United forces woman to put puppy in overhead bid, where it dies during flight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a terrible story and I feel for those who saw a dead puppy as they deplaned, owners included. I say this as someone who doesn't like dogs.

However, I can't help but think the current of culture of "I'll take my pet everywhere with me and invoke the law to sue you if you challenge me, be damned!" contributed to the flight attendant's thought process that resulted the dog's placement in the overhead bin. I imagine that air stewards are fed up with passengers who think the rules apply to everyone except them. I work in an industry that utilizes similar protocols as aviation (healthcare), and I can attest that visitors and patients toe the line between acceptable and non-acceptable use of animals in healthcare environments.

Pretty much anyone can claim their pet is a "support animal" nowadays, and depending on where and how they do it, they can get away with it without having to produce documentation or proof beyond the stupid vest they bought on Amazon or bogus certificate they procured on the internet.

The flight attendant made an error in judgment by asking the family to place the dog in the overhead compartment and is going to have to live with the professional and personal repercussions, even if they are needlessly severe and invasive. I'm interested in learning more about the circumstances led to that even happening.

Her incompetence and actions led directly to the death of an innocent animal. She has totally earned any professional repercussions that she gets. if she is found to have been deliberately cruel, she should face criminal charges, too.

If you're talking about the irresponsible owner, I agree.

The owner actually followed airline procedure. It was the airline employee who effed up and caused the death of an innocent animal and is now apparently lying about the extent of her involvement.....shameful.

Not if her carrier was blocking the aisle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would have walked off the plane before allowing my dog to go into an overhead bin. Common sense says there is not enough air for a puppy to breathe there.

+1
The woman should have declined to fly.

[Anonymous]

The dog owner also seems devoid of common sense. Who would think a small enclosed space would have enough air for a living being to breathe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a terrible story and I feel for those who saw a dead puppy as they deplaned, owners included. I say this as someone who doesn't like dogs.

However, I can't help but think the current of culture of "I'll take my pet everywhere with me and invoke the law to sue you if you challenge me, be damned!" contributed to the flight attendant's thought process that resulted the dog's placement in the overhead bin. I imagine that air stewards are fed up with passengers who think the rules apply to everyone except them. I work in an industry that utilizes similar protocols as aviation (healthcare), and I can attest that visitors and patients toe the line between acceptable and non-acceptable use of animals in healthcare environments.

Pretty much anyone can claim their pet is a "support animal" nowadays, and depending on where and how they do it, they can get away with it without having to produce documentation or proof beyond the stupid vest they bought on Amazon or bogus certificate they procured on the internet.

The flight attendant made an error in judgment by asking the family to place the dog in the overhead compartment and is going to have to live with the professional and personal repercussions, even if they are needlessly severe and invasive. I'm interested in learning more about the circumstances led to that even happening.

Her incompetence and actions led directly to the death of an innocent animal. She has totally earned any professional repercussions that she gets. if she is found to have been deliberately cruel, she should face criminal charges, too.

If you're talking about the irresponsible owner, I agree.

The owner actually followed airline procedure. It was the airline employee who effed up and caused the death of an innocent animal and is now apparently lying about the extent of her involvement.....shameful.

Where is your evidence that the the airline employee is "lying?" You're hearing one extremely biased account. An no, the owner wasn't following airline procedure, if the carrier was blocking the aisle.

If the carrier was blocking the aisle then it either needed to go under the seat as required OR the owner should have been asked to disembark. Putting the dog into an airless compartment was not the proper solution. I'm guessing that the owner wasn't happy about it but had no idea that her dog's life was in danger being stowed up there. The flight attendant on the other hand absolutely should have been aware that stowing a pet up there was not a safe thing to do.

Why does a flight attendant have more responsibility and insight than the dog's owner? The owner should have gotten off the plane instead of agreeing to the move. Your animal, your choice, your responsibility.

Because the FA knows all the airlines policies and procedures, and knows what is safe and what isn't. The FA flies on an airplane all day. The passenger doesn't. If the FA said it's safe to put the dog in the overhead, then it should be safe -- after all, the FA flies all day and should know what is safe or not right?

Except that's not what happened. The flight attended claimed she didn't know an animal was in the carrier, not that "it's perfectly safe."

Even if that was the case, an owner should know their animal's tolerance more than a flight attendant. It's YOUR animal. You make the decisions. If the owner truly felt concern, she should have left the plane.

The FA is not being truthful. It was obvious to other passengers that there was a dog inside that carrier. The lie just makes the FA look even worse.

The woman sounds like she is being untruthful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:United has gone out of its way to make itself more accommodating of people who want to travel with their pets than pretty much any other airline. You have to wonder if incidents like this will make them rethink their policies on this and make them more restrictive.

Huh? United has the highest rate of pet deaths on flights.

United generally sucks, we stopped flying them several years ago, their entire corporate culture is a disaster.

[Anonymous]

People need to wake up and actually punish these ghouls for their aggregious behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way the FA didn't know there was a dog in there if she's the one who put it in the compartment. An empty carrier would feel empty as she lifted it overhead and placed it in the bin. A carrier with an animal inside would be heavier, and mostly likely, its weight would perceptibly shift around as the carrier was lifted and placed. Obviously.

Have you seen the pictures of the carrier? It's not obviously a pet carrier, it looks like any other bag.

It's a TSA-approved pet carrier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UA has really suffered in the PR dept. Didn't they drag off a passenger last year that went viral? And now this?

Yes, but it doesn't matter. United will be fine. Congress has allowed there to be only THREE major airlines in America. There's not enough competition for a terrible company like United to be forced to improve.

The airline industry was deregulated in the 1970s. What law allows there to be only 3 airlines? Southwest, which transported more passengers than United last year (but fewer than American and Delta) would beg to differ.

I said major. Recently there were 6. Now there are 3. That hurts consumers.

What are the major 3?

I'd say there are 5: United, American, Southwest, Delta, Jetblue. Alaska may be worthy of adding to the list now that they bought Virgin America and took over their routes also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:United has gone out of its way to make itself more accommodating of people who want to travel with their pets than pretty much any other airline. You have to wonder if incidents like this will make them rethink their policies on this and make them more restrictive.

Huh? United has the highest rate of pet deaths on flights.

United generally sucks, we stopped flying them several years ago, their entire corporate culture is a disaster.

Yup. Their fatality rate is 2%, despite all their "accommodations."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way the FA didn't know there was a dog in there if she's the one who put it in the compartment. An empty carrier would feel empty as she lifted it overhead and placed it in the bin. A carrier with an animal inside would be heavier, and mostly likely, its weight would perceptibly shift around as the carrier was lifted and placed. Obviously.

Have you seen the pictures of the carrier? It's not obviously a pet carrier, it looks like any other bag.

The airline decides at checkin if your bag and dog meet the requirements. If it wasn't a proper carried, she should not have received a pet ticket. Which she did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UA has really suffered in the PR dept. Didn't they drag off a passenger last year that went viral? And now this?

Yes, but it doesn't matter. United will be fine. Congress has allowed there to be only THREE major airlines in America. There's not enough competition for a terrible company like United to be forced to improve.

The airline industry was deregulated in the 1970s. What law allows there to be only 3 airlines? Southwest, which transported more passengers than United last year (but fewer than American and Delta) would beg to differ.

I said major. Recently there were 6. Now there are 3. That hurts consumers.

What are the major 3?

I'd say there are 5: United, American, Southwest, Delta, Jetblue. Alaska may be worthy of adding to the list now that they bought Virgin America and took over their routes also.

United, American, and Delta are the only legacy carriers left in America. I may be wrong, but I believe these carriers have greater lobbying power than the others you've mentioned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would have walked off the plane before allowing my dog to go into an overhead bin. Common sense says there is not enough air for a puppy to breathe there.

+1
The woman should have declined to fly.

It was mid flight, dummies. Good luck walking off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way the FA didn't know there was a dog in there if she's the one who put it in the compartment. An empty carrier would feel empty as she lifted it overhead and placed it in the bin. A carrier with an animal inside would be heavier, and mostly likely, its weight would perceptibly shift around as the carrier was lifted and placed. Obviously.

Have you seen the pictures of the carrier? It's not obviously a pet carrier, it looks like any other bag.

The airline decides at checkin if your bag and dog meet the requirements. If it wasn't a proper carried, she should not have received a pet ticket. Which she did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don’t like flying with dogs on board then DONT FLY. You dog haters can take the bus or walk. It is our right to fly with dogs, thanks to the airlines policies. And it is our right to persecute and ostracize vicious flight attendants line the one that killed the dog

Well, if any good comes out of it perhaps the airlines unreasonably liberal policy of allowing animals to travel in the cabins of planes will change and only legitimate service dogs will be allowed.

Idiot dog owners who fancy themselves Paris Hilton are the worst kind of pet owners.

Non service dogs do not belong on CONUS airplanes. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would have walked off the plane before allowing my dog to go into an overhead bin. Common sense says there is not enough air for a puppy to breathe there.

+1
The woman should have declined to fly.

It was mid flight, dummies. Good luck walking off.

The articles I read the dog spent the entire flight in the overhead compartment, which tends to suggest that it was put up there prior to take-off, not mid-flight.

But since the articles vary significantly in the details depending on which passengers the reporter spoke to, they're all a bit suspect.