‘Who’s the bully here?’
United Airlines case against McGill professor wraps up in Quebec court
It could be another six months before a Quebec Superior Court judge decides whether a McGill engineering professor’s complaint website is to blame for United Airline employees being harassed by irate customers, or if this is a case of the airline giant is trying to bully and muzzle its critics.
On Wednesday, United and Jeremy Cooperstock wrapped up four days of sparring in a Montreal courtroom over the airline’s motion for an injunction demanding he remove the names and work contact information of senior employees from Untied.com, his nearly 20-year-old customer complaint site dedicated to the company.
These proceedings are the result of legal action United first took in 2012 after Cooperstock posted the publicly available names and company contact information of senior United employees on his website. The airline says that, as a result, irate customers harassed staff that could not be of assistance.
“It adds nothing to the process except slowing down the communication. It adds no value,” United lawyer Jeff Wittig told the court.
Wittig, who came from Houston, claimed his job had been disrupted because of emails and phone calls stemming from Cooperstock’s site.
“The end result is a delay to get them in the queue to customer care,” he said.
United presented as evidence a total of 1,396 emails and voice mails sent to employees it says were the result of Untied.com, which Cooperstock argues averages a few messages a day.
The professor, questioning Wittig directly, asked whether the lawyer had installed an email filter to ignore unwanted messages. The airline’s lawyer said he believed it would be too complicated to create an effective system.
Two of Cooperstock’s witnesses appeared via Skype from the United States, to demonstrate that customers did get help when they contacted people listed on Untied.com, but they say they didn’t get the contact information from his website.
“I did it all on my own. I yelled and screamed, I threatened to sue ... They were, in my opinion, a bunch of idiots,” said Ruben Knowles a witness in Austin, Texas. “I apologize for being grumpy, but this is irritating.”
United’s lawyer Mark Bantey later said that the irritation expressed by Knowles was an example of the type of complaints employees were exposed to as a result of Untied.com.
“He says he’s standing up against bullies, but who’s the bully here? I think it’s Mr. Cooperstock,” Bantey said in his closing arguments.
Cooperstock’s attorney, Molly Krishtalka, argued that although her client is stubborn in not changing his website, his freedom of expression should not be subject to the whims of those being criticized.
“That’s one of the hallmarks of a democratic society,” she said.
Krishtalka said that because the airline can’t shut down the site directly, it wants an injunction to indirectly attack Cooperstock.
Cooperstock also faces a copyright and trademark infringement case over Untied.com’s use of a similar logo and design to United.com.