United Airlines Incident
United Airlines has recently endured quite the public relations crisis. Due to an overbooking issue on Flight 3411, United Airlines staff asked for volunteers to switch to a later flight, according to NBC News. However, no one volunteered. Next, the staff followed the United Airlines protocol for an involuntary de-boarding situation where they selected four passengers based on policy criteria. In exchange for their de-boarding, each passenger would receive an $800 voucher. When one of the passengers selected, Dr. David Dao, refused to give up his seat, security was called and he was removed by force. Through being literally dragged through the aisle of the plan, Dao suffered a concussion, broken nose and lost his two front teeth. The Dao's removal was filmed, posted online and it soon went viral. This situation created a major public relations crisis for United Airlines (NBC News, 2017).
What ethical principles are in conflict here?
In the United Airlines incident, the two ethical principles that I believe are in conflict are the Judeo-Christian person as ends principle and Kant’s categorical imperative.
The Judeo-Christian ethical principle states to “love your neighbor as yourself” and that “humans are made in the image of God and with unconditional value regardless of circumstances.” Another one of this principle’s core values is other-regarding care, which clearly conflicts with the actions takes by United Airlines. Other-regarding care, which is a part of the Judeo-Christian principle, is what most of the respondents to the incident vocalized should have been used to handle the situation.
The other conflicting principle, Kant’s categorical imperative, states to “act only that maxim whereby at the same time you can will that it should become a universal law.” In Kant’s deontological ethics, the rule determines the result, the rule is the basis of the act, the rule is good regardless of the act and the result is always calculated within the rules. Therefore, Kant’s principle was what the United Airlines employees clearly followed, whether consciously or sub-consciously. This is evidently by the employees’ strict adherence to enforce the situation protocol instead of considering the importance of other-regarding care.
What (if anything) did United do right?
According to the ethical principles, I hold as a public relations student, I do not think United Airlines did anything right. I consult the Judeo-Christian ethical principle when making decisions, which conflicts how this situation was handled entirely. However, if I were to consult Kant’s categorical imperative, I would say that were right to determine their actions within the rules, which in this case was their protocol for over booking and later an involuntary de-boarding situation.
What could they have improved upon?
I think United Airlines could have improved the way they handling the situation both during the incident itself as well as handling the pressure from the media during the aftermath. During the incident, I would have recommended the United Airlines employees remember the importance of customer service in the airline industry. One of the most important values an airline should hold is brand loyalty, and through their actions, United Airlines disregarded the importance of the Dao's customer loyalty completely. However, not only did United Airlines risk losing Dao's customer loyalty, but also the loyalty of all of the United Airline customers on the flight that witnesses the Dao's treatment and many other who viewed the video online. In the aftermath of the incident, there are a few areas that I would suggest improving. As stated earlier, when considering the importance of customer service, I would recommend that United Airlines implement immediate repercussions to the staff for their physically harming actions on a customer, which they did not. When this type of situation occurs in public relations, I would advise United Airlines suspend or fire the employees responsible to make it known that the company truly values the customers experience above all. By firing the employees responsible, United Airlines is demonstrating a no tolerance policy and putting the customers’ quality experience at the top of their priority. However, this is not how United Airlines handled this incident. According to NECN News, United Airlines CEO Oscar Munoz stated that no one will be fired over the dragging incident.
What can other companies learn from an ethical PR standpoint?
Other companies can learn a lot of the United Airlines incident. Companies can learn the importance of employee training, which in this case would be training the proper protocol for an involuntary de-boarding situation. They can also learn how vital it is for a company to respond to an incident with quickness, thoroughness and transparency in their actions to address the issue at hand. Companies also must realize the affect public opinion can have on their market value and overall success. According to NECN News, United Airlines market shares dropped 4.3 percent, which lost them almost $1 billion dollars in market value. Companies must take all of this into account when creating policies and protocol for public relations crises.
