bzribee

I have severe SEVERE reactions to cats (asthma, to be specific), and various levels of response to larger dogs. I carry an epipen with me, multiple masks and a doctor's note and have found gate agents to generally be empathic and helpful. I will usually find the animal owners and have a non-threatening chat about where they'll sit, so on. The gate agents generally help me sit far away. I have been told (twice?) that whoever checks in first gets priority if there's an issue but I've never put that to the test.

I am not as accepting about this situation as I sound. I get very anxious when I see animals at the gate and close to freaked out if I see a cat (large dogs usually sit up front so I aim for the rear of the aircraft). I have had 10+ emergency room visits after cat exposure, the last visit was most terrifying. It was many years ago and was the visit when I finally put together that each ER trip was after being around cats. So now I know and I protect myself.

I can get very angry that life-threatening asthma does not trump the casual- save-money-maybe-ESA owner. And that I really have no rights except to take another flight. As far as I know all airlines in the US allow animals. I'm starting to hate flying. I feel like I'm putting myself in harm's way each time I take a flight.

2old4coach

Welcome to flyertalk!

Good advice on the PNR note.
As for starting to hate flying: I dread flying on UA, AA and Delta . I have 1 million on each of the above domestic carriers.
I have little faith that they will go one inch to help out anyone unless they profit from it. I do what I can to buy a first class ticket hoping that My wife does not have to sit near a cat. I will however make a note for her in the PNR. Folks at the EXP desk are the only helpful people left at AA.

kale73

It's not just allergies. My dear late mother had an extreme case of cynophobia. Size was not the issue: the presence of any dog would cause her to enter a state of heightened anxiety. Her blood pressure would shoot up and she would experience shortness of breath until the dog was out of sight. She wasn't allergic, but there was no possible way she could have traveled on a United AIrlines flight with a dog anywhere near her in the cabin.

Her fear was (for the most part) irrational. We speculated that she probably had had an "unfortunate incident" involving a canine in her childhood, but she couldn't recall anything specific. Neverthelsss, her reaction was swift and predictable. In the 80s and 90s, she regularly traveled by air, perhaps even on United Airlines, but as the possibility of encountering canines in places where she could not easily avoid them (i.e., airports and planes, including those operated by United Airlines) increased over the years, she stopped flying altogether.

Her phobia was psychological in nature, just as the issues of those people who legitimately seek the company of so-called "emotional support animals" on United Airlines are. Their "treatment" of whatever mental illness they may have been diagnosed with was her "trigger".

villox

I read that at Air Canada, they had or have a policy on cats, whereby if you call in advance to tell them of a cat allergy they would block the flight from having any pets, if the plane didn't have a HEPA filter (I assume the ESA issue isn't as much a problem in Canada). So it's first come first served, in a way. They also have some concept of a 5-row 'buffer zone' around allergy suffers on the HEPA flights. Dogs were a different matter and I guess only the buffer zone applied either way - they got court-imposed restrictions overturned because dog dander doesn't spread or linger as much as cat dander.

I'm all for some level of accommodation for allergy sufferers like these. The lack of regularly declared medical emergencies where pets vs allergies come into play is small enough that i suspect were overblowing the overall issue.

David Randles

I wouldn't sit next to an animal for a full flight. I'm allergic to dogs so its completely inconveniencing me for someone else to bring an animal on board. Most airlines offer assistance to disabled passengers anyway.

physioprof

When I was in college, I used to fly on Continental all the time with my pet rat in my knapsack, and hold her in my lap in flight. When other passengers asked, I told them she was a tasmanian hamster.

seenitall

As an alternative to requiring that the pet fee be paid for any in-cabin animal -- which could be illegal if the animal is a genuine ESA or service animal, how about this for a revised UA policy:

If you bring an animal into the cabin, you agree to be re-seated as necessary (including F back to Y) to avoid discomfort to nearby PAX who identify themselves as being allergic, or if the animal misbehaves or fails to remain in its designated space.

But putting animal-owners on notice that it is they that might be moved to the last row in Y if their animal offends, this could reduce the instances in which they bring an animal on a flight to only those where they really need it. Further, no one can argue with this policy because after all, UA policy is clear that seat assignments are never guaranteed. Thus, if the re-seating in unacceptable (the same as may occur in an IRROPs assignment), the animal-owner is welcome to reaccommodated on a later flight.

as219

This is a totally unworkable idea from UA's perspective, and for an obvious reason. UA is not in the business of differentiating between "genuine" and "bogus" ESAs; if you have the proper paperwork, then the ESA is allowed. Their working assumption has to be that all ESAs with proper paperwork are the real deal. So what you effectively propose is that UA preemptively threaten to re-accommodate a passenger in need of emotional support if someone in the vicinity is "offended" by the animal, whether due to allergies or otherwise. I don't think so. You seem to believe that a not insubstantial number of ESAs are bogus, which is of course your prerogative, but UA isn't going to base its policy on this belief. In the end who is more likely to sue, someone with a documented emotional problem clearly covered by the ACAA, or someone who gets upset that a dog invades his/her space?

seenitall

You didn't read my post. I did not suggest that UA need differentiate between bogus and genuine ESAs. All I suggested was that if the policy was to re-seat the ESA owner, it is possible that many ESA owners might choose to dispense with the ESA. But this would be their voluntary choice. They remain welcome to fly with their ESA -- but just to be forewarned that if there are problems, it will be they that will be re-seated rather than the affected Pax. Again, UA seat reservations are never guaranteed, so this policy is eminently workable. I don't think there is anything in the ACAA that says that particular seat chosen by an ESA owner is more sacrosanct than the seat chosen by any other Pax.

WineCountryUA

It does clear state that for the service animal case

and could be inferred to say the same for ESA.


=================

One last reminder, this thread is NOT about ESA or how one might change ESA -- as referenced earlier there are multiple threads for that discussion. This thread is about what a UA passenger might reasonably do when traveling with animals in the cabin is a problem for the passenger.

Thanks for staying on topic.


WineCountryUA
UA coModerator

TMC

Sounds like an episode of Fawlty Towers?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basil_the_Rat

LordTentacle

The COC nor any law I can provide finds any protection for passengers from service animals of any form.

I can't see the airline being required to do anything other than
1. Re-seat if possible
2. Offer alternative transport with the knowledge that its like being in any public place and there could be a service animal anywhere at any time
3. Offer a full refund

Having been on a number of flights were people have taken exception to my wifes service dog (not an ESA) every airline has been very consistent in telling the other passengers that they have the 3 options above. One person once did not accept this and made a scene and the captain came out and told them to get off the plane as they were causing a disturbance and then walked over to my wife and offered up a sincere apology over the "unfair and unwarranted attention".

Cant comment on pets on planes as I've not seen one in a long time

zitsky

Flying with a pet can be stressful. I've done it twice. I think most people are considerate and would be willing to move if asked. But it seems the answer is a middle seat or back of the plane.

kale73

I'm sure it's stressful for the human, but I suspect it can be far more stressful for the pet. Based on this forum, humans find dealing with United Airlines personnel and policies stressful enough. Forcing a poor defenseless animal to put up with United Airlines' shenanigans should warrant a PETA protest.

RooseveltL

The passenger (not myself) was 1K and upgraded. Not sure it matters but this has happened on multiple UAL flights.