After yesterday’s diverted flight in which a United plane had to land over a dispute regarding someone’s right to recline their seat, I think I see a business opportunity for dispute resolution. Josh Barro for The Uphot in the New York Times argues that if he is expected to give up his right to recline, he should be paid for it. As he notes, no one has yet tried to negotiate with him over his recline so it must be that people are not willing to buy this right. I think, instead, that no one really knows how to start the negotiation. If we dispute resolution professionals just announced at the beginning of the plane ride that we were available to mediate any disputes (and take a percentage of the money changing hands), who knows how many more happy passengers there could be? And, once we demonstrate how helpful mediation can be in this context, we will have convinced whole new audiences about the wisdom of using this process. In the alternative, perhaps we could offer negotiation training to passengers who need help starting the negotiation. After all, isn’t this a quintessential difficult conversation? Clearly the conversation about reclining seats has touched all sorts of nerves about identity, ownership, rights and respect. In the meantime, I’ll just pray for an upgrade to economy comfort! (Hat tip to Natalie Fleury)
I do think this is a great opportunity for dispute resolution. This is a prime example of the practical use of negotiation, and perhaps mediation, that could yield a fair result. It could also draw attention to dispute resolution as a whole and how these processes could provide a gentle yet effective outcome.
But we must consider what the nature of this dispute really is. This man is basically saying, “I have a right to invade the personal space of my neighbor, whose money used to purchase this flight was just as green as mine, and in order not to be a terrible person, I am going to require some money.” Would we reward a petulant child who acted this way? Do we not operate with a basic human sense of respect for one another as people who are all crammed onto the same plane, travelling to the same place? If this man had turned around and asked the person behind him if that person minded his head in their lap, then we can consider that consent and there is no discussion. Since this exchange probably did not occur, there is no reason why the man should be allowed to put his seat back at all, let alone at the expense of his fellow travelers. Why should the inconvenienced person have to pay for negotiation or mediation services for a contract that they never entered?