Annnnd here's what I don't understand:

 

An airline employee was letting people fly on passes. Why didn't the employee tell them about the dress code? And if he/she did, why didn't they follow it?

 

Do I understand such a policy, especially as applied to ten year old girls? Not really, but…

 

But.

 

I don't understand the sense of entitlement. There are rules. Are the rules stupid sometimes? Yes. Do you still have to follow them? Yes! Are you entitled to break them because they're being applied to you?

 

Uh, no.

 

I just don't get it.

 

Of course, I also don't understand why women feel the need to take pictures of their feet and post them on social media, either. *gross*

 

(You have issues.)

 

Duh.

 

But, like the sage poet Phil Collins once said, there must be some misunderstanding….

 

(There must be some kind of mist…sonofbitch. Now I'll be singing Genesis all day.)

 

You're welcome. Fly safe, dear readers. And follow the rules, would you please?

 

© 2017 J.J. Goodman. All rights reserved.