Posted on 04/27/2017 11:37:37 PM PDT by catnipman
"We look forward to implementing the improvements we have announced, which will put our customers at the center of everything we do."
"We breached public trust, and it's a serious breach," Munoz said in an exclusive interview earlier Thursday with NBC News' Lester Holt, adding that he had introduced changes at the company because "a circumstance like we've all witnessed should have never happened, never happened."
The airline also unveiled new policies early Thursday morning, including a promise to not use law enforcement to remove overbooked customers from planes, additional training for front-line employees and setting up an automated system that will ask passengers at check-in if they would be willing to give up their seat.
Munoz also pledged to reduce the amount of overbooking and offer up to $10,000 for customers willing to volunteer to take a later flight.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
All 3 have been suspended, plus their supervisor. Also, the head of the Chicago Aviation Department was fired yesterday for something they apparently dug up on him, but NOT related to the Dr Dao case.
If that weren't enough, the 3 officers who dragged Dao all wrote reports which put the blame on him for his injuries. However, 2 of the officers prefaced their reports saying they wrote it under duress and were ordered to do so. The guy who yanked Dao made no such disclaimer in his report. Weird, eh?
The 3 officers’ reports, including the 2 disclaimers, can be read at the following link =>
When crew members give unlawful orders to you, they, and their company are the liable party, and they will pay for it in court.
And if you want to keep defending a position that the law does not support - which is predicated in the passenger assaulting or intimidating a crew member, and has nothing to do with refusing, lawfully, to voluntarily give up their seat, go ahead, it won’t work in court. Laws have a purpose and safety and security, not unlawfully removing someone from their seat, is the purpose of the law. It does not make dictators of crew members able to act on a whim.
Said many people on their way to jail.
Do you think that airline corporate interests play no role in decisions to charge under this statute?
“Do you think that airline corporate interests play no role in decisions to charge under this statute?”
When there is a crime, and there is a viable suspect, charges will be filed and an indictment sought.
In this case, it would appear, that there was not evidence or a crime and prosecutors did not believe they could get an indictment.
Had Dao been indicted and convicted, the check United wrote to Dr. Dao would have been much smaller.
In this case, people would not change their minds based on whether criminal charges were filed - they would feel it was an additional injustice done to Dao by United. There would be protests outside the courthouse.
Had Dao committed a crime, he would have been charged.
If he had committed a crime and been convicted, his payout would have been far less.
The payout is the least of all the costs associated with this episode for United.
Per Federal Air Regulations and ICAO rules and Hague Convention for Contract Carriage for Flight Treaties, the Gate agent is entirely responsible for your safety once the ticket is scanned until the door is closed and becon turned on..then the pilots are...
United failed and participated in the beat down.
.they initiated it...they are paying... Lawyers are not the bad guys here nor is Dao...get over it..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.