TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Justified or just ungrateful?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Justified or just ungrateful?

post #1 of 56
1/30/09 at 2:37pm
Thread Starter 
Some of the passengers on the US Airways jet that crash landed in the Hudson River are not satisfied with the compensation offered by the airline.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01302009...ilt_152720.htm

Personally, getting out of that situation alive would have been more than enough for me. I wouldn't need or want anything else from the airline.
Reply
post #2 of 56
1/30/09 at 3:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTLynn View Post
Personally, getting out of that situation alive would have been more than enough for me. I wouldn't need or want anything else from the airline.
I agree with this.

Unfortunately we now live in a society where you can always "get something" out of someone - it's sad
Reply
post #3 of 56
1/30/09 at 3:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by WellingtonCats View Post
I agree with this.

Unfortunately we now live in a society where you can always "get something" out of someone - it's sad


Everyone wants "more". I see nothing wrong with $5000 cheques for lost luggage, plus the upgraded seating.

It's not like the airline deliberately risked its pilots and made them crash

It boils down to greed, plain and simple.
Reply
post #4 of 56
1/30/09 at 3:14pm
Some people make me sick! Oh and their totally ungrateful to be alive.

Personally i wouldn't want anything from them, infact i'd be sending the captain a bottle of Moet to drink to our health!
Reply
post #5 of 56
1/30/09 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosiemac View Post
Personally i wouldn't want anything from them, infact i'd be sending the captain a bottle of Moet to drink to our health!

I could see their complaint if the crash was actually the airlines' fault...but really. This is just ungrateful. Considering that the crash was not the airline's fault, I think it's awfully nice that they're compensating them at all.
Reply
post #6 of 56
1/30/09 at 3:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ms. Freya View Post

I could see their complaint if the crash was actually the airlines' fault...but really. This is just ungrateful. Considering that the crash was not the airline's fault, I think it's awfully nice that they're compensating them at all.
An exact cause hasn't been established yet, although it does appear that preliminary reports agree that the engines ingested enough birds to cause them to go into compressor stall. Working in the aviation industry for 20 years, I can tell you this: no one is safe from litigation no matter what the cause is found to be.

And quite often, its cheaper for the airline to settle than to fight the battle in court, where the lawyers are the big winners.
Reply
post #7 of 56
1/30/09 at 4:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosiemac View Post

Personally i wouldn't want anything from them, infact i'd be sending the captain a bottle of Moet to drink to our health!
Absolutely! So would I.
Reply
post #8 of 56
1/30/09 at 4:24pm
They should have status/upgrades for life. That is not that much of a deal for the airline to give. A lot of these people will not travel again within the year.
Reply
post #9 of 56
1/30/09 at 6:02pm
If the crash wasn't the airline's fault, and they're being compensated for their belongings what more do they want? They should be happy to be alive.
Reply
post #10 of 56
1/30/09 at 6:21pm
They are happy to be alive, but 1 year of upgrades is a slap on the face; especially if you don't travel much. Airlines have big time insurances, and I bet you anything they will use it. This is not $$$ they are giving - this is more a symbolic sorry for your trouble (HUGE trouble) kid of deal.
I am completely against suing, but if I was in that plane and all they gave me was 1 yr of upgrades... I would be very disappointed.
They should have honorary lifetime status for upgrades. That would be the right thing to do.
Reply
post #11 of 56
1/30/09 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTLynn View Post
Some of the passengers on the US Airways jet that crash landed in the Hudson River are not satisfied with the compensation offered by the airline.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01302009...ilt_152720.htm

Personally, getting out of that situation alive would have been more than enough for me. I wouldn't need or want anything else from the airline.
Greed is the ruination of man IMO.
I would be counting my blessings and thanking the Lord.

I wouldn't sue but I would take the $5,000.00
Reply
post #12 of 56
1/30/09 at 8:18pm
I don't think they should sue because it wasn't the airline's fault. If we could track the path of geese that would be great but apparently we can't.

I do think, rather that a year of upgraded service they should offer 3 round trip first class tickets. Not a lot of people fly that much in a one year period, so they should be able to cash in a limited number of tickets whenever they want. Of course, the plane did take off in NY, so there are probably a lot of people there that fly frequently.

Ok, maybe upgraded service for a year for people that fly a lot, and the option of first class seats for those that on fly every few years. How's that for a comprise?
Reply
post #13 of 56
1/31/09 at 12:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
An exact cause hasn't been established yet, although it does appear that preliminary reports agree that the engines ingested enough birds to cause them to go into compressor stall. Working in the aviation industry for 20 years, I can tell you this: no one is safe from litigation no matter what the cause is found to be.

And quite often, its cheaper for the airline to settle than to fight the battle in court, where the lawyers are the big winners.
I work in the health care field, and the same applies. I don't understand why everything that happens has a price tag. Yes, sometimes when bad things happen, it's somebody's fault. Sometimes bad things just happen. Why people think that they "deserve" more compensation in this case (if it does indeed turn out to be the birds) is beyond me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinalima View Post
They are happy to be alive, but 1 year of upgrades is a slap on the face; especially if you don't travel much. Airlines have big time insurances, and I bet you anything they will use it. This is not $$$ they are giving - this is more a symbolic sorry for your trouble (HUGE trouble) kid of deal.
I am completely against suing, but if I was in that plane and all they gave me was 1 yr of upgrades... I would be very disappointed.
They should have honorary lifetime status for upgrades. That would be the right thing to do.
A slap in the face how? The airline, as far as can be determined, was not at fault. I'll go further than that and say that because a highly competent pilot was at the helm (and whoever else on the crew who contributed), is the only reason those people are even alive. So what if the airline has insurance? What does that have to do with anything? A lifetime of upgrades??? How is that the "right thing to do" when the airline did nothing wrong? Those passengers "deserved" nothing, but were given gifts by the airline. The only ones who were "slapped in the face" were all the people responsible for making sure that every man, woman, and child survived that day.
Reply
post #14 of 56
1/31/09 at 1:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by clixpix View Post
I work in the health care field, and the same applies. I don't understand why everything that happens has a price tag. Yes, sometimes when bad things happen, it's somebody's fault. Sometimes bad things just happen. Why people think that they "deserve" more compensation in this case (if it does indeed turn out to be the birds) is beyond me.

A slap in the face how? The airline, as far as can be determined, was not at fault. I'll go further than that and say that because a highly competent pilot was at the helm (and whoever else on the crew who contributed), is the only reason those people are even alive. So what if the airline has insurance? What does that have to do with anything? A lifetime of upgrades??? How is that the "right thing to do" when the airline did nothing wrong? Those passengers "deserved" nothing, but were given gifts by the airline. The only ones who were "slapped in the face" were all the people responsible for making sure that every man, woman, and child survived that day.
Yep, slap in the face, pocket change, useless gift for most of them. That is my opinion.
Reply
post #15 of 56
1/31/09 at 2:06am
I don't see why they need to be given a gift at all.
Reply
post #16 of 56
1/31/09 at 4:07am
According to the article some of the passengers have already contacted lawyers. If they sue I have one word for them: ingrates.

The sense of entitlement that people have in this country is ridiculous.
Reply
post #17 of 56
1/31/09 at 4:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinalima View Post
They are happy to be alive, but 1 year of upgrades is a slap on the face; especially if you don't travel much. Airlines have big time insurances, and I bet you anything they will use it. This is not $$$ they are giving - this is more a symbolic sorry for your trouble (HUGE trouble) kid of deal.
I am completely against suing, but if I was in that plane and all they gave me was 1 yr of upgrades... I would be very disappointed.
They should have honorary lifetime status for upgrades. That would be the right thing to do.

But they didn't just give the upgrade, they gave a $5,000 check to replace their belongings. Now say you had a laptop at $2,000, a high end SLR digital camera at $1,000 you still have $2,000 for luggage and clothes. I wouldn't travel with more than $5,000 in belongings. That would be crazy to me. The only people I would have even a little sympathy for are the golfers. I know from my husband how expensive those clubs can be. But even then when we travel to Arizona to golf he takes his older clubs in case something happens. Just common sense to us.

The fact the airline gave the checks out, without making the passengers catalog their belongings is, to me, good customer service. I personally would make out in that deal. I just can't imagine travelling with more than $5,000 in belongings.

The fact that airlines have big time insurance is irrelevant. Everytime they would have to use it the insurance company would raise thier rates or get their money back somehow. They aren't running a charity. There are always consequences and the raise in premium would only get passed on to future passengers.
Reply
post #18 of 56
1/31/09 at 7:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinalima View Post
Yep, slap in the face, pocket change, useless gift for most of them. That is my opinion.

I thought they were getting five grand a piece, isn't that enough?
Reply
post #19 of 56
1/31/09 at 8:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by peachytoday View Post
But they didn't just give the upgrade, they gave a $5,000 check to replace their belongings. Now say you had a laptop at $2,000, a high end SLR digital camera at $1,000 you still have $2,000 for luggage and clothes. I wouldn't travel with more than $5,000 in belongings. That would be crazy to me. The only people I would have even a little sympathy for are the golfers. I know from my husband how expensive those clubs can be. But even then when we travel to Arizona to golf he takes his older clubs in case something happens. Just common sense to us.

The fact the airline gave the checks out, without making the passengers catalog their belongings is, to me, good customer service. I personally would make out in that deal. I just can't imagine travelling with more than $5,000 in belongings.

The fact that airlines have big time insurance is irrelevant. Everytime they would have to use it the insurance company would raise thier rates or get their money back somehow. They aren't running a charity. There are always consequences and the raise in premium would only get passed on to future passengers.
Also, wouldn't your homeowners insurance would pay for any golf clubs, cameras, etc.? I think it does I don't know if renter's insurance would. So the $5,000 was a gift, along with the upgrades.

IMO, they're ungrateful, greedy wretches, and IMO, they shouldn't receive another dime, or another upgrade. It's stories like this that exemplify the "it's all about me and what I can get" attitude. They should be ashamed of themselves for wanting more.
Reply
post #20 of 56
1/31/09 at 9:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by KTLynn View Post
Some of the passengers on the US Airways jet that crash landed in the Hudson River are not satisfied with the compensation offered by the airline.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01302009...ilt_152720.htm

Personally, getting out of that situation alive would have been more than enough for me. I wouldn't need or want anything else from the airline.
At first they thought they were going to die. Then they were just grateful to be alive.

Then, they all realized they had essentially hit the lottery! Welcome to America, the land run by trial lawyers.
Reply
post #21 of 56
1/31/09 at 12:21pm
Even if the crash was the air lines fault, things go wrong. It is just a part of life. Accidents happen, get used to it! If they sue and win all they are going to do is punish future passengers. Sure they have insurance and when that goes up guess who is paying for it? US! The price of tickets will rise, as if they are nit high enough right now.

We live in a land where you can sue someone becasue you burnt your self on coffee and win. Why shouldnt these people just join the ranks of stupid law suits.

They need to stop thinking with their walets and start counting their blessings. After they sue the air lines they might as well sue the family members of the birds that brought the plain down.
Reply
post #22 of 56
1/31/09 at 3:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinalima View Post
1 year of upgrades is a slap on the face .
*Thinks*

A year of free upgrades, or grateful to be alive?.....I'll still say grateful to be alive. Theres too many people these days with £/$ in their eyes.
Reply
post #23 of 56
2/3/09 at 3:55pm
I would be thanking everyone who would listen to me if I got out of a situation like that alive. I would be esctatic if I got $5,000 to replace my luggage. I would never in a million years expect any other perks, so a year of upgrades would have me smiling (assuming I was willing to get on a plane again after that). Greed is what has this country in the mess it's in right now.
Reply
post #24 of 56
2/3/09 at 4:15pm
What if counselling/medication to deal with the emotional trauma of a near death experience ends up costing $25,000 and a passenger doesnt have the golden US insurance some are lucky to have? That $5000 check will sure look like a slap in the face then. I would expect the airline to cover my costs associated with the accident above and beyond my belongings, which is why I think there are probably some passengers who may sue and have every right to (assuming the airline is refusing to pay for counselling costs or something as provided in my earlier example). Now, if theres no emotional trauma, no lost time etc., then I would agree those people are being greedy to ask for more, but in this situation, I would expect there to be exceptions.
Reply
post #25 of 56
2/3/09 at 4:18pm
I don't see why passengers should be able to sue over that something that should be proven to NOT be the airline's fault. If the airline were at fault it would be one thing but I don't see the justification over an act of nature.
Reply
post #26 of 56
2/3/09 at 10:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Februa View Post
What if counselling/medication to deal with the emotional trauma of a near death experience ends up costing $25,000 and a passenger doesnt have the golden US insurance some are lucky to have? That $5000 check will sure look like a slap in the face then. I would expect the airline to cover my costs associated with the accident above and beyond my belongings, which is why I think there are probably some passengers who may sue and have every right to (assuming the airline is refusing to pay for counselling costs or something as provided in my earlier example). Now, if theres no emotional trauma, no lost time etc., then I would agree those people are being greedy to ask for more, but in this situation, I would expect there to be exceptions.
I think I read somewhere that they're able to ask for more moneys to cover additional costs. Anyone know?
Reply
post #27 of 56
2/4/09 at 12:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Februa View Post
What if counselling/medication to deal with the emotional trauma of a near death experience ends up costing $25,000 and a passenger doesnt have the golden US insurance some are lucky to have? That $5000 check will sure look like a slap in the face then. I would expect the airline to cover my costs associated with the accident above and beyond my belongings, which is why I think there are probably some passengers who may sue and have every right to (assuming the airline is refusing to pay for counselling costs or something as provided in my earlier example). Now, if theres no emotional trauma, no lost time etc., then I would agree those people are being greedy to ask for more, but in this situation, I would expect there to be exceptions.
Why should the airline pay if the airline was not at fault? Because they're considered a "deep pocket"? That hardly seems fair.
Reply
post #28 of 56
2/4/09 at 12:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by clixpix View Post
Why should the airline pay if the airline was not at fault? Because they're considered a "deep pocket"? That hardly seems fair.
Here is an analogy for you; since it was a nature accident: Say you are driving on the snow, and a deer crosses in front of you; you crash and get hurt - not your fault.... Your insurance will still pay for your medical bills - same thing.

Part of the airfare goes towards insurance, and it is only fair that it is used properly.
Reply
post #29 of 56
2/4/09 at 6:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by clixpix View Post
Why should the airline pay if the airline was not at fault? Because they're considered a "deep pocket"? That hardly seems fair.
One reason the cost of flying is so high is because of that one fact. Everyone and everything involved has to have HUGE amounts of liability insurance, and that cost gets passed along.

Several thousand parts on an aircraft, every one of them came at a premium since there's the chance of a lawsuit if an accident happens. Every person that performed maintenance on the aircraft, the fuel supplier, Jeppeson that makes the flight crews navigational charts, it goes on and on.
Reply
post #30 of 56
2/4/09 at 6:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolinalima View Post
Here is an analogy for you; since it was a nature accident: Say you are driving on the snow, and a deer crosses in front of you; you crash and get hurt - not your fault.... Your insurance will still pay for your medical bills - same thing.

Part of the airfare goes towards insurance, and it is only fair that it is used properly.
I don't see the correlation. I would think someone else would have to be driving the car - perhaps your neighbour and you are a passenger in his car. A deer runs out in front of him and he crashes and you get hurt. You sue him for monies and his insurance pays up. His insurance rates go up not your insurance so you are not out anything.

I agree with the ohers that say greed is ruining the country. Just because a company has insurance does not mean they are rich. Anyone remember all the ambulance chasing drivers after the Union Carbide Bophal disaster? Union Carbide was a huge worldwide company with many assets. Because of greed and lawyers there no longer is a Union Carbide. The disaster was discovered to have been a deliberate act on the part of a disgruntled employee but that won't bring a company back.

Too many people are looking for a quick way to get rich off somebody else and it makes me sick. It's too bad they can't be honest and earn what they get instead of thinking everyone owes them something.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Justified or just ungrateful?