Slashdot Mirror


Why Do Airlines Overbook? (bbc.com)

From a report on BBC: A common overbooking problem on a United Airlines flight on Sunday ended with a man being bloodied and dragged from his seat and an already troubled airline earning more bad press. How did it all go so wrong? Overbooking on flights happens all the time. Empty seats cost airlines money, so they offset the number of passengers who miss flights by selling too many tickets. In this case, the problem arose because United decided at the last minute to fly four members of staff to a connection point and needed to bump four passengers to make way for them. When there's an overbooking issue the first step is to offer an inducement to the passengers to take a later flight. [...] Of the 613 million people who flew on major US carriers in 2015, 46,000 were involuntarily denied boarding, according to data from the Department of Transportation -- less than 0.008%.

35 of 575 comments (clear)

  1. Mile high club by Quakeulf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They all wanna do it but they don't wanna be caught doing it.

  2. Because it is profitable to do so by H3lldr0p · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's the beginning and the end of this conversation.

    The only way to get airlines to stop doing it is to make it unprofitable to do so either through fines and/or regulations which increase the compensation for those bumped from flights to the point where it's not worth it to do.

    1. Re:Because it is profitable to do so by Luthair · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A suggestion I put in one of the other versions of this story - require airlines to get volunteers and place no limit on compensation. The issue here is that there is a power imbalance and its in the financial interest of the dominant party to take advantage of the weaker.

      By removing the compensation limit and requiring volunteers we return balance to the situation and make it a free market. If it occasionally costs $20000 for someone to volunteer then airlines will be more careful about overbooking and people being bumped won't be complaining as they got an amount they're happy changing their plans for.

    2. Re:Because it is profitable to do so by queequeg1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      It looks like there actually is a maximum ($1,350).

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/cf...

    3. Re:Because it is profitable to do so by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is nothing to stop an airline paying more compensation. Take this case:
      http://heelsfirsttravel.boardi...

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    4. Re:Because it is profitable to do so by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes... but there's no incentive. Essentially the airline is allowed to say "No takers for $1,349? OK, well, in that case we're kicking off the four people we don't like the most, and they each get $1,350. Unless you paid less than 1/3 of that for your ticket, in which case we're giving you just 3x the value of your ticket (yeah, the limit isn't even $1,350, it's 3x the value of your ticket capped at $1,350.)

      What baffles me is that United didn't even do that. Passengers said the largest offer they heard was in the hundreds.

      Yes, they can offer more, but it's PR at that point. The law has been written to favor the airlines - which, incidentally, means that the apologists are sorta right, the entire thing was almost certainly legal. Not moral "because it's the law" as the apologists claim, just technically legal, and Mr Dao is probably screwed.

      United had a moral obligation to solve its mistake peacefully. The fact it didn't, and the fact it's totally legal that it didn't, means we need to reform the law. End the cap: nobody should be forced to give up their seat on an overbooked flight.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    5. Re:Because it is profitable to do so by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What baffles me is that United didn't even do that. Passengers said the largest offer they heard was in the hundreds.

      I travel for business a lot and often run into the overbooking situation - my company uses Delta, and the most I've seen offered was 1000 "delta" dollars. So, not even cash, but only good for future flights with tons of restrictions. As I've said in other posts, there should be no such thing as involuntary bumping - the airlines should have to keep upping the offer until they have enough volunteers.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
  3. Numbers by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    46,000 were involuntarily denied boarding, according to data from the Department of Transportation -- less than 0.008%.

    It may be less than 0.008% but it's still forty six thousand human beings.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Numbers by cob666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      46,000 were involuntarily denied boarding, according to data from the Department of Transportation -- less than 0.008%.

      It may be less than 0.008% but it's still forty six thousand human beings.

      Also, denied boarding is a whole different ball game than being physically removed from the plane after already boarding. United should have either offered more compensation until somebody took the bait or they should have bumped one of the 4 UA employees that wanted to fly. I hope the guy that was dragged from the plane has a basis to sue because what happened is not OK.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
    2. Re:Numbers by MBGMorden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's good, and MOST of the time I'd happily be willing to accept a delay too. However, there are people who may be flying somewhere for a funeral. They may absolutely have to be back at work the next day or face termination. As the man in the latest United scam claimed (maybe truthfully, maybe not), they may be a doctor that has patients they must attend to.

      The bottom line is that is there is something inherently just not right about a business being able to sell you a ticket on a plane that is taking off but then deny you a seat on that plane because they sold too many of them.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    3. Re:Numbers by freeze128 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The airline was offered $400 for each volunteer to give up their seat. After there were no takers, they upped it to $800. I assume they mean $800 + a ticket refund. There are regulations in place that increase the dollar value the longer the passenger has to wait for another flight. But at that point, I have to ask, "Couldn't the airline just send the employees to the destination using ANY OTHER MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION for that much money?"

    4. Re:Numbers by omnichad · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then maybe the captain should be charged with the assault if you want him to be responsible. Removing someone is not the same as giving them a concussion and a number of other injuries.

    5. Re: Numbers by jabuzz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That correspondent is almost certainly wrong in law. The pilot has to have a valid legal reason for asking you to leave, which in this case he did not. Yes you can be arbitrarily denied boarding, but he was already boarded and addition the bumbing was for United employees not paying customers so bumbing him from the plane was a breach of contract, and up till the point he was forced off he was not disruptive. Being a pilot does not give you god like powers.

      The most obvious was I can explain it would be if the pilot had come out and said get that black bastard of my plane to a person of African descent. Still think that would be legal?

  4. Market failure by sinij · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Flying is an awful experience these days because market drives price optimization above anything else. A lot of it is driven by "find cheapest" aggregators and "you must fly cheapest" corporate policies. This is actually not in the best interest of consumers. Actually, vast majority of consumers would be better off with slightly more expensive but consumer-focused service.

    Security theater at the airports, outrageous fees, cramped seats, inadequate cleaning between flights. Why would anyone fly unless they absolutely had to?

    1. Re:Market failure by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why would anyone fly unless they absolutely had to?

      Because it usually works out just fine, and it's so incredibly fast compared to driving. Days turn into just a few hours. Fewer hotel nights means it's cheaper than driving too, sometimes enormously so.

      If you're rich and can afford to drive everywhere because you don't mind more nights in hotels and there's no limit to the time you can be away, I understand why you don't fly. But when you look down on jetsetters, you're being an insensitive snob.

      We jump through hoops like trained animals, no longer having the dignity of humans, and now from this story we see that it's unreliable and a carrier might not keep its word. Yet even still, it comes out on top. Look at it this way: Airplanes were such a great technological advancement, that we'll put up with so much bullshit.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  5. Not an overbooking incident by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Overbooking incidents are resolved at check-in counters. This is an incident of someone being removed from a plane to make way for employees. Not only is this not overbooking, but it's also a mindbogglingly dickish move by an airline to de-board someone already sitting and expecting to reach their destination, even more dickish that it wasn't voluntary at all.

    I really wish I could boycot United, but as have already done so for years there's not much more I can do. Frankly these types of incidents only seem to happen with one carrier over and over again.

    Last time I checked in at a KLM service desk they told me they were overbooked and they gave me the choice of flying 30min later and paid me €200 for my troubles. Quite a different response then "these people will need to get off the plane to make space for an employee of ours".

    1. Re:Not an overbooking incident by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Informative

      They did supposedly offer $400, then $800 reimbursement. No one took them up on it.

      The mildly moronic part was not offering more money or saying "We're going to all sit here until someone gives up." The stupid part was choosing someone at random and demanding he give up his seat without listening to whether he absolutely needed to get back or had some flexibility. "I'm a doctor and I have patients I need to tend to" is a pretty fucking good excuse. Find some retiree or some asshole who sells cars or does computer stuff.

      The part that was stupid even for a US airline company was using force to get him off rather than choosing someone else. The airline isn't his parents, the point shouldn't be to teach him to obey.

    2. Re:Not an overbooking incident by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Overbooking incidents are resolved at check-in counters. This is an incident of someone being removed from a plane to make way for employees. Not only is this not overbooking, but it's also a mindbogglingly dickish move by an airline to de-board someone already sitting and expecting to reach their destination, even more dickish that it wasn't voluntary at all.

      Exactly. People keep labeling this is an overbooking issue, but it's questionable whether that's really the case at all. And even if it was, it's likely that they didn't have the authority to remove him anyway.

      Airlines have been granted limited authority by the Department of Transportation to deny boarding to confirmed passengers when they're overbooked. As you said, that sort of issue is handled at the check-in counter at the time of boarding, but if all of the confirmed passengers had already boarded and were in their seats, it should be self-evident that the plane wasn't overbooked, given that everyone was already in their seats. Moreover, even if the plane was overbooked, they still wouldn't have the authority to remove people from the plane, meaning that their only recourse would be to deny boarding to the passengers who hadn't boarded yet, namely their four employees. And really, that should have been their choice anyway, given that none of the employees needed to be at the destination until the next day and the destination was just a four-hour car ride away.

      That the police went along with this is also appalling, given that they're supposed to be the sane ones who actually enforce the law. Yes, I know it's naive, but I've seen plenty of videos of law enforcement officers who've refused to obey whatever the hell a pissed off TSA agent is screeching at them to do, and have instead helped the passengers or visitors in going about their business (I seem to recall them even asking the passenger in one video if they wanted to press charges against the TSA agent, which shut that agent up immediately). What the officers did here was shameful.

  6. Re:The four seats were used by crew, how was this by HumanWiki · · Score: 5, Informative

    United should be fined hugely for this, the four removed should sue. The staff involved fired, the execs making that policy fired.

    But nothing will happen, i normally fly them, but will look elsewhere.

    Yes and it seems many others here are blindly commenting and don't understand what actually happened. This wasn't an overbooking scenario. This was a scenario where passengers had been cleared, boarded and seated. Then another flight crew needed to board to make a flight for the next day. No one volunteered, so they played Hunger Games with the passengers. One of the ones selected was a Dr that had patients to see in the morning and thus his refusal.

    United Airlines then turned in to President Snow and had a 69 year old man beaten and drug, yes, drug, (not carried as some outfits want to say), off the plane over it.

    United could have easily booked this crew later or sent them by other means. They chose to violently remove a 69 year old man like he was brandishing a weapon or threatening people.

    So, people carrying on about overbooking can get bent as that's not what happened. This wasn't denial of boarding. It was violent eviction.

    United is going to end up paying for this event, one way or another.

    The Aviation Security officer has already been placed on leave and his outfit as publicly stated his actions were not in line with their policy (re: he's f*cked).

    Now it's on to see how UA is going to handle this mess.

  7. Re:Why do airlines overbook? by Luthair · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And yet they don't refund the tickets for the people who don't show up. What other industry is allowed to sell commodities twice? Usually that is considered fraud....

  8. Fallacy by Zemran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Empty seats cost airlines money" not if those seats are already paid for. This total BS. If the seat is paid for then less weight saves them money. Overbooking is pure greed. They know the average percentage of people who will miss the flight and they overbook to make more money but sometimes the people do not miss the flight and they do not have enough seats. It is pure greed and lies. If I have paid for a seat it should not be theirs to sell again as what they normally do is just get more strict about the check in time to reject people if they are going to have a problem. You arrive at check in a minute late (I was rejected 3 minutes late once) and they get hard arsed because they already have someone sitting in your seat. They have sold it and made money from something they had already sold to you.

    --
    I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
  9. Re:Slow day in tech, then? by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, TFA is a bit off if they're referring to the United Airlines incident, since it wasn't simple overbooking (which would mean passengers would be denied at the gate). In that case it was four UA aircrew that needed to get a flight at the last minute, and UA decided that they needed someone to be voluntold off the plane itself.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  10. Re:Slow day in tech, then? by vivian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fair and most capitalist thing to do would be for the airline to simply have an in-cabin auction for your seat - have the captain announce higher and higher prices for your seat, and the first four call buttons to get pressed win the auction. (first N call buttons if a different number of seats than 4 are needed)
    Thrown in a business class upgrade and I'm sure it wouldn't take long to get a few empty economy seats, and everyone's happy.

  11. Re:Slow day in tech, then? by Khyber · · Score: 3, Interesting

    And the law actually requires a minimum of $1,350 refund for the seat if forced off. The guy was still in the right to refuse to give up his seat at any price lower than that, and the Chicago police helped United Airlines violate Federal Law.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  12. the 4 UA employees that wanted to fly by wiredog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They were crew for a flight that would be cancelled if they weren't there. What this is, in addition to a PR foulup, is a logistics screwup. The crew should have been booked on a flight already.

  13. Re:Slow day in tech, then? by operagost · · Score: 5, Informative
    $1,350 is the MAX. Here's what I found:

    If you are bumped involuntarily and the airline arranges substitute transportation that is scheduled to get you to your final destination (including later connections) within one hour of your original scheduled arrival time, there is no compensation.
    If the airline arranges substitute transportation that is scheduled to arrive at your destination between one and two hours after your original arrival time (between one and four hours on international flights), the airline must pay you an amount equal to 200% of your one-way fare to your final destination that day, with a $675 maximum.
    If the substitute transportation is scheduled to get you to your destination more than two hours later (four hours internationally), or if the airline does not make any substitute travel arrangements for you, the compensation doubles (400% of your one-way fare, $1350 maximum).
    If your ticket does not show a fare (for example, a frequent-flyer award ticket or a ticket issued by a consolidator), your denied boarding compensation is based on the lowest cash, check or credit card payment charged for a ticket in the same class of service (e.g., coach, first class) on that flight.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  14. Re:Every Overbooked Seat is Paid For Twice by Luthair · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They could have planned ahead, they could have flown them another airline, they could have chartered a private plane. They had choices.

  15. Re:Is anyone asking the real question here? by RandySmith6424 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It wasn't for a passenger. It was for 4 UA employees that needed a last minute flight somewhere.

  16. Re:The four seats were used by crew, how was this by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Aviation Security officer has already been placed on leave and his outfit as publicly stated his actions were not in line with their policy (re: he's f*cked).

    Security and police are just about never f*cked. The first rule of a police state is that you don't throw the police under the bus. They may get bad press but where the rubber meets the road, or perhaps I should say where the baton meets the suspect, they still have free rein. Virtually all suspensions result in a slap on the wrist are are in effect paid vacations.

  17. Re:Is anyone asking the real question here? by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The real question is why we let corporations use the government to enforece rules they set. In this case whe have a company using jackbooted thugs, paid for by your taxes, to abuse your peer. This is just another illustration of where power really lies. This is not a democracy. It is a corporate oligarchy.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
  18. Re:Is anyone asking the real question here? by Luthair · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They didn't get 3 volunteers - United is wording it in a misleading way by saying "voluntarily left" the other 3 people did not volunteer, they were told to leave but left without being dragged out.

  19. Re:Slow day in tech, then? by magarity · · Score: 3, Funny

    For 4000 dollars, they could have put all 4 employees on a chartered turboprop and had them in Louisville in 90 minutes.

    For the amount of the resulting lawsuit or settlement they could have bought a Gulfstream to fly the 4 employees to anywhere.

  20. Can't bump for crew by MountainLogic · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you look at https://www.law.cornell.edu/cf... you will see that you can not bump just to make room for crew:

    250.2a Policy regarding denied boarding. In the event of an oversold flight, every carrier shall ensure that the smallest practicable number of persons holding confirmed reserved space on that flight are denied boarding involuntarily.

    Obviously, IANAL, but reading the source code (the CFR), it appears they yanked this guy off to make room for flight crew. Do crew have a confirmed reserved space?

  21. Re:Why do airlines overbook? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No one except airlines WANTS THEM TO OVERBOOK, because the only entity that overbooking benefits is the carrier. Overbooking does not benefit the customer (no, overbooking does not "help them keep fares low", competition does). The obvious solution in this case was to continue offering higher and higher incentives until they reached the point where people were willing to give up their seats. Dragging a bloody paying passenger off the plane is going to end up costing them far more than just raising the offer until they got enough volunteers.

    In this case overbooking wasn't even necessarily the case. The plane was fully loaded when 4 employees showed up and told the gate agent that they needed to be on that plane, because it was the last plane to their destination that day. They weren't booked for the flight, they just showed up and said they needed to be on it. Overbooking doesn't even apply to this case. The problem is how United handled the situation, by deciding to call in the police and drag a paying customer off the plane instead of just offering whatever it took to get 4 people to agree.

    This whole whine session is silly.

    I'd like to see if you still feel that way if you decide that getting to your destination is worth more than $800 to you and instead the police come on board, bloody your mouth, and drag you off the plane.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  22. Re:Why aren't there breach of contract lawsuits? by harperska · · Score: 4, Insightful

    According to the contract, it was within UA's rights to remove the passenger from the plane. However, it was a royal PR fuckup to do it in the way that they did, and consequentially, they deserve whatever fallout comes from this.