THE passengers who survived last month's plane plunge into an icy New York river have been offered compensation – but there's a catch.
The survivors have the option of first-class domestic and international flights upgrades, but they will have to get back on a US Airways plane – the airline responsible for terrifying ordeal.
And to make it worse, the upgrade is only valid for a year, reports The New York Post.
All 150 passengers, including Australian Emma Cowan, were rescued from the freezing Hudson River on January 15, after the Airbus A320 was forced down when a flock of geese struck the plane.
Passengers were immediately refunded the cost of the airfare and received a cheque for $8000. Now passengers are being asked to enjoy perks such as priority check-in and boarding, priority security lanes, and first dibs on standby seats until March 2010.
But passengers have been outraged by the latest offer and said the upgraded should be permanent.
"You're going to crash me into the water, and you're going to tell me all I get is an upgrade?" Antonio Sales told the New York Post.
"That's more of an 'OK, you're not dead, I'll give you something to hold on to.' It's not enough at all."
Another passenger, Fred Berretta, said: "I think if you survive a plane crash, being upgraded permanently is a good gesture too."
While some called for the upgrade to be permanent, others were horrified at the thought of getting on another plane.
"My husband is not going to want to get on a plane for at least a year," passenger Tess Sosa told The New York Post.
Not sure I like the "typical american" comment. Maybe in Australia it is custom to high five after a plane crash and call it good but in America we expect some kind of compensation when our lives are unnecessarily endangered. They were compensated but 8k$ and a temporary upgrade is a bit low.. especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
The compensation for the plane crash is horrendously low. Its obviously aimed at staving off a class action torts claim against them, which would likely bleed them far harder.
This one year offer is, to be quite honest, a joke.
Highways, typical Australian tag, I get it land of once thieves... but yea, I've never been part of a horrific plunge into a frozen abyss, I think they should compensate them with some sort of Rv/Boat deal instead of plane tickets, seems insensitive to give them plane tickets
It wasn't really the airlines fault, I think the passengers should recognize that fact first. I think the compensation was good enough as it was, maybe a bit more, but that's it. I also think, given the situation, anyone in the world would want more compensation, not just an American. Their legal system is big on punitive damages, but this sort of situation is quite different from the famous cases you hear about, lives were actually in danger and this could cause a lot of emotional and psychological damages. I can barely get on airplane right now without hyperventilating, imagine after a crash.
The airline is being GENEROUS by giving them what they got. They should THANK the airline for having such an outstanding pilot. The plane going down was obviously an act of god that nobody could prevent, but the pilot and crew's good reactions saved it from being worse.
On February 02 2009 19:28 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Not sure I like the "typical american" comment. Maybe in Australia it is custom to high five after a plane crash and call it good but in America we expect some kind of compensation when our lives are unnecessarily endangered. They were compensated but 8k$ and a temporary upgrade is a bit low.. especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
suing over spilled coffee... typical american.
in other countries, people are known to work their ass off. what a bunch of whiners.
On February 02 2009 19:28 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Not sure I like the "typical american" comment. Maybe in Australia it is custom to high five after a plane crash and call it good but in America we expect some kind of compensation when our lives are unnecessarily endangered. They were compensated but 8k$ and a temporary upgrade is a bit low.. especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
suing over spilled coffee... typical american.
in other countries, people are known to work their ass off. what a bunch of whiners.
Don't troll. Your account says your from the States anyways.
Does anyone else find it ironic that these people want a permanent upgrade, when they just narrowly avoided a permanent downgrade (death)? It's one thing to ask for compensation for medical/psychological bills caused by this incident that weren't covered with the 8000$ but asking for a permanent upgrade for future flights? It's not only illogical to assume the airline owes you anything other than damages immediately caused to you, which in all reality wasn't even their fault, but it seems like a slap in the face of the airline considering that they were offering a token of goodwill to the unfortunate participants of an extremely unusual incident only to be rebuked in what appears to be a rude manner.
Americans are known for trying to sue for everything cmon guys some of you even said you would sue yourself "easy money". In Australia we have legislation today where we cant sue even if it is appropriate as a reactionary response to American sue excesses....(also corruption :\)
Wtf. Free upgrade for the rest of their lives? That is fucking greedy tbh.
If it was the airline's fault in any way, then fine, I could understand a lot more.. But.. it was fucking birds. Inc, makes a good point about people being able to claim millions over spilt coffee. But just because a spasticated precedent exists doesn't mean it should be followed...
On February 02 2009 20:26 Choros wrote: Americans are known for trying to sue for everything cmon guys some of you even said you would sue yourself "easy money". In Australia we have legislation today where we cant sue even if it is appropriate as a reactionary response to American sue excesses....(also corruption :\)
Does it actually say "as a reactionary response to American sue excesses" in the legislation? If it does.... that's kind of sad. In Canada we have nothing like that, although it is different, and people often confuse our legal system with the Americans. Our torts are never nearly as generous.
Yes we do. Andrews case trio which set out rules on quantum of damages for torts claims set a maximum value, at 100,000$ in 1971 (74? don't remember), adjusted upward for inflation.
I think we are all approaching this the wrong way. What did the pilot get for being such a badass? They should write him an 8k check for every life he saved.
Yes we do. Andrews case trio which set out rules on quantum of damages for torts claims set a maximum value, at 100,000$ in 1971 (74? don't remember), adjusted upward for inflation.
I meant there is nothing in our precedents or legislation that says "because of American suing excess."
People will always be looking for ways to get some free money. I'm currently trying to figure out a way to sue TL for brain trauma, from the MIND MELTING FINAL EDITS.
I agree that they are selfish. The airline did nothing wrong, but still gave these people thousands of dollars and their response is, "That's not enough."
=p i wonder if you guys were in the same position and a select few of the passengers decided to push for more "compensation" would you disagree with them or go along with it by not speaking out
Its so sad that these days people will sue each other over random crap hoping to get some money, like that dude who sued his dry cleaner for millions a way back for loosing his pair of pants, i mean seriously what the hell are these people thinking, do they think the courts have nothing better to do that deal with their shit ? People who make law suits like that should just get jail time for being idiots and wasting the courts time. Are these people really that stupid, a flock of damn birds crash into the plane out of nowhere, how is that the companies fault, and the company is even gives them money and upgrades, and they have to be such pricks. And what is up with this : *"You're going to crash me into the water, and you're going to tell me all I get is an upgrade?" Antonio Sales told the New York Post.* If hes too stupid to realize no one crashed him into the water, he should just go sue the birds that rammed the plane, or better yet, sue God for trying to kill him.
And its not like its a American thing to do something like this, im sure there are people all over the world that would do the same thing, its just that America is the only place where a law suit like that could probably pass.
what a bunch of whiny bitches. Oh no, my plane safely glided into the water, now im "traumatized" and require lots of financial compensation and tv time.
Of course people suffered a very stressful situation, and they were affected by this landing. But they fail to realize, that there are situations in life when there's nobody's fault for your pain. There are many situations when things just happen. And nobody's guilty. So, why should a company pay them anything at all? Did the company neglect any safety rules or something? I don't think so. The people suffered a stressful situation, the company lost its airplane. So, why should company lose more than that?
On February 02 2009 21:55 besiger wrote: Its so sad that these days people will sue each other over random crap hoping to get some money, like that dude who sued his dry cleaner for millions a way back for loosing his pair of pants, i mean seriously what the hell are these people thinking, do they think the courts have nothing better to do that deal with their shit ? People who make law suits like that should just get jail time for being idiots and wasting the courts time. Are these people really that stupid, a flock of damn birds crash into the plane out of nowhere, how is that the companies fault, and the company is even gives them money and upgrades, and they have to be such pricks. And what is up with this : *"You're going to crash me into the water, and you're going to tell me all I get is an upgrade?" Antonio Sales told the New York Post.* If hes too stupid to realize no one crashed him into the water, he should just go sue the birds that rammed the plane, or better yet, sue God for trying to kill him.
And its not like its a American thing to do something like this, im sure there are people all over the world that would do the same thing, its just that America is the only place where a law suit like that could probably pass.
Lol this is just retarded. If it had actually been someone fucking up somehow (a tech doing a mistake on ground or whatever) a sue might have been in place. But a pack of fucking birds? If anything these people should have given their eternal thanks and might even consider giving their compensations to the pilots who saved their lives, but no they go on whining when the company is doing their best to make things better after this fucked up accident when they in fact dont owe them anything.
If i was involved in this, i'd be really, but really happy that i'm alive. It's like a second life for them. 99% of the plane crashes have no survivors.
After that, i would go and donate the 8k$ to someone who's in a real need.
Some people simply don't understand that life can't be bought with money so it really can't be evaluated in money.
er i'm with the "eh typical americans..." people here... i wouldn't give a toss about personal compensation, instead (if i got my way) i'd demand a super-scale investigation / investment in improving safety / something along those lines. people in article sound pathetic as fuck to me. feel free to explain otherwise- no1 seems to have done this yet
On February 02 2009 22:18 Dazed_Spy wrote: what a bunch of whiny bitches. Oh no, my plane safely glided into the water, now im "traumatized" and require lots of financial compensation and tv time.
Really pathetic.
Yeah, because they all knew they were going to land safely, right? Would be nice to see you on that flight. I'm sure you'd think differently.
i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
I think they are being a bit rediculous. They are forgetting it was that airlines pilot that saved all their lives by being amazing and taking the plane down for a perfect landing in the water. Thank the stars that you are alive and get on with your lives.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
On February 02 2009 22:18 Dazed_Spy wrote: what a bunch of whiny bitches. Oh no, my plane safely glided into the water, now im "traumatized" and require lots of financial compensation and tv time.
Really pathetic.
man you're so hardcore! you must laugh in the face of danger!
I guarantee you would be at least a little "traumatized" if your plane ended up landing in a river after engine failure. And you would be upset at the company or airport or whoever's job it is to not realize that launching two planes so close would leave the pilot no room to maneuver when a big flock of migrating geese come through.
They are not suing the pilot, they are suing the airlines, which is totally warranted. It may not have been their fault, but the airlines guarantee a safe flight and they guarantee your arrival. If it was actually some plot to bring the plane down, they would sue to get their asses in jail and basically own the airlines, but they just want more compensation for putting their lives at risk, thats sometimes even enough to kill someone or leave them fucked up for a real long time.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
If you were in a bus, you would sue the company from where you bought the ticket. If you are alone on your own car, theres no one to sue. As long as it was a bird that caused the accident and it was an isolated accident.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
If you were in a bus, you would sue the company from where you bought the ticket. If you are alone on your own car, theres no one to sue. As long as it was a bird that caused the accident and it was an isolated accident.
wtf kind of fucked up mentality is that? It would not be the bus companies fault a fucking bird flies into the bus... They should put up "unforeseen shit happens disclaimers" and all of you who expects money if something crazy happens can start walking around if you aint happy with it. You cant expect compensation for unforeseen things none have control over...
edit : From the company im talking about, compensation from insurance companies or the government if you are serious injured is something else.
On February 03 2009 00:17 Cloud wrote: They are not suing the pilot, they are suing the airlines, which is totally warranted. It may not have been their fault, but the airlines guarantee a safe flight and they guarantee your arrival. If it was actually some plot to bring the plane down, they would sue to get their asses in jail and basically own the airlines, but they just want more compensation for putting their lives at risk, thats sometimes even enough to kill someone or leave them fucked up for a real long time.
buuuuut the airline didnt put their lives at risk? in fact the airline employee actually saved their lives, which were put at risk by something outside anyones control.
And you would be upset at the company or airport or whoever's job it is to not realize that launching two planes so close would leave the pilot no room to maneuver when a big flock of migrating geese come through.
nevermind if this is the case then the airline was at fault and deserves to be sued
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
If you sign a contract for safe transportation and it isn't met, then yes it's totally acceptable. You don't write a contract with yourself when you go driving, but if you hired a limo service and it happened, you probably could.
I also like the morons writing "typical Americans," whose posts none of us actually recognize, probably because they've never said anything worth reading before.
3 people out of 150 are complaining. You're extrapolating >50% of Americans are like this, because 2% of a plane flight is upset. Way to go, retards.
EDIT: And you're citing information based on a NY Post article. Again, fail.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
If you were in a bus, you would sue the company from where you bought the ticket. If you are alone on your own car, theres no one to sue. As long as it was a bird that caused the accident and it was an isolated accident.
wtf kind of fucked up mentality is that? It would not be the bus companies fault a fucking bird flies into the bus... They should put up "unforeseen shit happens disclaimers" and all of you who expects money if something crazy happens can start walking around if you aint happy with it. You cant expect compensation for unforeseen things none have control over...
edit : From the company im talking about, compensation from insurance companies or the government if you are serious injured is something else.
If they are guaranteeing your safety, they cant shield behind some "unforeseen shit happened" argument. No matter how ridiculous you try to make your examples, most can be predicted with a pretty good timeline, for example, bird crashing into your windshield will be more common when their mating season begins, so there should be a sign to drive fucking slower.
Also, its not some fucked up mentality, maybe you who are in your ~20 years may react totally rational, decide its no ones fault. But some 60 year old wont react the same, some 40 year old woman with a 10 year old child will definitely not react the same.
Iv also noticed that its only north Americans who think suing the company is the right thing to do in this thread. The rest of the world seems to think that is pretty fucked up and people should be happy to actually be alive and that the company is nice enough offering them some sort of do-good.
Or like, ive noticed that every single non north american is calling these people greedy, that they have some fucked up mentality, that if the passengers werent american they wouldnt be so intent on getting more money, none mention the accident, what people could have gone through waiting to be rescued, because every non north american here has balls of steel and would totally be ok and would hop on another plane of that company anytime. I mean they do have some BADASS pilots dont they?
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
If you were in a bus, you would sue the company from where you bought the ticket. If you are alone on your own car, theres no one to sue. As long as it was a bird that caused the accident and it was an isolated accident.
wtf kind of fucked up mentality is that? It would not be the bus companies fault a fucking bird flies into the bus... They should put up "unforeseen shit happens disclaimers" and all of you who expects money if something crazy happens can start walking around if you aint happy with it. You cant expect compensation for unforeseen things none have control over...
edit : From the company im talking about, compensation from insurance companies or the government if you are serious injured is something else.
i agree with you oystein, if anyone has to compensate, that would be insurance companies. Maybe that's what their crew are targeting?
On February 03 2009 01:26 Rotodyne wrote: These people should really be thinking of the geese that got sucked into a jet engine...the true victims of this incident :[
Or how likely it is a plan of the size is to be taken down by a flock of geese fleeing from the annoying loud noise. Exactly, it didn't happen ^^ Maybe this could happen to a silent weather monitoring plane, but not a big passenger plane.
On February 02 2009 19:28 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Not sure I like the "typical american" comment. Maybe in Australia it is custom to high five after a plane crash and call it good but in America we expect some kind of compensation when our lives are unnecessarily endangered. They were compensated but 8k$ and a temporary upgrade is a bit low.. especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
"In America, we expect to profit over non-fault accidents!"
Maybe you can look at ridiculous precedents as an excuse, but it's more fun to look at them as a symptom of the larger problem.
On February 03 2009 01:38 Hawk wrote: Lol @ free plane ride. who the hell would wanna ride again for a year?
Anyone who cares more about where they wanted to go in the first place :O It depends how traumatized someone would feel after an accident. Shit happens all the time though, it's not like anyone gets on a plane thinking it's 100% safe... and if they do they're fools. It's safer than getting in a car, statistically, but it's not safe in general. If a flock of deaf geese ran into the paper plane I happened to be riding one day and I lived, I'd just think it was a really good story to get pity from girls. Take the 8k and get on with my life It's not the best way to make 8k, but if I knew I was gonna live (and not be permanently injured)... why not. There are worse things to do for money.
You accept the risk when you do things, I think is what everyone apposed to the idea of suing is saying in this thread.
On a related note, did the families of 9/11 victims ever bring a lawsuit against American Airlines or United Airlines in response to poor security screening or loss of life or anything like that?
On February 03 2009 01:38 Hawk wrote: Lol @ free plane ride. who the hell would wanna ride again for a year?
I wonder how many people react with "I am lucky to survive a plane crash - sure don't want to risk that again" and how many people say "I survived a plane crash - I am INVINCIBLE".
Probably much more with the former. Fuckin' pessimists ;-)
If only we could all be like Boris from GoldenEye... Not to be traumatized by unlucky catastrophes, but to stand up, raise our arms into the air, and proclaim, "I am INVINCIBLE!"
Did you guys read this? "My husband is not going to want to get on a plane for at least a year," passenger Tess Sosa told The New York Post." The fact they only get an upgrade for 1 year is ludicrous, maybe they don't deserve permanent upgrades but 1 fucking year? half the people probably never want to fly for awhile, and when they do their upgrade won't be valid.
- a lap top, maybe a cellphone, my weeks worth paper work and maybe lost work, my luggage, lost time until next flight, having to go through the dreaded debriefing, my phucking luggage and everything in it.. and that's if I didn't lose anything of real value I might have been carrying.. - dunno, maybe I am "greedy" but 8k sounds measly..
On February 02 2009 19:28 {88}iNcontroL wrote: especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
I'm not certain if I agree with the "typical American " comment either but doesn't that coffee comment just prove his point on greed? It does seem a bit greedy to me whenever people sue for psychological trauma because it's difficult to assuage the damage done but I'm not in their shoes. However, I'm not certain this is a good time to be asking big businesses to hand out financial compensation. Something like permanent upgrade seems more appropriate to me.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
That situation isn't applicable. When you are flying you are in the care and responsibility of these airlines. When you hit a bird and your windshield cracks and you crash you pay for it. Yah your insurance might help out, but that's something you have to take care of.
The idiocy from you in threads increases daily.
And I agree with Physician, though no-one can calculate the cost of the trauma from an incident like this, there is still a number of commodities that are not going to be salvaged from the plane, and if they are they are no longer of us to you since everything is contaminated with the Hudson River (shits gross lol).
On February 03 2009 01:46 Flaccid wrote: On a related note, did the families of 9/11 victims ever bring a lawsuit against American Airlines or United Airlines in response to poor security screening or loss of life or anything like that?
That's not even related either... jesus where are you people coming from?!
On February 03 2009 01:46 Flaccid wrote: On a related note, did the families of 9/11 victims ever bring a lawsuit against American Airlines or United Airlines in response to poor security screening or loss of life or anything like that?
That's not even related either... jesus where are you people coming from?!
Actually it does sorta relate but how did the terrorists get in?
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
That situation isn't applicable. When you are flying you are in the care and responsibility of these airlines. When you hit a bird and your windshield cracks and you crash you pay for it. Yah your insurance might help out, but that's something you have to take care of.
The idiocy from you in threads increases daily.
And I agree with Physician, though no-one can calculate the cost of the trauma from an incident like this, there is still a number of commodities that are not going to be salvaged from the plane, and if they are they are no longer of us to you since everything is contaminated with the Hudson River (shits gross lol).
There is an assumed risk when you go onto an airline, and that is a legal thing. They can sue, it just will fail miserably. A better example is someone getting into the car of his friends, and being driven around during the winter. They skid on black ice. They live, no one is hurt. The car is not even seriously damaged. You can sue the driver, but you will fail, unless you can prove it was their fault that they skidded on the black ice. There is an assumed risk when you are being driven by another, especially in certain hazardous conditions. The pilot in real life did nothing wrong, the airline was not at fault.
Edit: Didn't know about the planes being too close. In this case...I don't know. The case is not so clear cut, and the American system has proven itself to be 100% flawed in the past, with people winning claims over coffee. So it's up in the air really.
Sometimes shit happens and it's nobodies fault. Unless the airline was to blame for there being birds in the sky I don't think they should pay them shit. They were almost killed by an act of God and the skill and experience of the airlines pilot saved them. They should be grateful, not thinking "I can't sue God when bad stuff happens, I'll sue somebody else". The $8k is a nice gesture and more than enough. For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
this is so stupid why can't people be just glad they're alive I honestly don't think I would want to blame anyone after a near death experience that is obviously accidental
On February 03 2009 01:46 Flaccid wrote: On a related note, did the families of 9/11 victims ever bring a lawsuit against American Airlines or United Airlines in response to poor security screening or loss of life or anything like that?
I thought almost the same. Or did they made a lawsuit against the United States for endangering the lives of its citizens with low security measures on the airports back in 9/11?
On February 03 2009 03:18 minus_human wrote: this is so stupid why can't people be just glad they're alive I honestly don't think I would want to blame anyone after a near death experience that is obviously accidental
What, its totally unethical for people to feel angry after a near death experience? Maybe it was an accident, but it was definitely not the passengers accident.
On February 03 2009 01:46 Flaccid wrote: On a related note, did the families of 9/11 victims ever bring a lawsuit against American Airlines or United Airlines in response to poor security screening or loss of life or anything like that?
That's not even related either... jesus where are you people coming from?!
Actually it does sorta relate but how did the terrorists get in?
Sorry I forgot the birds got on the plane before it took off with the intent to take the plane down, making this a great comparison.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
That situation isn't applicable. When you are flying you are in the care and responsibility of these airlines. When you hit a bird and your windshield cracks and you crash you pay for it. Yah your insurance might help out, but that's something you have to take care of.
The idiocy from you in threads increases daily.
And I agree with Physician, though no-one can calculate the cost of the trauma from an incident like this, there is still a number of commodities that are not going to be salvaged from the plane, and if they are they are no longer of us to you since everything is contaminated with the Hudson River (shits gross lol).
There is an assumed risk when you go onto an airline, and that is a legal thing. They can sue, it just will fail miserably. A better example is someone getting into the car of his friends, and being driven around during the winter. They skid on black ice. They live, no one is hurt. The car is not even seriously damaged. You can sue the driver, but you will fail, unless you can prove it was their fault that they skidded on the black ice. There is an assumed risk when you are being driven by another, especially in certain hazardous conditions. The pilot in real life did nothing wrong, the airline was not at fault.
Edit: Didn't know about the planes being too close. In this case...I don't know. The case is not so clear cut, and the American system has proven itself to be 100% flawed in the past, with people winning claims over coffee. So it's up in the air really.
Edit2: that was a bad pun
Actually in America you can sue the driver in your scenario if there was a good reason and you will typically win in a settlement (obviously won't go to court no one is that stupid). It is their fault for not driving safely, which is ingrained in every driver when they attempt to obtain a drivers license. And I'm not saying that the pilot should be sued, he's a hero, but the airline is still technically at fault (well hence the settlement). I mean there's not much they can do now, but I am saying I would have wanted more than $8000 and premiums for a year. Maybe if you got to pick and choose like 5 discounted flights over 20 years that would be sweet.
On February 03 2009 02:33 Physician wrote: - a lap top, maybe a cellphone, my weeks worth paper work and maybe lost work, my luggage, lost time until next flight, having to go through the dreaded debriefing, my phucking luggage and everything in it.. and that's if I didn't lose anything of real value might have been carrying.. - dunno, maybe I am "greedy" but 8k sounds measly..
Just a question - are you sure they lost their luggage? Luggage is often not on the same plane as the passengers. And are you sure they were not compensated separately if they did lose valuables?
I suppose if they were not compensated separately, $8k isn't huge, but it's almost surely worth more than the stuff they lost.
The people are definitely being greedy, but who knows, maybe when they sure for infinity billion dollars, they really need it because their mother needs a serious operation that costs infinity billion dollars, and they personally know the CEO of the airline and he is actually a child rapist.
as far as i can remember this is the second time a citation to the new york post has occurred on tl. i guess people outside of new york don't know about the peculiar nature of that rag.
the case is not so much greed as bad management. should have given the complainers more and hush them up better.
On February 03 2009 03:38 oneofthem wrote: as far as i can remember this is the second time a citation to the new york post has occurred on tl. i guess people outside of new york don't know about the peculiar nature of that rag.
for the sake of those outside of the city, let me make it clear:
the new york post is one of, if not the, worst paper in the country. but they come up with some funny headlines sometimes.
On February 03 2009 03:18 minus_human wrote: this is so stupid why can't people be just glad they're alive I honestly don't think I would want to blame anyone after a near death experience that is obviously accidental
On February 03 2009 03:18 minus_human wrote: this is so stupid why can't people be just glad they're alive I honestly don't think I would want to blame anyone after a near death experience that is obviously accidental
What, its totally unethical for people to feel angry after a near death experience? Maybe it was an accident, but it was definitely not the passengers accident.
Maybe its not unethical, but i for one would not be very angry, i'd be fucking happy that i'd even be alive. And they got money and stuff too. They just got their greed mode on and decided to profit from it.
For some of those people, the flight was probably the best thing happened to them this year. I mean they got 8000 for basically free? Maybe losing a bit of luggage
Relief immediately after the accident, youre thankful to the pilot, but, afterwards? once you get yourself together and start rationalizing? Is the pilot just thankful as well? He almost dies just the same as everyone else, and you?
On February 03 2009 03:38 oneofthem wrote: as far as i can remember this is the second time a citation to the new york post has occurred on tl. i guess people outside of new york don't know about the peculiar nature of that rag.
for the sake of those outside of the city, let me make it clear:
the new york post is one of, if not the, worst paper in the country. but they come up with some funny headlines sometimes.
Heh, I can agree with this sentiment. You get better and more informed news out of the Onion.
On February 03 2009 00:09 Amber[LighT] wrote: i'd personally want more than $8000 dollars and upgrades for a year. I wouldn't fly for over a year if this happened to me, and until it happens to you, you will not know how traumatic something like this actually is.
How many people on this board have actually been in a crash quite like the one last month. Lets not forget they crashed into a freezing hudson river, it's not like their luggage came out of the plane all perfect. Though it was the birds fault you are not going to take birds to court...
So lets say a bird crashes into your windshield when your driving your car, and you drive out of the rode and into a river and survive, your gonna go around suing the people who sold you the car or someone else just cuz you are having troubles from it afterward?? That could be traumatic also but you cant go around demanding money just because your life dont run perfect, shit happens in life and its dangerous to live.
That situation isn't applicable. When you are flying you are in the care and responsibility of these airlines. When you hit a bird and your windshield cracks and you crash you pay for it. Yah your insurance might help out, but that's something you have to take care of.
The idiocy from you in threads increases daily.
And I agree with Physician, though no-one can calculate the cost of the trauma from an incident like this, there is still a number of commodities that are not going to be salvaged from the plane, and if they are they are no longer of us to you since everything is contaminated with the Hudson River (shits gross lol).
Man reading posts like this makes me happy im born in my part of the world and not in the US, and I guess this sort of things are expected when you have a society where you are all alone and nobody taking care of you in case you were somehow unlucky in life, and that forces people to be greedy just to be able to take care of themselves. Where I live whoever was involved in this would get tons of hours at shrinks and lots of followup if needed after the incident etc and maybe I am just taking this for granted because of where I live and Americans actually needs to sue to be able to afford shit like that.
Your talking about idiocy when you are the one who think its OK to sue someone who have NO responsibility for what happened? Its a fucking freak accident that noone had any control over... If you think its OK to sue someone innocent you have something seriously wrong in your view of the world. (Should they have done something wrong its another thing)
Money aint everything in life, and these of all people who have faced a near death experience off everyone, should realize there is more to life instead of using this tragedy for a personal economic gain.
I guess if you live in a country were people are able to sue for hot coffee, suing for an air crash seems totally warranted.
i actually read the post pretty often. for the sports and ironically entertaining editorials. i wish they would bring back the ny sun though, surely these zionists have enough money
On February 03 2009 01:46 Flaccid wrote: On a related note, did the families of 9/11 victims ever bring a lawsuit against American Airlines or United Airlines in response to poor security screening or loss of life or anything like that?
That's not even related either... jesus where are you people coming from?!
I was asking a question, not making a point. Calm down.
Anywho, the relation is an outside force infringing on this 'contract of safe travel' apparently afforded to people who get on a plane. And like this whole bird thing, it creates an argument of how much the airline could have done to prevent it. It's actually reasonable to say that the whole terrorist thing was *more* in their control than this so called 'act of nature'. Plus there were (obviously) more significant consequences.
So that seems more like a situation where people would be justified in brining on lawsuits. But if they didn't, why not? And why do it now? Just curious, is all.
Isn't there some sort of law against this thing? Actually maybe I'm just dreaming in my ideal world now. These airline companies should get people to sign some document that waives them of responsibility of certain freak accidents - stating that technical malfunctions (or flocks of geese) statistically can always occur, under any circumstance. You get into any engineered vehicle and you could die from any number of mishaps. It's the way the world works.
The "Be glad your alive" argument doesn't really work in this situation I'm sorry.
OP is obviously an idiot here, but I still agree that the 'benefits package' was plenty, considering the airline was ruled to be not at fault. Could just as easily blame the passengers and make them reimburse the airline.
i dont get what everyone is so fussed about, yeah they're greedy, like a lot of people(some would argue most people) but just because they are suing doesn't mean they will win a penny
On February 02 2009 19:28 {88}iNcontroL wrote: especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
I'm not certain if I agree with the "typical American " comment either but doesn't that coffee comment just prove his point on greed? It does seem a bit greedy to me whenever people sue for psychological trauma because it's difficult to assuage the damage done but I'm not in their shoes. However, I'm not certain this is a good time to be asking big businesses to hand out financial compensation. Something like permanent upgrade seems more appropriate to me.
People joke about the hot coffee, but the McDonald's lawsuit was completely justified. I'm pretty sure most of the posters on this forum were too young at the time to actually understand what happened, myself included. + Show Spoiler +
No one is in favor of frivolous cases of outlandish results; however, it is important to understand some points that were not reported in most of the stories about the case. McDonalds coffee was not only hot, it was scalding -- capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle.
...
After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.
The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.
...
McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.
Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat.
...
Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.
On February 03 2009 03:12 Kwark wrote: For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
Spoken like a college student. When we both have jobs and are carrying laptops and expensive documents and expensive suits, I guarantee we'd both be bitching about it.
it'd be foolish for the passengers to assume no risk when boarding a plane anyway. it's not like your 100% safe when you do anything. sure if the plane crash landed because a mechanic left a wrench in the engine or something you could sue and stuff but otherwise it's a ridiculous situation to be suing the airline.
I would sue the pilot, because I bet there were people on board who desperately wanted to die and their chance got taken away from them by some lousy pilot who wanted to show off his skills. I believe some people actually believe that this was their way to say good bye to this World and clearly this airline and staff is responsible for not letting it happen.
On February 03 2009 05:47 Jibba wrote: "Liebeck ... sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused."
And that might have covered her medical treatments..
Anyway, even if there was some wrongdoing in her case, the amount of the judgement has for better or worse made it a lodestone for anti-suit sentiment.
But I'm all for some sort of tort reform. When you see a doctor with a seven figure judgement against him for fusing the wrong two vertebrae on a patient whose obesity made it difficult to count down to the correct one by feel (true story) it makes you wonder. Then those costs (defrayed by rather large malpractice insurance payments) get passed on to anyone who sees a doctor. This then leads to people not understanding the costs involved with running a practice and feeling perfectly fine not paying (leading to collection rates of 60% if the doctor is lucky) those greedy fucks. [/not exactly objective]
On February 02 2009 21:55 besiger wrote: Its so sad that these days people will sue each other over random crap hoping to get some money, like that dude who sued his dry cleaner for millions a way back for loosing his pair of pants, i mean seriously what the hell are these people thinking, do they think the courts have nothing better to do that deal with their shit ? People who make law suits like that should just get jail time for being idiots and wasting the courts time. Are these people really that stupid, a flock of damn birds crash into the plane out of nowhere, how is that the companies fault, and the company is even gives them money and upgrades, and they have to be such pricks. And what is up with this : *"You're going to crash me into the water, and you're going to tell me all I get is an upgrade?" Antonio Sales told the New York Post.* If hes too stupid to realize no one crashed him into the water, he should just go sue the birds that rammed the plane, or better yet, sue God for trying to kill him.
And its not like its a American thing to do something like this, im sure there are people all over the world that would do the same thing, its just that America is the only place where a law suit like that could probably pass.
You should blame the courts for rewarding such ridiculously high compensation in the first place. This is what has motivated people to sue for anything.
On February 03 2009 05:47 Jibba wrote: "Liebeck ... sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused."
And that might have covered her medical treatments..
Anyway, even if there was some wrongdoing in her case, the amount of the judgement has for better or worse made it a lodestone for anti-suit sentiment.
It's true, but because it's been wrongfully portrayed by the media. The initial awarded was $200k for compensatory damages which got reduced because the jury found her at fault as well, and the punitive damages penalty against McDonald's (which was set at the amount of $ McDonald's makes selling coffee in 2 days, not a completely arbitrary value) got reduced when they lowered the temperature of the coffee. Then they made a secret agreement out of court.
Their coffee caused third degree burns in a couple seconds on normal human skin. Joke all you want, but the lawsuit was justified. It's just a landmark because the media sucks and people are too stupid to find out what really happened.
On February 03 2009 03:12 Kwark wrote: For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
Spoken like a college student. When we both have jobs and are carrying laptops and expensive documents and expensive suits, I guarantee we'd both be bitching about it.
On February 03 2009 03:12 Kwark wrote: For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
Spoken like a college student. When we both have jobs and are carrying laptops and expensive documents and expensive suits, I guarantee we'd both be bitching about it.
Not when someone gave me $8000.
Ok, so for you the dispute is over monetary value, not principle. If the plane got ripped in half at row D and you were sitting in row C, the half ot the plane that made it to safety, would 8k cover it?
to be honest i would expect atleast a 2 million dollar compensation but hey thats just me and wtf people talking against greed like they're some kind of saint lol. Shit im greedy as hell and i'll admit it. Greed is how winning is done.
On February 03 2009 03:18 minus_human wrote: this is so stupid why can't people be just glad they're alive I honestly don't think I would want to blame anyone after a near death experience that is obviously accidental
What, its totally unethical for people to feel angry after a near death experience? Maybe it was an accident, but it was definitely not the passengers accident.
I didn't say it was unethical, nor undeserved I just though of how I would feel in a similar situation For it me it would probably be a wake-up call, it would give me new perspective on my life and I wouldn't, most likely, wish to pursue any trivial ego-centric material bonuses from my experience
If I ran that airline, as soon as they turned down that compensation I would have made the assumption that they are no longer going to be customers, and would have offered a huge "FU", knowing that no matter how much compensation I give them, they're not going to buy from me ever again.
On February 03 2009 03:12 Kwark wrote: For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
Spoken like a college student. When we both have jobs and are carrying laptops and expensive documents and expensive suits, I guarantee we'd both be bitching about it.
Not when someone gave me $8000.
Ok, so for you the dispute is over monetary value, not principle. If the plane got ripped in half at row D and you were sitting in row C, the half ot the plane that made it to safety, would 8k cover it?
If medical costs of treating me for trauma were below 8k, yes. It's a freak accident, I don't see why I should profit out of it.
This thread is basically the majority of North Americans versus the majority of everywhere else. Really goes to show the different paradigms and cultures around.
On February 03 2009 03:12 Kwark wrote: For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
Spoken like a college student. When we both have jobs and are carrying laptops and expensive documents and expensive suits, I guarantee we'd both be bitching about it.
Not when someone gave me $8000.
Ok, so for you the dispute is over monetary value, not principle. If the plane got ripped in half at row D and you were sitting in row C, the half ot the plane that made it to safety, would 8k cover it?
If medical costs of treating me for trauma were below 8k, yes. It's a freak accident, I don't see why I should profit out of it.
You don't profit from it.. they pay you for being a part of the trauma. If I could ride an safe and sound with no problems I would pay them for their service and be done with it. If they are going to do retarded things like launch improperly and leave themselves no room when geese decide to suicide bomb the plane and force the plane to crash I am going to expect them to pay me lots of money to make the problem less of a problem.
Fucking nyoken is terrified of flying to this day because one time a passenger sitting next to him started freaking out and crying n shit.. imagine the hundred or so nyoken's a plane crash would create. The system expects the guilty party (company) to compensate those they endangered.
On February 03 2009 09:57 YianKutKu wrote: The US has 4% of the world's population, yet consumes 40% of the world's resources.
I don't really see how this is relevant to the thread. Using a few idiots who just had a life or death experience as an excuse to apply stereotypes to the US is not a good idea.
On February 03 2009 09:58 mahnini wrote: inertia is a property of matter
It saddens me that everyone is just looking to make some fast cash these days. It was an accident, one that could not have been prevented, and luckily enough no one died. (With the utmost respect), I bet those people on the four 9/11 flights wish they were as lucky as this group.
On February 03 2009 03:12 Kwark wrote: For those saying that they lost their luggage, the airline lost a plane and you don't see them bitching.
Spoken like a college student. When we both have jobs and are carrying laptops and expensive documents and expensive suits, I guarantee we'd both be bitching about it.
Not when someone gave me $8000.
Ok, so for you the dispute is over monetary value, not principle. If the plane got ripped in half at row D and you were sitting in row C, the half ot the plane that made it to safety, would 8k cover it?
If medical costs of treating me for trauma were below 8k, yes. It's a freak accident, I don't see why I should profit out of it.
You don't profit from it.. they pay you for being a part of the trauma. If I could ride an safe and sound with no problems I would pay them for their service and be done with it. If they are going to do retarded things like launch improperly and leave themselves no room when geese decide to suicide bomb the plane and force the plane to crash I am going to expect them to pay me lots of money to make the problem less of a problem.
Correct me if I am wrong and its different in the US, but here the airplane companies don`t decide when they launch. The flight coordinators (not sure of the English word, the guys in the tower at the airport) directs all the traffic at the airport and decides when and where planes take off and land, so no the company who you flew with would not be responsible for this but the airport itself.
I didn't read the whole thread, but these people are idiots. There was a terrible accident and they owe their lives to this airline for hiring and training their pilots so well.
Buncha idiots just trying to get the most they can without having to work for it.
Alright, let me first say that USAirways deserves all this.... why you ask?
Well, as someone who travels 100% for their job, I can tell you that no airline frustrates me more than their bullshit. They are called USairways but most of their planes are not Boeing planes, which pisses me off slightly more because Boeing is about 20 miles from my house (I am a Washington resident)
They also charge RIDICULOUS FEES!!!!
1st bag check: $15 2nd bag check:$25 Alcohol: $7 (per drink) Water $2
They also have a nice set of fees they pass on such as the fuel fee, 911 fee and other fees not mandated to pass on to their customers, but of course they do anyway.
USAirways will nickle and dime the shit out of you, and the people who are forced to fly their bullshit want payback.... I hope they cripple that company, I truly do, if for no other reason than those fucking faggots wont give me a bottle of water when my credit card doesn't work. I of course am not a biggot and dont take it out on Flight Attendants, but nonetheless, HOW THE FUCK DO YOU CHARGE FOR WATER IN AMERICA?
In most states, whether you know this or not, it is illegal to run a business such as a venue, grocery store, and other types of retail environments with not having a FREE water supply, thus the Airlines shouldn't be able to dodge that bullet.
As for the "typical American" comments, a lot of "ridiculous suits" are the result in a never ending bureaucracy that most Americans have to face EVERYDAY. If it doesn't have 8 miles of Red Tape.... its not American. I tell you when I was in Australia I felt a lot more laid back, but people in America are tired of that kind of typical bullshit treatment being lumped in a category and being told what they are going to get, and this is what our POLICY is.... a bunch of bullshit that is..... even though these are crash victims, they still have to go through the same bullshit
In a way, if they end up getting more out of USAirways, it will make me more of a patriotic American. If any of you followed This story, you would know that a lot of bullshit suits do get beat down, and people get what they deserve. Sure sometimes there are cases of hot coffee suits, but for good reason, it keeps companies on their toes about safety (albeit ridiculous sometimes) they need to have a LITTLE concern for their consumers, after all, can't kill the people who buy your product, or turn them against you.....
All in all, USAirways are not offering a good enough package for the victims, The patrons who nearly lost their lives are now being bought off with chump change and 1 year long flight vouchers, which mind you, have a shitload of red tape to use in the first place (I.E. NO ONLINE BOOKING) is a bunch of bullshit and is an insult! May this be a biased view, but I am sick of bullshit like this, and in all honesty, I was hoping USAirways would go down because of the shitty way they do business on the whole, but this event to me, is karma to the airline, and I hope those passengers take every penny!
Flame me bitches......
EDIT:
P.S. It was the airlines//Airports fault.... not enough measures were taken to keep birds away, I know at Seatac we have HUGE assault measures against birds as well as satellite defenses and other ways of keeping them under control, because it is a BIG DEAL
This is just people trying to be opportunistic and get as much as they can from the situation. There is nothing American (or any other sub group for that matter) about it.
On February 04 2009 11:54 ManaBlue wrote: This is just people trying to be opportunistic and get as much as they can from the situation. There is nothing American (or any other sub group for that matter) about it.
being oportunistic in possible court cases has become an american standard tho.
On February 02 2009 19:28 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Not sure I like the "typical american" comment. Maybe in Australia it is custom to high five after a plane crash and call it good but in America we expect some kind of compensation when our lives are unnecessarily endangered. They were compensated but 8k$ and a temporary upgrade is a bit low.. especially when people are suing for millions over spilled hot coffee
suing over spilled coffee... typical american.
in other countries, people are known to work their ass off. what a bunch of whiners.
Wasn't that spilled coffee like 600 degrees or something
And didn't the health department tell them like four times that it was way too hot to serve
On February 04 2009 11:54 ManaBlue wrote: This is just people trying to be opportunistic and get as much as they can from the situation. There is nothing American (or any other sub group for that matter) about it.
being oportunistic in possible court cases has become an american standard tho.
both of you have a good point...
but it is a common stereotype and I dont know why people would argue about it... blacks like chicken and latinos like bean thats it ? just dont get too serious about it...
but in my opinion (I guess Im americanized already) they should get shit load of cash...
The spilled coffee was actually a cheap mcdonalds cup that just straight up broke from being cheap, and for some reason the coffee was heated to a higher temperature than other stores. The lady got scars and burns even though she was using the cup properly.
On February 04 2009 12:03 baal wrote: being oportunistic in possible court cases has become an american standard tho.
There's often more to it than that. Don't judge off of some forum post or a news article.
And in this thread I think we've been under emphasizing what actually being in a plane crash is like, especially when other companies in the industry have measures to prevent crashes like this one.
On February 02 2009 19:57 Liquid`NonY wrote: OMG greed actually exists? Thx Highways! Let's all huddle together and talk about how bad greed is and how we're not greedy! Oooo it feels so good.
...
Whatever this thread is supposed to accomplish, I get the feeling it's no better than greed.
Greed rules the world and the poor and those unfortunate enough to be born into lower society have to suffer the consequences of the greedy. Welcome to reality. Enjoy your stay.
Yes the poor airplane companies.. those poor unfortunate bastards. I get the feeling you didn't read the thread, nay, didn't read the OP? Bit bold.. but I like your style.
EPT
!!
