Well it didn't take the screamer long to get his lawyers lined up

Moron......did they ask the man to leave the seat? Yes. Did he refuse that lawful request? Yes. Did they ask him again to leave his seat? Yes. Did they give him a lawful order to leave the seat according to the law? Yes. Did he again refuse to now follow a lawful order from a law enforcement officer, enforcing the law? Yes.

You guys are morons....he knew exactly what he was doing....he is a criminal who knew he had a golden opportunity ...

Don't worry syco --- I had you in mind when I wrote that as well, not just the OP. Your voice in applauding authoritarian overreach with yelps of "yes Master may I have another" is well known around here. Any time the powerful start punching the commoner, you start drooling. We all know that.

As I said -- always instructive, rarely surprising.

To your "content" here swooning over the jackboots --- did they assault a passenger who was in the seat he paid for? Did they bloody his nose and drag him out? These are the questions you won't touch, since they stand in the way of the Rambo bedroom poster you jerk off to.

It was definitely a felony assault, no question about that. And it was over a civil matter to boot.
If true, then the officer in question will be convicted of a crime....unless Rahm's Chicago is as corrupt as many thing, then maybe not, eh?

The airline is an accomplice to the crime; like I said he wasn't committing a crime to begin with, so they had no cause to call the cops in the first place, nor have him dragged off.Federal regulations require airlines to pay 4 times the cost of the fare, or up to $1,350 as compensation; they didn't offer that, so everything is on them as well as the cops.
How was the airline an accomplice? Yes, Dao did commit a crime by interfering with both flight crew and airline operations. Part 121 airline operations are governed by strict rules. It's not Burger King and it's not Greyhound.

Since the fare was $220, 4X that amount is $880. My understanding is that's the amount offered. If not, then that's the amount Dao could have demanded in the terminal.

Maybe -- but that assumes an airline playing by its own Contract of Carriage. Whether they offered Dao or anybody else a voucher to be bumped in the terminal, i.e. consistent with their own contract, is not known and in fact moot. But when they boarded the plane and THEN started doing it, they were already operating outside the provisions of their own contract.

Still, they could request volunteers, and apparently did, and that's fine if both parties agree to the terms. Dao did not take the offer, ergo did not agree to the terms, ergo United hasn't a leg to stand on. PER ITS OWN CONTRACT.

And further, United has already admitted it fucked up. Pretty much everyone has admitted UA fucked up except you, the last dishonest hack standing, and your endless crusade to fluff a corporate cock and get it off the hook it's already hung itself on.

"In the terminal". Your term. And correct.
 
Yes Pugo, I know how it works (insert rolling eyes here).
I've never supported United in this story. They fucked up, I get it. They should have offered much more, and had they done so they would not only have had all the volunteers they needed, but they wouldn't be in this huge mess.
What I've been saying is even when you have boarded and taken your seat, once you've been selected to be removed and security and or police arrive, act like an adult and make the best of a lousy situation.
Instead, this man held on for dear life like a three year old, and not only ruined his day and made himself late, he also ruined it for everyone else aboard and made them late as well.

And what I've been saying is YOU'RE WRONG. The airline has no basis to remove already-boarded passengers for its own convenience, period.

Who says so? United Airlines says so. Their own Contract of Carriage says so.

The complete UA Contract of Carriage Rule 21:

Rule 21 Refusal of Transport
UA shall have the right to refuse to transport or shall have the right to remove from the aircraft at any point, any Passenger for the following reasons:

  1. Breach of Contract of Carriage – Failure by Passenger to comply with the Rules of the Contract of Carriage.
  2. Government Request, Regulations or Security Directives – Whenever such action is necessary to comply with any government regulation, Customs and Border Protection, government or airport security directive of any sort, or any governmental request for emergency transportation in connection with the national defense.
  3. Force Majeure and Other Unforeseeable Conditions – Whenever such action is necessary or advisable by reason of weather or other conditions beyond UA’s control including, but not limited to, acts of God, force majeure, strikes, civil commotions, embargoes, wars, hostilities, terrorist activities, or disturbances, whether actual, threatened, or reported.
  4. Search of Passenger or Property – Whenever a Passenger refuses to submit to electronic surveillance or to permit search of his/her person or property.
  5. Proof of Identity – Whenever a Passenger refuses on request to produce identification satisfactory to UA or who presents a Ticket to board and whose identification does not match the name on the Ticket. UA shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to require identification of persons purchasing tickets and/or presenting a ticket(s) for the purpose of boarding the aircraft.
  6. Failure to Pay – Whenever a Passenger has not paid the appropriate fare for a Ticket, Baggage, or applicable service charges for services required for travel, has not paid an outstanding debt or Court judgment, or has not produced satisfactory proof to UA that the Passenger is an authorized non-revenue Passenger or has engaged in a prohibited practice as specified in Rule 6.
  7. Across International Boundaries – Whenever a Passenger is traveling across any international boundary if:
    1. The government required travel documents of such Passenger appear not to be in order according to UA's reasonable belief; or
    2. Such Passenger’s embarkation from, transit through, or entry into any country from, through, or to which such Passenger desires transportation would be unlawful or denied for any reason.
  8. Safety – Whenever refusal or removal of a Passenger may be necessary for the safety of such Passenger or other Passengers or members of the crew including, but not limited to:
    1. Passengers whose conduct is disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent;
    2. Passengers who fail to comply with or interfere with the duties of the members of the flight crew, federal regulations, or security directives;
    3. Passengers who assault any employee of UA, including the gate agents and flight crew, or any UA Passenger;
    4. Passengers who, through and as a result of their conduct, cause a disturbance such that the captain or member of the cockpit crew must leave the cockpit in order to attend to the disturbance;
    5. Passengers who are barefoot or not properly clothed;
    6. Passengers who appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs to a degree that the Passenger may endanger the Passenger or another Passenger or members of the crew (other than a qualified individual whose appearance or involuntary behavior may make them appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs);
    7. Passengers wearing or possessing on or about their person concealed or unconcealed deadly or dangerous weapons; provided, however, that UA will carry law enforcement personnel who meet the qualifications and conditions established in 49 C.F.R. §1544.219;
    8. Passengers who are unwilling or unable to follow UA’s policy on smoking or use of other smokeless materials;
    9. Unless they comply with Rule 6 I), Passengers who are unable to sit in a single seat with the seat belt properly secured, and/or are unable to put the seat’s armrests down when seated and remain seated with the armrest down for the entirety of the flight, and/or passengers who significantly encroach upon the adjoining passenger’s seat;
    10. Passengers who are manacled or in the custody of law enforcement personnel;
    11. Passengers who have resisted or may reasonably be believed to be capable of resisting custodial supervision;
    12. Pregnant Passengers in their ninth month, unless such Passenger provides a doctor’s certificate dated no more than 72 hours prior to departure stating that the doctor has examined and found the Passenger to be physically fit for air travel to and from the destination requested on the date of the flight, and that the estimated date of delivery is after the date of the last flight;
    13. Passengers who are incapable of completing a flight safely, without requiring extraordinary medical assistance during the flight, as well as Passengers who appear to have symptoms of or have a communicable disease or condition that could pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others on the flight, or who refuse a screening for such disease or condition. (NOTE: UA requires a medical certificate for Passengers who wish to travel under such circumstances. Visit UA’s website, united.com, for more information regarding UA’s requirements for medical certificates);
    14. Passengers who fail to travel with the required safety assistant(s), advance notice and/or other safety requirements pursuant to Rules 14 and 15;
    15. Passengers who do not qualify as acceptable Non-Ambulatory Passengers (see Rule 14);
    16. Passengers who have or cause a malodorous condition (other than individuals qualifying as disabled);
    17. Passengers whose physical or mental condition is such that, in United’s sole opinion, they are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an escort. The escort must accompany the escorted passenger at all times; and
    18. Unaccompanied passengers who are both blind and deaf, unless such passenger is able to communicate with representatives of UA by either physical, mechanical, electronic, or other means. Such passenger must inform UA of the method of communication to be used; and
    19. Passengers who are unwilling to follow UA’s policy that prohibits voice calls after the aircraft doors have closed, while taxiing in preparation for takeoff, or while airborne.

  9. Any Passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, consents and acknowledges that he or she shall reimburse UA for any such loss, damage or expense. UA has the right to refuse transport, on a permanent basis, to any passenger who, by reason of engaging in the above activities in this Rule 21, causes UA any loss, damage or expense of any kind, or who has been disorderly, offensive, abusive, or violent. In addition, the activities enumerated in H) 1) through 8) shall constitute a material breach of contract, for which UA shall be excused from performing its obligations under this contract.
  10. UA is not liable for its refusal to transport any passenger or for its removal of any passenger in accordance with this Rule. A Passenger who is removed or refused transportation in accordance with this Rule may be eligible for a refund upon request. See Rule 27 A). As an express precondition to issuance of any refund, UA shall not be responsible for damages of any kind whatsoever. The passenger’s sole and exclusive remedy shall be Rule 27 A).

Exactly ZERO (0) of these conditions applied to Dao and his wife.



Any days or travel that were ruined --- and there certainly were ruins ---- were solely and completely the fault of United Airlines, who perpetrated the entire incident. Again --- who says so? Again--- United Airlines.

Yep, shouldn't have happened, but once they come for you, suck it up, act like an adult, get off the plane, allow others to make their destinations ON TIME. Then, start the wheels of justice by calling lawyers, United officials, etc.
Save the juvenile hissy fits for juveniles.

Juvenile hissy fit huh? Oh right, you mean like the way he swept the aisle with his back while being dragged after the goons had knocked him out and popped a couple of teeth. And the way he viciously attacked that arm rest just because he was thrown against it ---- that kind of hissyfit. Huh.

Diga me this about "hissyfits", if you please-----

--- how come you corporapologists can only argue from emotion?

I'm talking about his refusal to leave.
Act like an adult, tell the security you are angry you are being forced off, but in the end realize you are not the center of the universe. His refusal created such a scene that it escalated to a physical situation.
Grow up, make the best of it, contemplate retribution later, and allow the rest of the passengers get to their destinations.
The man is obviously a liberal, and true to form liberals are narcicistic pricks.
The City of Chicago's aviation officer was the one who escalated it to violence. The aircraft should have been deplaned along with the cockpit crew. If Dao still refused to leave, then the aviation officers would wait him out as they explained how, when he's hungry enough or has to pee, he'll be arrested.

The aviation officer-goons are acting at the behest of United Airlines. That makes them what's contractually called its servants. And that makes United co-culpable for what they did.
 
Moron......did they ask the man to leave the seat? Yes. Did he refuse that lawful request? Yes. Did they ask him again to leave his seat? Yes. Did they give him a lawful order to leave the seat according to the law? Yes. Did he again refuse to now follow a lawful order from a law enforcement officer, enforcing the law? Yes.

You guys are morons....he knew exactly what he was doing....he is a criminal who knew he had a golden opportunity ...

Don't worry syco --- I had you in mind when I wrote that as well, not just the OP. Your voice in applauding authoritarian overreach with yelps of "yes Master may I have another" is well known around here. Any time the powerful start punching the commoner, you start drooling. We all know that.

As I said -- always instructive, rarely surprising.

To your "content" here swooning over the jackboots --- did they assault a passenger who was in the seat he paid for? Did they bloody his nose and drag him out? These are the questions you won't touch, since they stand in the way of the Rambo bedroom poster you jerk off to.

It was definitely a felony assault, no question about that. And it was over a civil matter to boot.
If true, then the officer in question will be convicted of a crime....unless Rahm's Chicago is as corrupt as many thing, then maybe not, eh?

The airline is an accomplice to the crime; like I said he wasn't committing a crime to begin with, so they had no cause to call the cops in the first place, nor have him dragged off.Federal regulations require airlines to pay 4 times the cost of the fare, or up to $1,350 as compensation; they didn't offer that, so everything is on them as well as the cops.
How was the airline an accomplice? Yes, Dao did commit a crime by interfering with both flight crew and airline operations. Part 121 airline operations are governed by strict rules. It's not Burger King and it's not Greyhound.

Since the fare was $220, 4X that amount is $880. My understanding is that's the amount offered. If not, then that's the amount Dao could have demanded in the terminal.

The airlines escalated the situation; he wasn't violating any laws, and the let him board, then baited him continuously, ratcheting up the tension level on purpose; they're accomplices and just as guilty of the assault. It was a civil matter, not a criminal matter; they committed the crime here. And, they do to many others; it's a pattern with the assholes.

There are at least two jump seats in the cockpit; employees can ride there. No need to provoke passengers with paid tickets and already boarded and seated, period, end of story. these 'attendants' were just having a power trip and this uppity Asian guy refused to play' The Passive Asian' role for them, so they went spastic and wanted to show him who's boss. They only play this power game on white males and select males like Dao. They're racist bigots. They wouldn't dare play it with any other demographic, and all the 'local interest' stories played on local stations who found others they did this to show that is indeed the case; here local all four channels ran local stories, and all of them were white males, even a First Class passenger was harassed out of his seat.
 
Last edited:
The airlines escalated the situation; he wasn't violating any laws, and the let him board, then baited him continuously, ratcheting up the tension level on purpose; they're accomplices and just as guilty of the assault. It was a civil matter, not a criminal matter; they committed the crime here. And, they do to many others; it's a pattern with the assholes.

There are at least two jump seats in the cockpit; employees can ride there. No need to provoke passengers with paid tickets and already boarded and seated, period, end of story. these 'attendants' were just having a power trip and this uppity Asian guy refused to play' The Passive Asian' role for them, so they went spastic and wanted to show him who's boss. They only play this power game on white males and select males like Dao. They're racist bigots. They wouldn't dare play it with any other demographic, and all the 'local interest' stories played on local stations who found others they did this to show that is indeed the case; here local all four channels ran local stories, and all of them were white males, even a First Class passenger was harassed out of his seat.
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.
 
The airlines escalated the situation; he wasn't violating any laws, and the let him board, then baited him continuously, ratcheting up the tension level on purpose; they're accomplices and just as guilty of the assault. It was a civil matter, not a criminal matter; they committed the crime here. And, they do to many others; it's a pattern with the assholes.

There are at least two jump seats in the cockpit; employees can ride there. No need to provoke passengers with paid tickets and already boarded and seated, period, end of story. these 'attendants' were just having a power trip and this uppity Asian guy refused to play' The Passive Asian' role for them, so they went spastic and wanted to show him who's boss. They only play this power game on white males and select males like Dao. They're racist bigots. They wouldn't dare play it with any other demographic, and all the 'local interest' stories played on local stations who found others they did this to show that is indeed the case; here local all four channels ran local stories, and all of them were white males, even a First Class passenger was harassed out of his seat.
Awesome. Let's see what a judge and jury think of that....and the FAA. :D

So, do you plan on traveling by air this year? Will you be standing up for your rights or are you one of those "all talk, no action" guys?
 
188.jpg
 
The airlines escalated the situation; he wasn't violating any laws, and the let him board, then baited him continuously, ratcheting up the tension level on purpose; they're accomplices and just as guilty of the assault. It was a civil matter, not a criminal matter; they committed the crime here. And, they do to many others; it's a pattern with the assholes.

There are at least two jump seats in the cockpit; employees can ride there. No need to provoke passengers with paid tickets and already boarded and seated, period, end of story. these 'attendants' were just having a power trip and this uppity Asian guy refused to play' The Passive Asian' role for them, so they went spastic and wanted to show him who's boss. They only play this power game on white males and select males like Dao. They're racist bigots. They wouldn't dare play it with any other demographic, and all the 'local interest' stories played on local stations who found others they did this to show that is indeed the case; here local all four channels ran local stories, and all of them were white males, even a First Class passenger was harassed out of his seat.
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.
Right...because, to you, this is the same thing.
 
The airlines escalated the situation; he wasn't violating any laws, and the let him board, then baited him continuously, ratcheting up the tension level on purpose; they're accomplices and just as guilty of the assault. It was a civil matter, not a criminal matter; they committed the crime here. And, they do to many others; it's a pattern with the assholes.

There are at least two jump seats in the cockpit; employees can ride there. No need to provoke passengers with paid tickets and already boarded and seated, period, end of story. these 'attendants' were just having a power trip and this uppity Asian guy refused to play' The Passive Asian' role for them, so they went spastic and wanted to show him who's boss. They only play this power game on white males and select males like Dao. They're racist bigots. They wouldn't dare play it with any other demographic, and all the 'local interest' stories played on local stations who found others they did this to show that is indeed the case; here local all four channels ran local stories, and all of them were white males, even a First Class passenger was harassed out of his seat.
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.
Right...because, to you, this is the same thing.
Same as what? Not sure what you are talking about.
 
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

I have flown thousands of miles, thank you very much, to Asia, Europe, SE Asia, AFrica, and SA. You're just an idiot with nowhere to climb out of that hole you fell in, trying to be all 'probidness n stuff', one of those who wets his pants in fear of pissing off some bitchy flight attendant. The last few years since retiring I've mostly flown on private jets, except for a few flights to Europe to see my son and daughter-in-law and grandchildren. Your bullshit attemptat trying to pass yourself off as some airline and legal expert is just pathetic.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.

You're showing yours.

This guy is going to win his lawsuit hands down; if he lets them settle out of court on the cheap he's an idiot.
 
The airlines escalated the situation; he wasn't violating any laws, and the let him board, then baited him continuously, ratcheting up the tension level on purpose; they're accomplices and just as guilty of the assault. It was a civil matter, not a criminal matter; they committed the crime here. And, they do to many others; it's a pattern with the assholes.

There are at least two jump seats in the cockpit; employees can ride there. No need to provoke passengers with paid tickets and already boarded and seated, period, end of story. these 'attendants' were just having a power trip and this uppity Asian guy refused to play' The Passive Asian' role for them, so they went spastic and wanted to show him who's boss. They only play this power game on white males and select males like Dao. They're racist bigots. They wouldn't dare play it with any other demographic, and all the 'local interest' stories played on local stations who found others they did this to show that is indeed the case; here local all four channels ran local stories, and all of them were white males, even a First Class passenger was harassed out of his seat.
Awesome. Let's see what a judge and jury think of that....and the FAA. :D

So, do you plan on traveling by air this year? Will you be standing up for your rights or are you one of those "all talk, no action" guys?

WTF are you raving about here??? Your gibbering weirdness isn't making your case for you.
 
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

I have flown thousands of miles, thank you very much, to Asia, Europe, SE Asia, AFrica, and SA. You're just an idiot with nowhere to climb out of that hole you fell in, trying to be all 'probidness n stuff', one of those who wets his pants in fear of pissing off some bitchy flight attendant. The last few years since retiring I've mostly flown on private jets, except for a few flights to Europe to see my son and daughter-in-law and grandchildren. Your bullshit attemptat trying to pass yourself off as some airline and legal expert is just pathetic.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.

You're showing yours.

This guy is going to win his lawsuit hands down; if he lets them settle out of court on the cheap he's an idiot.
Awesome. I'm sure you will be telling that "bitchy flight attendant" to go fuck herself on your very next flight....or, at least, that's what you'll claim.

Awwww, so you are a millionaire flying private jets to Europe. So just slumming hanging out here?

You still remain ignorant on the number and use of jumpseats. No matter, after all, you're a millionaire and you know best!
 
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

I have flown thousands of miles, thank you very much, to Asia, Europe, SE Asia, AFrica, and SA. You're just an idiot with nowhere to climb out of that hole you fell in, trying to be all 'probidness n stuff', one of those who wets his pants in fear of pissing off some bitchy flight attendant. The last few years since retiring I've mostly flown on private jets, except for a few flights to Europe to see my son and daughter-in-law and grandchildren. Your bullshit attemptat trying to pass yourself off as some airline and legal expert is just pathetic.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.

You're showing yours.

This guy is going to win his lawsuit hands down; if he lets them settle out of court on the cheap he's an idiot.
Awesome. I'm sure you will be telling that "bitchy flight attendant" to go fuck herself on your very next flight....or, at least, that's what you'll claim.

Awwww, so you are a millionaire flying private jets to Europe. So just slumming hanging out here?

You still remain ignorant on the number and use of jumpseats. No matter, after all, you're a millionaire and you know best!

If you had actually read the story you would have seen where the pilot himself said there were jump seats available, but keep being a clueless troll, we don't care if you continue to look like an idiot.

didn't know it cost a million dollars to fly to Europe; are you sure you have the right currency standard? Give me a million and I'll arrange a flight for you anywhere you want to go. You like popcorn?
 
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

I have flown thousands of miles, thank you very much, to Asia, Europe, SE Asia, AFrica, and SA. You're just an idiot with nowhere to climb out of that hole you fell in, trying to be all 'probidness n stuff', one of those who wets his pants in fear of pissing off some bitchy flight attendant. The last few years since retiring I've mostly flown on private jets, except for a few flights to Europe to see my son and daughter-in-law and grandchildren. Your bullshit attemptat trying to pass yourself off as some airline and legal expert is just pathetic.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.

You're showing yours.

This guy is going to win his lawsuit hands down; if he lets them settle out of court on the cheap he's an idiot.
Awesome. I'm sure you will be telling that "bitchy flight attendant" to go fuck herself on your very next flight....or, at least, that's what you'll claim.

Awwww, so you are a millionaire flying private jets to Europe. So just slumming hanging out here?

You still remain ignorant on the number and use of jumpseats. No matter, after all, you're a millionaire and you know best!

If you had actually read the story you would have seen where the pilot himself said there were jump seats available, but keep being a clueless troll, we don't care if you continue to look like an idiot.

didn't know it cost a million dollars to fly to Europe; are you sure you have the right currency standard? Give me a million and I'll arrange a flight for you anywhere you want to go. You like popcorn?
You are free to jump to as many conclusions as you like but clearly you don't understand union contracts, crew rest rules, who can legally ride in which jumpseats and how many jumpseats are available on Republic airlines E170s.
 
Do you fly much? At all? The next time you do, make sure you tell ever airline employee exactly what you think about it. Then tell them to go fuck themselves when you're told to buckle up, stop texting or put out your joint.

I have flown thousands of miles, thank you very much, to Asia, Europe, SE Asia, AFrica, and SA. You're just an idiot with nowhere to climb out of that hole you fell in, trying to be all 'probidness n stuff', one of those who wets his pants in fear of pissing off some bitchy flight attendant. The last few years since retiring I've mostly flown on private jets, except for a few flights to Europe to see my son and daughter-in-law and grandchildren. Your bullshit attemptat trying to pass yourself off as some airline and legal expert is just pathetic.

As for cockpit jumpseats, you are showing your ignorance. Typical.

You're showing yours.

This guy is going to win his lawsuit hands down; if he lets them settle out of court on the cheap he's an idiot.
Awesome. I'm sure you will be telling that "bitchy flight attendant" to go fuck herself on your very next flight....or, at least, that's what you'll claim.

Awwww, so you are a millionaire flying private jets to Europe. So just slumming hanging out here?

You still remain ignorant on the number and use of jumpseats. No matter, after all, you're a millionaire and you know best!

If you had actually read the story you would have seen where the pilot himself said there were jump seats available, but keep being a clueless troll, we don't care if you continue to look like an idiot.

didn't know it cost a million dollars to fly to Europe; are you sure you have the right currency standard? Give me a million and I'll arrange a flight for you anywhere you want to go. You like popcorn?
You are free to jump to as many conclusions as you like but clearly you don't understand union contracts, crew rest rules, who can legally ride in which jumpseats and how many jumpseats are available on Republic airlines E170s.

Yes, we've already established you don't really know what you're talking about. Why keep making that clear to us yet again? The pilot said there were jumpseats, you said there weren't any, and most people who fly regularly see airline employees use them all the time.
 
Aw....the heart bleeds.

United Airlines’ Chief Executive Will Not Become Its Chairman
By BARRY MEIER APRIL 21, 2017


22united1-master768.jpg


Oscar Munoz, chief executive of United Airlines. Credit Richard Drew/Associated Press
"United Continental Holdings, struggling to quell fallout from the forcible removal of a passenger from a flight, said its chief executive, Oscar Munoz, would no longer become chairman next year as planned, according to a filing on Friday.

United also said it would revise executive compensation based on the airline’s customer performance.

“Having an independent chairman of the board is a means to ensure that Mr. Munoz is able to more exclusively focus on his role as chief executive officer,” the company said in the filing, made with the Securities and Exchange Commission."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/business/united-airlines-ceo.html
 
Yes, we've already established you don't really know what you're talking about. Why keep making that clear to us yet again? The pilot said there were jumpseats, you said there weren't any, and most people who fly regularly see airline employees use them all the time.
That's not what I said, but you've shown a propensity for not only thinking whatever you like, but lying about others who try to correct you.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top