United Flight 967: Airline's Obligation to Compensate Injured Passengers
In May, passengers aboard United Flight 935 from London to Los Angeles were injured when the aircraft encountered severe turbulence. This time, it was the passengers aboard United Flight 967 from Dulles to Los Angeles. 26 passengers and 4 crew members were reportedly treated when the flight diverted to Denver so that the injured could get medical attention.
What is United Airline's obligation to compensate the injured? The answer varies.
Passengers who were traveling on United Flight 967 as part of an international flight:
If a passenger originated outside the US, or was ticketed to cont
inue on from LA to a foreign destination, the Montreal Convention applies to that particular passenger’s claim. The Montreal Convention makes the airline liable for any injuries suffered on board the aircraft due to an "accident." The definition of "accident" includes an encounter with severe turbulence. The passenger need not prove that the airline was at fault for the accident. Under the Convention, the airline is automatically liable.
As discussed here, the Convention also entitles the passengers to be compensated for the emotional distress they have suffered, but only if they suffered some sort of physical injury as well.
Passengers who were traveling domestically:
To obtain compensation for his injuries, the domestic passenger needs to prove that his injuries were due to the airline's negligence. For example, the domestic passengers might need to prove that the flight crew could have reasonably avoided the turbulence but chose to fly too close to a storm.
Provided that the domestic passenger can prove the airline was negligent, the law allows the passenger to be compensated for emotional distress suffered even in the absence of physical injury.
Cabin Crew:
The injured cabin crew cannot sue their employer due to workers compensation laws. They may be able to proceed against others responsible for the encounter, such as the weather reporting agency used by the airline. In appropriate circumstances, the crew members can also sue the United States government if Air Traffic Control should have advised the flight of the upcoming turbulence.
I was thinking about this again as I flew transcon yesterday. It was bordering on moderately chop over the Rockies and, of course, the passengers were up and walking about even though the FAs themselves were seated and belted in.
The FAs made the usual couple of calls asking pax to please sit down, and that was about it.
I got to wondering. As the airline is less exposed for injuries in this situation (domestic) do the FAs react differently than on international flights? The most I do is Mexico and Canada, not much overseas. Since airlines are at a higher risk of liability due to injuries even when the belt light is on during international flights, are the FAs trained to enforce compliance more strictly? Or even with stronger verbiage via the PA?
Mara'D -
Good question. Maybe we'll hear from a FA.
Mike