由买买提看人间百态

boards

本页内容为未名空间相应帖子的节选和存档,一周内的贴子最多显示50字,超过一周显示500字 访问原贴
USANews版 - UA完全不把乘客当人,律师眼里躺赢的案子
相关主题
不要再说overbook了United强行拖行亚裔医生下飞机
这次UA事件的本质以及这次UA要是赢了的话Foxnews首页:THIS IS WRONG! United blasted after man forcibly dragged from seat
一直听说UA员工福利很好UNITED拽乘客下机,也看看媒体的嘴脸
医生说是要回去上班,应该是突破口。医生这回告几百万应该没有问题吧?
UA在ord的overbooking臭名昭著不懂,为啥不让ua employee 下去呢?
航空公司为什么要超售机票?如果1972年关于机票超订的高院判决是没赔钱
Southwest网站对overbooking, involuntary denied boarding 的解释这个案子UA输了, 我家以后就没钱出门了。
最近的DELTA OVERBOOK飞机上赶一家人下飞机ua说不是overbooked了
相关话题的讨论汇总
话题: reserved话题: confirmed话题: boarding话题: seats话题: did
进入USANews版参与讨论
1 (共1页)
h*********n
发帖数: 11319
1
现在还在扯jb蛋“超售”的都是他妈的UA枪手
专业民事律师眼里这根本就是躺赢的case
FW: Lawyer here. This myth that passengers don't have rights needs to go
away, ASAP. You are dead wrong when saying that United legally kicked him
off the plane.
法律上,航空公司没有权力无故把就座的乘客赶下飞机
1. 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.
法律规定航空公司雇员的优先级低于付费旅客
2. 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.
航空公司无权要求对没有危害飞行安全的旅客动用武力
3. 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
a**********2
发帖数: 3726
2
Re.
1 (共1页)
进入USANews版参与讨论
相关主题
ua说不是overbooked了UA在ord的overbooking臭名昭著
Overbook rule needs to go航空公司为什么要超售机票?
梳理一下美联航事件的一些争议要点Southwest网站对overbooking, involuntary denied boarding 的解释
联航事件的最好结果最近的DELTA OVERBOOK飞机上赶一家人下飞机
不要再说overbook了United强行拖行亚裔医生下飞机
这次UA事件的本质以及这次UA要是赢了的话Foxnews首页:THIS IS WRONG! United blasted after man forcibly dragged from seat
一直听说UA员工福利很好UNITED拽乘客下机,也看看媒体的嘴脸
医生说是要回去上班,应该是突破口。医生这回告几百万应该没有问题吧?
相关话题的讨论汇总
话题: reserved话题: confirmed话题: boarding话题: seats话题: did