Originally Posted by
BearX220
The fundamental question here is: who was responsible for controlling the environment where this happened? Delta, the dog owner, the federal government, the victim, the vet who certified the dog as a fake "support animal", or the dog itself?
- The dog is the least responsible party.
- The victim may have unconsciously provoked the dog but it's hard to argue he brought the attack on himself.
- The vet was not certifying the dog's mental health or that it was incapable of unprovoked aggression.
- Federal law does not require Delta to board unboxed, unscreened animals without fear of favor.
- The owner is responsible for controlling the dog but is aboard the plane at the sole discretion of Delta.
- Delta is finally responsible for maintaining a safe cabin environment, and is going to look pretty silly arguing otherwise when FAs deplane people for looking at them funny.
I think Delta has to eat it here, and if it leads to harsher rules against "support animals," fine.
Federal law DOES require special accommodation for service and support animals, but provides little guidance as to what constitutes a "support animal" beyond requiring a letter from a qualified mental health professional. Part of the problem was that airlines weren't requiring this letter at the time of booking or check-in. There was also no vetting of the animal as being capable of carrying out the role of an ESA. ESAs are completely unregulated; it's only as a result of this that airlines are requiring owners to self-certify that the animal can behave (and I'm guessing this self-certification includes language absolving the airline of any liability for the animal's misbehavior, as well as absorbing any costs associated for restoring the cabin to clean, working order.)
What's ultimately happened is that as a direct result of this incident, the airlines have tightened up the rules and made their own rules for ESAs, essentially telling the government that if they won't regulate the ESA issue, the airlines will. The other unfortunate reality is that this incident gave the airlines the leverage they needed to tighten up the rules: it's a lot easier to respond to what
has happened than it is to speculate as to what
might happen.
Delta will likely have to pay
something, but I also don't see that holding up on appeal: they were following industry practice as it pertains to following federal regulations, and spearheaded efforts to improve industry practice as a result.