Sometimes People Suck

#26
#26
cotton said:
So the airline isn't responsible for transporting passengers safely, regardless of circumstances? I have a hard time siding with an airline spokesperson looking down on a plane in the drink and proclaiming, "Not our fault."

Would your opinion be the same if the plane had broken up and everyone on board had died?
Click to expand...
The only way they're entitled to anything from the airline is if there was willful negligence on the part of the carrier. Otherwise, everyone knows the risks of flying.
 
#27
#27
volinbham said:
I don't doubt some will extract much out of this incident. If I were one of the passengers, I wouldn't feel the airline owed me a thing unless I knew they had done something wrong.
Click to expand...

There will be those who wont jump on the band wagon
Initially,but one or two conversations with attorneys
and other passengers and don't forget the thought of
the amount of money.Most will fall in line.

I applaud your sense of fair play,of doing the right thing.
I set here and think the same thoughts but in the end
I just don't know.So I have to just say,I'm glad I'm not in that position.
 
#28
#28
volinbham said:
I don't doubt some will extract much out of this incident. If I were one of the passengers, I wouldn't feel the airline owed me a thing unless I knew they had done something wrong.
Click to expand...

I think that is where we disagree. Crashing the plane is doing something wrong. The airline has a duty to provide safe passage for their passengers. They didn't do that.

If you want to suggest that awards in tort cases are often out of proportion with the harm caused, I would agree, but the airline did something wrong by having a plane in the river that wasn't supposed to be there. It caused some degree of harm to the passengers who didn't want to be on a plane in the river, even if the harm wasn't as great as it could have been because of a heroic pilot. They are due compensation from the airline to make up for the harm caused them by the airline. They are in the process of negotiating that compensation.

It looks funny in the headlines when passengers who are lucky to be alive sue, but that is the way the system is supposed to work.
 
#29
#29
BigPapaVol said:
The only way they're entitled to anything from the airline is if there was willful negligence on the part of the carrier. Otherwise, everyone knows the risks of flying.
Click to expand...

That just isn't true. I'll say it again--the airline has a duty to provide safe passage, and they didn't do it. Your standard of "willful negligence" is absurdly high, and fortunately isn't the law.

The airline has a responsibility not to crash planes. It is that simple, and it is the reason that there will be lawsuits and awards every time a plane crashes.
 
#30
#30
cotton said:
I think that is where we disagree. Crashing the plane is doing something wrong. The airline has a duty to provide safe passage for their passengers. They didn't do that.
Click to expand...

This is where I disagree with you. In this case, I don't see crashing the plane as doing something wrong. There was no human error, there was no mechanical failure due to shoddy maintenance, wrong or failing parts, etc. It appears to be an act of nature.

Also, they did provide safe passage for their passengers.

My office building should protect me from outside elements but if meteor hit the building and I got wet from the sprinklers and lost some personal equipment, I wouldn't say the builder or building owner did something wrong. Now if the roof caved in when it rained due to poor design or construction we have a different scenario.
 
#32
#32
volinbham said:
This is where I disagree with you. In this case, I don't see crashing the plane as doing something wrong. There was no human error, there was no mechanical failure due to shoddy maintenance, wrong or failing parts, etc. It appears to be an act of nature.

Also, they did provide safe passage for their passengers.

My office building should protect me from outside elements but if meteor hit the building and I got wet from the sprinklers and lost some personal equipment, I wouldn't say the builder or building owner did something wrong. Now if the roof caved in when it rained due to poor design or construction we have a different scenario.
Click to expand...

They didn't. It just wasn't as harmful as it could have been.

Who, then, should be responsible for bearing the loss, or incurring the harm, resulting from an "act of nature" when you are a ticketed passenger on an airline? Your suggestion puts all of the responsibility on the passenger, who absolutely did nothing wrong.
 
#33
#33
cotton said:
They didn't. It just wasn't as harmful as it could have been.

Who, then, should be responsible for bearing the loss, or incurring the harm, resulting from an "act of nature" when you are a ticketed passenger on an airline? Your suggestion puts all of the responsibility on the passenger, who absolutely did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

Other than luggage, what loss or harm?
 
#34
#34
volinbham said:
I don't doubt some will extract much out of this incident. If I were one of the passengers, I wouldn't feel the airline owed me a thing unless I knew they had done something wrong.
Click to expand...
I think I would be extremely grateful that the pilot (an airline employee) saved my ass from being dead and would love to shake his hand.
 
#36
#36
cotton said:
So if a plane goes down and crashes to smitherines, and negligence can't be proven, the airline should have no liability to families of the recently disintegrated? That is different that what the law is, and I am very glad of that.

The compensation--which probably hasn't been received-- is essentially an offer of settlement. I don't have any problem with passengers saying that the offer isn't high enough.
Click to expand...

So how much do you blame the Airport and Controllers? After all, couldn’t it be said that they sent the plane into the path of the geese. The pilots were just following instructions.
 
#37
#37
VolDad said:
So how much do you blame the Airport and Controllers? After all, couldn’t it be said that they sent the plane into the path of the geese. The pilots were just following instructions.
Click to expand...
None! They have no way to predict a flock of geese flying into the path of the aircraft. Radar is not going to pick up the geese.
 
#38
#38
cotton said:
That just isn't true. I'll say it again--the airline has a duty to provide safe passage, and they didn't do it. Your standard of "willful negligence" is absurdly high, and fortunately isn't the law.

The airline has a responsibility not to crash planes. It is that simple, and it is the reason that there will be lawsuits and awards every time a plane crashes.
Click to expand...
if the law provides for anything in terms of remuneration from a faultless airline, it's dead freaking wrong, regardless what else it might say. It is absolutely working against fairness. The courts might work that way because juries and judges can be idiotic, but there is no way you can argue that punishing the airline here is justice.
 
Last edited:
#39
#39
SavageOrangeJug said:
None! They have no way to predict a flock of geese flying into the path of the aircraft. Radar is not going to pick up the geese.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Cotton wants to blame the Airline when all the pilots were doing is following instructions. Why isn't he blaming the Airport or Controllers.
 
#40
#40
cotton said:
They didn't. It just wasn't as harmful as it could have been.

Who, then, should be responsible for bearing the loss, or incurring the harm, resulting from an "act of nature" when you are a ticketed passenger on an airline? Your suggestion puts all of the responsibility on the passenger, who absolutely did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

Just because the passengers didn't do something wrong here doesn't mean they should "win" here. When you board a plane, you accept risks just as when you step foot in your car. If a bird hits your car window and causes you to wreck, who are you going to sue? I don't see how the airline can be responsible for payments in this case. They did everything right...including hiring an excellent pilot who landed the plane in practically the only acceptable fashion after an event that was not his or the airline's fault. I'm not even sure the airline is directly responsible for this even if he can't land the plane that safely....
 
#41
#41
cotton said:
Who, then, should be responsible for bearing the loss, or incurring the harm, resulting from an "act of nature" when you are a ticketed passenger on an airline? Your suggestion puts all of the responsibility on the passenger, who absolutely did nothing wrong.
Click to expand...

To flip this around, why should an entity that was not responsible for the harm be forced to compensate the passengers?

This is the crux of the issue. The fact that passengers did nothing wrong doesn't mean they should be compensated if any harm comes to them through an act of nature. If there is a directly responsible party (e.g. pilot error) then they have a claim against the person responsible.

Presumably each (most) of these people has insurance to cover medical costs and maybe other losses. Insurance exists to "repair" harm when there isn't a responsible party.
 
#42
#42
Has anyone consider the fact that the FAA requires
airports to have programs to prevent collisions between
birds and aircraft.Maybe the Airport is one that is culpable in this instance.
 
#43
#43
I think the Geese Traffic Controllers were probably at fault - sue those bastages. Of course, the republi-geese probably cut off funding due to unionization efforts supported demo-geese. All the while, the demo-geese obstructed tort-reform because of the powerful trial-lawyer goose lobby.

In the end, apathetic goose voters are to blame.
 
#44
#44
volinbham said:
I think the Geese Traffic Controllers were probably at fault - sue those bastages. Of course, the republi-geese probably cut off funding due to unionization efforts supported demo-geese. All the while, the demo-geese obstructed tort-reform because of the powerful trial-lawyer goose lobby.

In the end, apathetic goose voters are to blame.
Click to expand...
and the geese are always whining about their plight because ducks are more popular and geese are prettier.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#45
#45
volinbham said:
Insurance exists to "repair" harm when there isn't a responsible party.
Click to expand...

Alas, it also exists to cover liability when there IS a responsible party . . . and unfortunately the attorneys found out about it.
 
#46
#46
volinbham said:
I think the Geese Traffic Controllers were probably at fault - sue those bastages. Of course, the republi-geese probably cut off funding due to unionization efforts supported demo-geese. All the while, the demo-geese obstructed tort-reform because of the powerful trial-lawyer goose lobby.

In the end, apathetic goose voters are to blame.
Click to expand...

BigPapaVol said:
and the geese are always whining about their plight because ducks are more popular and geese are prettier.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Everyone has a different perception of reality.

I guess the old maxim birds of a feather flock together
Applies to you two birds.

The point remains you are arguing a lost cause.Regardless of your esteemed opinions.
 
#48
#48
orangeblooded2 said:
Everyone has a different perception of reality.

I guess the old maxim birds of a feather flock together
Applies to you two birds.

The point remains you are arguing a lost cause.Regardless of your esteemed opinions.
Click to expand...
How is it a lost cause?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#49
#49
orangeblooded2 said:
Everyone has a different perception of reality.

I guess the old maxim birds of a feather flock together
Applies to you two birds.

The point remains you are arguing a lost cause.Regardless of your esteemed opinions.
Click to expand...

Well your not invited to the Vol Nation cookout I planned. I'm afraid there's a one in a million chance a crazed squirrel might attack you and cause some emotional scarring - thus leading you to sue me for the harm you encountered. To bad, it's going to be quite the shindig :neener2:
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top