princeville

Are you reading the published policy for animals traveling as pets? Emotional support animals have different rules. They don't have to be kept in a carrier under a seat.

nigos

Thank you for this clarification. You are correct, I was referring to the policy on pets without appreciating the claim that emotional support animals do not travel under the same rules as pets. Of course it brings up the quandary When is a pet an emotional support animal and are there any emotional support animals that are not pets? I think pets are wonderful but I'm not comfortable with the dramatic increase of pets in aircraft cabins under the provision of allowing emotional support animals - especially when owners ignore animals that become a nuisance to other passengers.

villox

I plan to travel for the first time with an in cabin pet in January. I will keep him under the seat in a carrier and we are on paid first class fares.

If a fellow passenger had an allergy problem that they objected to I would expect that passenger to be reaccomodated on a non-pet flight if required. It’s practically not possible to identify a flight for me to be reaccomodated on with a non-allergic passenger because United has no record of this. However, United DOES know which flights likely won’t have pets.

FlyngSvyr

As a practical matter you are probably correct and why the airline does this. BUT, that is assuming the other passenger has no pressing engagements & is completely flexible. The problems start when the other passenger is on the last possible flight to a wedding, funeral, business meeting, etc...

Will your pet be an ESA or Service animal? If not then the other option is for the animal to be placed in the hold. There is no reason for the other passenger to be displaced in that case.

kale73

As an initial step, I would petition United Airlines to make a slight change in the rules that United Airlines has published to comply with U.S. government regulations.

As cited by PsuedoEuropeanGuy, United Airlines currently requires that the passenger have "current documentation" (no older than one year) from a licensed mental health professional in order to travel on United Airlines with an emotional support animal.

Since that documentation must stipulate that...
...should it be assumed that that "need" will simply disappear within a year's time?

I think United Airlines should change the "within one year" policy to indicate that the authorization will remain in effect in perpetuiity or until the passenger presents a letter from a licensed mental health professional certifying that he or she has been "cured" from the "need" to travel with an ESA. United Airlines should also annotate the profile of each passenger accordingly so that, once a passenger has been certified as "needing" an ESA to travel, then that passenger henceforth MUST have an ESA in his or her possession whenever he or she attempts to board a United Airlines flight (until such time as he or she presents documentation rescinding the "prescription").

This slight change in policy wouldn't affect anyone who genuinely needs an ESA to travel on United Airlines, but would make it more complicated for those who are claiming a pet as an ESA for reasons of sheer convenience or economics. Also, any passenger who is found to be regularly "changing" his or her ESA status (I need it, I need it not. I need it, I need it not) will raise a red flag in the system that might permit United Airlines to dig deeper into the credentials and qualifications of whatever "mental health professional" the passenger is using for his or her "on again / off again" mental illness.

Definitely not a panacea, but I think it would be a good first step within the constraints imposed by the government.

gene2632

So this means I can bring my therapy elephant on my next flight? Good news.

1P

If I'm in paid F (as I often am), with an allergy to dogs (as I have), and you arrive on the plane with a pet that could easily travel in the hold, you can be sure that you will be the one to be reaccommodated, not me.

villox

United allows in-cabin pets. They offer it as a service, set limits on them, and charge a fee. If you can point me to where in the contract I have signed with United that there is a risk of me being forced to instead switch to a service I did not purchase, PetSafe, I will accept there is a chance of the situation you describe arising.

As it is, as a GS on a paid first class ticket on a 1.5 hour flight, I expect I won’t have any issues.

3Cforme

The publicity would be awful - targeting the people with an emotional need (covered under the law, whether you and the OP like it or not). UA would be sued within a week.

3Cforme

Sorry, you're wrong. The passenger bringing the service animal or comfort animal is protected under the law. UA must accommodate them under terms of the law. You're not protected as an allergy sufferer with attitude.

villox

In this case the discussion was around a pet, not a ESA. Still, I do not believe there are any such accommodations United will make to force a pet off the flight in favor of an allergy sufferer.

surram

I read the rules. You can bring a therapy cat, dog and even a horse (if it is of a certain size). Crazy rules, huh?

joe_miami

The airlines are too afraid of bad p.r. to stand up for themselves when they're in the right. No way they're going to risk the wrath of activists everywhere over this. A guy on a Delta flight was bit in the face by an *emotional support pit bull* (!) back in June or July, and absolutely nothing has changed since.

MSPeconomist

This could be fun when the person who allegedly needs the ESA tries to travel to a place that requires animal quarantine or tries to fly an itinerary including segments on a foreign carrier that does not permit ESAs in the cabin.

kale73

On what grounds?

The passenger has represented to the airline that he or she "needs" Emotional Support Animal A in order to safely fly.
The passenger then shows up to board a later flight without Emotional Support Animal A.
The airline says "Uh uh. You (and your shrink) have represented that it would be unsafe for you to fly without ESA A. For your safety and that of everyone else on the plane, you cannot board this flight without ESA A or a letter from your shrink declaring that you are 'cured'."

I think the publicity would be stupendous!