Airlines Hike Pet Fares

Old Aug 7, 2008, 8:06 am
  #31  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
Originally Posted by cepheid
The AA entry should also be updated, as their fees are now $100 each way. I'd have posted these in the sticky thread, but it's locked... I would also recommend unlocking it, so that discussion like this can take place in that thread.
Thanks, I have made the correction in the sticky thread.
RSSrsvp is offline  
Old Aug 7, 2008, 4:17 pm
  #32  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,054
Originally Posted by RSSrsvp
The sticky thread will remain locked based on my experiences in the past with numerous posts cluttering up sticky threads.
Understood, but no need to shout. I'll continue to post on fares as I see changes...
cepheid is offline  
Old Aug 7, 2008, 8:39 pm
  #33  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
Originally Posted by cepheid
Understood, but no need to shout. I'll continue to post on fares as I see changes...
Whenever I sign an official post as a moderator I bold the fonts. Please keep those updates coming. Perhaps we will actually see a consumer savvy airline lower the pet fees and cause a chain reaction in the industry. @:-)
RSSrsvp is offline  
Old Aug 7, 2008, 8:44 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,054
Originally Posted by RSSrsvp
a consumer savvy airline
A what?
cepheid is offline  
Old Aug 7, 2008, 8:47 pm
  #35  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
Originally Posted by cepheid
A what?
Sorry, I guess that was a classic example of a oxymoron.
RSSrsvp is offline  
Old Aug 10, 2008, 5:31 pm
  #36  
Formerly known as tonivitanza
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 70
Animal Fees

Yes, I suspect the fees are designed as a disincentive to travel with your pet.
And yes, there are good reasons to charge for a pet, even if they ARE taking up space that would otherwise be occupied by your feet or your other carry-on.
Liability is a huge cost. A plane is diverted due to a severe allergic reaction. Everyone on board who is delayed demands compensation. The allergy-sufferer -- perhaps a child, perhaps someone who may not have even been aware of their condition before flying in an enclosed space with recirculated air and someone's cat -- spends days in the hospital. Could die. A dog whose owner has let it out of its bag bites or frightens someone -- maybe someone's child. The parent of that child hits or kicks the animal away. The whole cabin is in an uproar due to this kind of scenario, or just the one where the animal wanders away from the owner or decides to follow the irresponsible owner to the lav. The pet owner sues. Your animal leaves parasites or pee or poop on the plane and it has to be cleaned up before it makes someone sick, disgusts someone, leads them to trip and fall on the plane, forces them to go home with a flea or tick on their bag or coat. Your dog gets hurt during turbulence because you decided you HAD to keep it on your lap, despite being told to do otherwise. Then you sue.
Recently a United flight had to delayed/canceled due to a tick infestation discovered on board. How do you think it got there? What do you think that cost the airline and its passengers...in tangible and intangible costs?
How many flights are made miserable by baying, screeching animals under the seats? How would you like to pay a first-class fare, only to have a dog barking throughout the flight? How would you like to see a tray table with someone's dog sitting on it instead of in their carrier? (Remember, this is a creature that licks its own ... and eats its own poop, if you let it.) Every pet owner's "darling baby" (people who call their animals "babies" or "children" are offensive to me as a mother of humans) is ALWAYS dander-free, perfectly trained, hypoallergenic, never bites, etc., etc. Yes, you can say that babies and kids are MORE annoying. But they ARE human...you were once a baby, too. You were never a puppy or a kitty.
As a flight attendant it is rare that I have a pet onboard (aside from seeing-eye dogs) whose owner has not caused a problem or ignored repeated requests to keep their animal INSIDE the carriers. Anything that will persuade people to keep their pets at home -- where they are safer and more comfortable anyway -- is OK by me.
By the way, don't even get me started on people who buy fake vests and tags for their "emotional support/service animals" and browbeat their doctors into writing letters attesting to the passenger's serious mental health needs. If you're that crazy, you shouldn't be on a plane.
SCToni is offline  
Old Aug 10, 2008, 8:40 pm
  #37  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,054
Originally Posted by tonivitanza
A plane is diverted due to a severe allergic reaction. (...) spends days in the hospital. Could die.
I'm sure it exists, but I've never heard of a potentially fatal animal dander allergy. Nuts, shellfish, penicillin, yes... but not animal dander.

Have you ever heard of a flight being diverted due to an animal allergy? I sure haven't. More to the point, anyone with an allergy that severe could react to cat hair on someone's sweater, and therefore shouldn't be on an airplane anyway without a facemask and/or epipen. So... let's not blow things out of proportion, shall we?

Even more importantly, this whole discussion is OT because it's irrelevant to how or why fees are going up. The airlines often bill these fee hikes as "due to increasing fuel costs," yet the fees are going up much faster than fuel costs. If the primary purpose of the fees is to cover liability, they shouldn't increase much at all, since the liability is fairly constant (as are the costs to adjudicate such).

Originally Posted by tonivitanza
Recently a United flight had to delayed/canceled due to a tick infestation discovered on board. How do you think it got there?
Ticks don't always travel on animals; they are mobile by themselves and seek out sources of heat, just FYI. They also travel on humans and/or on or in baggage.

Originally Posted by tonivitanza
How many flights are made miserable by baying, screeching animals under the seats?
I've never been disturbed by an animal on any flight, much less had a flight "made miserable." On the other hand, I've had plenty of flights made miserable by crying babies, and I'd argue that parents changing dirty diapers on the seat or tray table (which happens far too often) is a much bigger health concern than stray animal dander. That doesn't mean I'm advocating against babies on planes.

Originally Posted by tonivitanza
As a flight attendant it is rare that I have a pet onboard (aside from seeing-eye dogs) whose owner has not caused a problem or ignored repeated requests to keep their animal INSIDE the carriers.
Really? Maybe because the ones who don't cause any problems are entirely forgettable, if you even knew they were there. When I bring my pets on board, as I disembark, almost every flight attendant says, "Wow, I didn't even know you brought a dog!" These were flight attendants who personally served me during the flight, mind you.

Originally Posted by tonivitanza
By the way, don't even get me started on people who buy fake vests and tags for their "emotional support/service animals"
No need to get you started, since you seem to have gotten yourself started already.

I'd kindly ask you NOT to turn this thread into a discussion about how miserable pets are, how they should never be allowed on planes, how it's OK for babies to make people miserable just because they're human, or any other pet-bashing intolerance. This thread is about airline fees, whether or not they are rising, and what effect that has on the traveler. It is not for spouting inflammatory opinions about whether or not pets should be allowed on the flight.

It's quite clear you don't like dogs (and possibly cats) whether or not they're on the plane. Like it or not, many airlines allow pets on planes, and I don't think these fee hikes are because they want to increase the disincentive to bring pets. If airlines truly wanted fewer people to bring pets on board, they would simply forbid on-board pets. If you're really that anti-pet, there are airlines who don't allow on-board pets (e.g. WN). The free market is a wonderful thing...

Oh, and welcome to FT.
cepheid is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2008, 9:36 am
  #38  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4
So, what's the consensus on the best/cheapest airlines for pets?

I read through the FAQ, but it seems a bit outdated. I just sent the moderator a note regarding the Virgin America fees which seem to be $100 on their website and not the $50 as was previously posted.

What are your experiences?
jedigras is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2008, 1:42 pm
  #39  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,054
Originally Posted by jedigras
So, what's the consensus on the best/cheapest airlines for pets?
I think NW remains the "cheapest" at $80 at the moment, but that will probably change once they merge with DL.

For my money, I think UA is the "best" for in-cabin pets, although certainly not the cheapest, and this is entirely because of Economy Plus. The extra few inches really do help with an in-cabin pet, because they allow you to place the pet under the seat more easily and to still have some legroom during the flight. On short flights this may not be an issue, but most of my flights are transcons, where sufficient legroom is imperative. If you aren't an elite on UA, though, you'd have to buy up to E+, either one-time or an annual membership, so that obviously increases your costs.
cepheid is offline  
Old Aug 11, 2008, 4:33 pm
  #40  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Programs: DL FO, Marriott Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 12,003
Folks, please stay on topic!

Once again the topic is the increased pet fees being charged by the airlins and nothing else.

Thanks for your understanding and consideration in this matter.
RSSrsvp - Moderator
RSSrsvp is offline  
Old Aug 16, 2008, 5:51 am
  #41  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: TPA/ALC/CDG
Programs: Iberia Plus, Flying Blue, Delta Skymiles, Priority Club
Posts: 68
Wink

Originally Posted by swag
Pet fees are among the junkiest of junk fees. Consider that I can bring an infant on my lap for free, but it's $100-ish to bring the dog under the seat.

I can see charging something, though, not to compensate the airline for extra service (since there really is none), but to deter the behavior. I think neither the airline nor the flying public wants to have a cabin full of underseat pets, and having a relatively nominal fee helps limit the number of pax who bring the pets along.
Checking recently, I noticed many airlines only along 1 in cabin pet per flight. So there's no risk of a cabin full of woofers and meowers.
asimegusta is offline  
Old Aug 16, 2008, 5:51 am
  #42  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: TPA/ALC/CDG
Programs: Iberia Plus, Flying Blue, Delta Skymiles, Priority Club
Posts: 68
Wink Airlines allowing only 1 in cabin pet per flight

Originally Posted by swag
Pet fees are among the junkiest of junk fees. Consider that I can bring an infant on my lap for free, but it's $100-ish to bring the dog under the seat.

I can see charging something, though, not to compensate the airline for extra service (since there really is none), but to deter the behavior. I think neither the airline nor the flying public wants to have a cabin full of underseat pets, and having a relatively nominal fee helps limit the number of pax who bring the pets along.
Checking recently, I noticed many airlines rules allow 1 in cabin pet per flight. So there's no risk of a cabin full of woofers and meowers.

Last edited by asimegusta; Aug 16, 2008 at 5:52 am Reason: mispelling
asimegusta is offline  
Old Aug 16, 2008, 5:41 pm
  #43  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Boulder, CO
Programs: UA, AA, WN; HH, MR, IHG
Posts: 7,054
Originally Posted by asimegusta
Checking recently, I noticed many airlines only along 1 in cabin pet per flight. So there's no risk of a cabin full of woofers and meowers.
UA allows 2 or 3 in the Y cabin, and 1 or 2 in domestic F (for narrowbodies and widebodies, respectively). Last time I checked, AA allowed up to 5 pets in the Y cabin. Regardless, this discussion isn't really about pet fees going up...
cepheid is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2008, 1:15 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2
Going home to see family - What a surprise!

My husband and I are traveling to see our family tomorrow. He recently returned from his second tour overseas (he is in the service) and we are excited to see family.

When I went to delta's website today and after calling customer service several times I was notified that for my small 5lb dog to travel it would cost more than our airfare. The price (for him to travel) since our initial purchase of our tickets has gone up in price 100% (org. price $75, current price $150). Is this fair? Our dog will be under my seat, he doesnt take any additional room or assistance from any of the crew members. Is it right to charge $300 or $200 for our dog to fly when our airfare was $240 each; and we actually have a seat on the plane.

I understand with the cost of everything going up in the world Delta has to see where they can make profits, but how can the company do this to regular families? Our dog is part of the family; we would like him to be with us, but at a reasonable cost. We are a military family on a military income, if we knew the price for him to travel was going to be so outrageous we would of looked at other options. I don't understand how the airlines can do this to people, don't they understand what it is to have a family?
PAS81 is offline  
Old Sep 3, 2008, 1:20 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: ATL
Posts: 3,219
It has nothing to do with cost of service. Airlines have said that they want to discourage people traveling with pets. Raising pet fees also are hidden costs which do not effect most people, so they can get away with huge increases.

I think you should have booked your at the time you booked your ticket.

Over the summer went on our trip from NYC to Chicago to visit family and decided this year that it was much cheaper to drive than fly.
Tummy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.