FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - AS Sued After "Emotional Support" Pit Bull Attacks a 5-Year-Old Girl at PDX
Old Mar 1, 2019, 12:36 pm
  #26  
MSPeconomist
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,417
As more dogs are being taken by their owners to more places (not just airports and airplanes but also into hotels, restaurants in the USA, stores, public parks, special events other than those focused on dogs, etc.), one solution might be to criminalize having an aggressive dog that bites someone, just as it increasingly is a criminal offense to cause an accident because one had been texting while driving. Then there would be punishment even if the dog owner can't afford to pay as well as the deterrent effect.

It's interesting that some FAs are urging their employers to restrict dogs (pets and ESAs) on board, yet I've also seen FAs gushing over pets that are removed from their carriers for the entire flight or are being carried around the aircraft. I've even seen someone with a cabin dog get an upgrade on board into an empty business class pair of seats where the dog then was unrestrained. This was an EZE flight and the only explanation I know that's consistent with my observations is that the dog owner was an NRSA who could not be assigned a seat in business class because of an airline policy rule as there is no place to put a pet carrier (we know that storage in overhead bins is not a good idea and can be fatal for the animal) in the business class cabin. IMO if someone really "needs" an ESA, they probably shouldn't be working for an airline or in any other potentially high stress position. To me, it's ridiculous that nonrevs can bring animals (other than genuine service animals, including those helping veterans affected by PTSD) on board to annoy and possibly injure customers.

A good start would be to strictly enforce all existing rules and for airlines to make those rules as strong as possible without violating the ACCA. It would be better if airlines would focus part of their substantial lobbying effort on revising the ACCA so as to strictly limit ESAs to be trained and certified animals (so that they're really more like service animals) used in cases of PTSD and similar situations and to give airlines the right to refuse to permit other ESAs as well as pets to travel on scheduled commercial aircraft. If someone wants to bring a fake ESA, they can either set up a charter or fly private, and crew should have the right to refuse to work such flights.
MSPeconomist is offline