I believe the crew arrived only after the flight had been boarded.

Flights are not overbooked in error.....but the airlines do this routinely and intentionally. They have historical data (probably because of computers!) and can predict quite accurately how many will “no show” for a particular flight and be able to fill a seat that would otherwise go empty. It's when those calculations are off that they have to start bumping passengers.

In this case with United.....don't think it was because of overbooking. They needed the seats to get a flight crew to Louisville to take an aircraft out in the morning.

The primary point of sale on these flights is from YUL, not Europe. It caters primarily to the Canadian summer vacation crowd, on packaged holidays and all.

French Canadian travel from YUL to all the secondary French cities is probably as strong (if not stronger) than the market from a single secondary Canadian city to mainstream European destinations, such as London, Paris, Rome, etc.

Hence why TS operates these flights. And they are most likely profitable, or else TS wouldn't fly them. They have started and canceled several unprofitable routes to Europe recently, such as IST (before all the turmoil), BUD etc.

A big part of overbooking and "no-shows" is that people don't make their connections because of delays with the airlines. It must be pretty damn rare for people to just miss a flight on their own volition.

I had a flight fairly recently, with United, where we were delayed leaving YVR by a couple of hours because the iPad-based flight manuals and log-books were off-line due to an unexpected iOS update. They discovered this after we had pushed back and were in line for departure. We pulled over and waited and the pilot came on the PA after about half an hour to explain the situation and he said that it was affected hundreds of United flights but bemoaned that United's wireless roaming plan was apparently limited to 3G speeds so instead of it going pretty quick like it would in the US, it was taking forever and we were grounded until the update was complete. After close to two hours(!) we were good to go and they put the hammer down and made it to DEN as fast as possible.

The flight was continuing down to IAH and so while everyone needed to deplane for it to be cleaned before we reboarded, at least I didn't have any issues with my connecting flight despite the delay. The problem was that things were looking perilously tight in IAH for my connecting flight to CLT. I ran flat out and managed to get to the gate while boarding was still in progress but United had already rebooked me onto the last flight of the night. So, despite being there in time for the flight, I was not allowed to board and was actually told that the original flight was oversold and they had people volunteer to take the later flight that I was going to be on. Small consolation, my status got me upgraded to business for the later flight whereas I would have just been in standard economy on my original flight.

Banning overbooking would be overkill, but there needs to be strong regulations to discourage bumping and to give generous compensation to anyone who does get bumped. If I buy a service, I have the right to that service.

A good law would be to:
1) In the event of overcapacity, they must upgrade some passengers from economy to business or first class before bumping anyone off the plane--there must be literally no capacity available anywhere on the aircraft for anyone to be denied boarding

2) If there is no capacity, compensation should be
-a free ticket on the next available flight, and if that's more than six hours later, a free upgrade to business class must be offered if capacity is available
-a free overnight hotel stay if necessary
-$20 per required meal
-cash compensation equal to 500% of the price paid for the ticket.

With requirements like that, bumping would be so expensive that overbooking would stop in a hurry.

Surely that's what happens now. Isn't it? :shrug:

It seems to be happening less.

Likely scenario:

Flight was not overbooked while boarding.

After the plane was boarded 4 crew members were sold on the flight under do not deplane, aircraft on ground. They were required to travel to the destination because there was a flight without a crew. The planned crew was illegal to operate because they had exceeded allowable hours.

The gate agents solicited volunteers on board and 3 volunteered. So, one was forced.

We all know what subsequently happened.

I can think of a number of ways that could have successfully resolved the situation without violence.

Updated YUL S2017

http://i.imgur.com/pFveSpZ.png

I'll
Update with tel aviv I forgot!!! Lol

All the above was accomplished on UA 3411, but there were still no volunteers to get off the airplane.

The problem is that the general public is expecting massive amounts of compensation (in the thousands of dollars) in order to voluntarily not fly. Further more there is a general misconception that a ticket entitles the passenger to a specific seat and that they "own" the right to sit there. Reality is very different in that the passenger is merely renting a seat that can be revoked at any time by the airline.

It is not just air travel, but society in general that has excessive customer demands for compensation. My wife works the customer service counter for a local grocery store. There was a sale on steaks that was incorrectly priced at the checkout counter. Store policy is to offer a price error item for free up to $10 (restricted to single item). Unofficially the $10 limit can be raised so the whole item (steak for $20 per pack) can be provided as compensation. However the customer expected 10 warehouse packs of steak to be provided free of charge with the bill over $200.

The deadhead crew was likely required to operate the same airplane back to ORD in the morning.

In the aftermath of the Colgan Air Q400 crash in BUF, crew rest was policy was revisited and expanded too far, IMHO. Prior to Colgan Air, crew deadhead time could count towards rest requirements. Today the crew rest requirements don't start until the crew is at the hotel.

What should have occurred, UA should have threatened to cancel the whole flight once no one was willing to leave the airplane. This would have solicited several volunteers who would be willing to take the $800 offer. A cancelled flight means passengers get a hotel, meal voucher, and toiletry kit; but no Involuntary Denied Boarding compensation. This little fact usually solicits the required volunteers.

Likely one of the standard operating procedures to be implemented at UA, no aircraft boarding until the oversell situation is resolved. Further once boarding has began, there are no further additions to the flight manifest list.

The unintended consequence of changes to UA policy WRT flight manifest changes after boarding has started, short connections will be bumped to the next flight. For me, this has a very detrimental effect. I can run through YYZ/ORD/EWR/SFO/etc. with great speed and make a 20 minute connection. I am out of breath, but the gasp of air comes from the Gate Agent when they proclaim "Your just landed 15 minutes ago, we didn't think you would make it and gave away your seat". Under the new rules if preboarding has began, I won't be able to get my seat assignment back.

YUL February 2017

1,255,229 +2.5%

Domestic up 2.0%
Intl up 5.1%
trans down 1.3%

YTD total: 2,591,128 +4.2%

http://www.admtl.com/sites/default/f...det_Eng_17.pdf

Finally, ADM has decided to give us the split aircraft movement numbers between YUL and YMX. :tup: ADM's numbers for YMX are much lower than NavCan's though.

ADM lists YMX as having handled roughly 13,000 movements each of the last 3 years, but NavCan's numbers are closer to 30,000-40,000 a year.

I don't agree. The new policy is fair. The old one wasn't, and was clearly identified as a secondary cause that contributed to the Colgan Air crash.

Im curious, what was the point of quoting YYC numbers? Why not also provide YEG, YVR or others?

For comparison's sake. YEG's passenger numbers are well below YYC, and YVR is well above YUL. Figured YYC and YUL's numbers are close to each other and was worth comparing.

Plus, YYC's numbers were easily accessible just a few pages over. I haven't seen YEG's or YVR's Feb numbers and didn't feel like looking it up.

I would dare say that comparing percentage increases is a better way and would allow comparisons to multiple airports.

I always post updates on airport stats whenever they're available of course that's if someone else doesnt post it before me so calm down ....YUL clearly becoming bigger and bigger !! And it will stay number 3 for a long time! But obviously yyc is a Major Canadian airport.

YVR February 2017:

1,648,480 +3.4%

YTD total:

3,439,527 +6.8%


http://www.yvr.ca/en/about-yvr/facts-and-stats

Calm down? You're hilarious if you think your post got me upset. In your defence, YUL should be bigger as it has a much much larger population base to draw from.

Oh grow up both of you, how many times do we have to go through this.... :uhh:

Both cities have their own reason why they handle the amount of traffic they do.