Dog dies on IAH-LGA after FA supposedly insisted pax store dog overhead
Mar 16, 2018, 2:50 am
#466
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Virginia City Highlands
Programs: Nothing anymore after 20 years
Posts: 6,900
Mar 16, 2018, 6:17 am
#467
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,025
I must really be missing something. Not really sure I follow the cause of death being related to being in an overhead bin.
There should be as much oxygen and temperature regulation in the overhead bins as in the rest of the cabin. They are part of the cabin and there is no seal, let alone a hermetic one. People suggesting there isn't enough "airflow" in the overhead bins don't seem to understand how diffusion works. Also, we know French bulldogs aren't allowed in cargo holds because they're brachycephalic and this condition is exacerbated by stress. Being shoved in a noisier area under the seat would surely be more stressful to an animal than the more quiet and dark area in the overhead bins.
There should be as much oxygen and temperature regulation in the overhead bins as in the rest of the cabin. They are part of the cabin and there is no seal, let alone a hermetic one. People suggesting there isn't enough "airflow" in the overhead bins don't seem to understand how diffusion works. Also, we know French bulldogs aren't allowed in cargo holds because they're brachycephalic and this condition is exacerbated by stress. Being shoved in a noisier area under the seat would surely be more stressful to an animal than the more quiet and dark area in the overhead bins.
+1
Understand the business argument that pets make good revenue for UA, but I think the claims for compensation for dead animals must soon outweigh the benefits of the additional fees.
Does anyone know if there is a domestic or international airline that does not accept animals in the cabin?
Understand the business argument that pets make good revenue for UA, but I think the claims for compensation for dead animals must soon outweigh the benefits of the additional fees.
Does anyone know if there is a domestic or international airline that does not accept animals in the cabin?
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 16, 2018 at 11:31 am Reason: merging consecutive posts by same member
Mar 16, 2018, 7:04 am
#468
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,405
More unintentional evidence today that no "crime" was committed here, and that it's all just a case of a flight attendant not hearing what a passenger said. Add this to an improbable fact pattern (as most people realize, it's the bizarre circumstances that almost always lead to these "outrageous" airline stories), and you have a front-page story.
The NYTimes today reports that the Spanish-speaking dog owner (hmmm) says the flight attendant "had to know" that she told her there was a dog in her luggage because the dog barked during the flight. The fact that the flight attendant was crying when she found out about the dog at the end of the flight apparently didn't stop her from reaching this questionable conclusion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/u...www.google.com
As I've said before, the obvious solution to this improbable "problem" is requiring all animal carriers to be clearly marked (I suggested blaze orange) and not look like luggage. Of course, lots of pet owners, for various reasons, wouldn't like that. And I tend to agree with them: it's just not necessary, as this weird fact pattern is unlikely to play out again (especially with all the publicity this incident has garnered) and it's particularly unlikely it play out with a genetically-deficient dog breed susceptible to breathing problems. So I'm inclined to think that once the recriminations run their course, and United is finished getting all the criticisms that it doesn't entirely deserve, air travel with pets will not change much. Nor should it.
The NYTimes today reports that the Spanish-speaking dog owner (hmmm) says the flight attendant "had to know" that she told her there was a dog in her luggage because the dog barked during the flight. The fact that the flight attendant was crying when she found out about the dog at the end of the flight apparently didn't stop her from reaching this questionable conclusion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/u...www.google.com
As I've said before, the obvious solution to this improbable "problem" is requiring all animal carriers to be clearly marked (I suggested blaze orange) and not look like luggage. Of course, lots of pet owners, for various reasons, wouldn't like that. And I tend to agree with them: it's just not necessary, as this weird fact pattern is unlikely to play out again (especially with all the publicity this incident has garnered) and it's particularly unlikely it play out with a genetically-deficient dog breed susceptible to breathing problems. So I'm inclined to think that once the recriminations run their course, and United is finished getting all the criticisms that it doesn't entirely deserve, air travel with pets will not change much. Nor should it.
Mar 16, 2018, 7:30 am
#469
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Programs: UA GS
Posts: 2,438
More unintentional evidence today that no "crime" was committed here, and that it's all just a case of a flight attendant not hearing what a passenger said. Add this to an improbable fact pattern (as most people realize, it's the bizarre circumstances that almost always lead to these "outrageous" airline stories), and you have a front-page story.
The NYTimes today reports that the Spanish-speaking dog owner (hmmm) says the flight attendant "had to know" that she told her there was a dog in her luggage because the dog barked during the flight. The fact that the flight attendant was crying when she found out about the dog at the end of the flight apparently didn't stop her from reaching this questionable conclusion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/u...www.google.com
As I've said before, the obvious solution to this improbable "problem" is requiring all animal carriers to be clearly marked (I suggested blaze orange) and not look like luggage. Of course, lots of pet owners, for various reasons, wouldn't like that. And I tend to agree with them: it's just not necessary, as this weird fact pattern is unlikely to play out again (especially with all the publicity this incident has garnered) and it's particularly unlikely it play out with a genetically-deficient dog breed susceptible to breathing problems. So I'm inclined to think that once the recriminations run their course, and United is finished getting all the criticisms that it doesn't entirely deserve, air travel with pets will not change much. Nor should it.
The NYTimes today reports that the Spanish-speaking dog owner (hmmm) says the flight attendant "had to know" that she told her there was a dog in her luggage because the dog barked during the flight. The fact that the flight attendant was crying when she found out about the dog at the end of the flight apparently didn't stop her from reaching this questionable conclusion.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/u...www.google.com
As I've said before, the obvious solution to this improbable "problem" is requiring all animal carriers to be clearly marked (I suggested blaze orange) and not look like luggage. Of course, lots of pet owners, for various reasons, wouldn't like that. And I tend to agree with them: it's just not necessary, as this weird fact pattern is unlikely to play out again (especially with all the publicity this incident has garnered) and it's particularly unlikely it play out with a genetically-deficient dog breed susceptible to breathing problems. So I'm inclined to think that once the recriminations run their course, and United is finished getting all the criticisms that it doesn't entirely deserve, air travel with pets will not change much. Nor should it.
"The flight attendant who placed the carrier in the overhead bin said she had not heard the owner tell her that the dog was in the carrier,"
Mar 16, 2018, 7:52 am
#470
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: IAH
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 527
The dog is a genetically defective breed. It has trouble breathing at 72 degrees at sea level, anything beyond that and the dog has issues.
With that said, you have now shoved a living creature into a confined space. Within confined spaces without adequate ventilation/airflow you can have issues with carbon dioxide build up and lack of oxygen. I'm not sure what the lung capacity of a french bulldog is and how much air it uses under a stressful situation versus a normal situation, but putting it in the overhead with other luggage was not the answer.
Fault goes all around. The FA for the initial command. The owners for not checking on the dog during the flight. Or the owners flat out refusing to put their dog in the overhead and force the hands of the FA to escalate the issue to somebody who has some brains.
With that said, you have now shoved a living creature into a confined space. Within confined spaces without adequate ventilation/airflow you can have issues with carbon dioxide build up and lack of oxygen. I'm not sure what the lung capacity of a french bulldog is and how much air it uses under a stressful situation versus a normal situation, but putting it in the overhead with other luggage was not the answer.
Fault goes all around. The FA for the initial command. The owners for not checking on the dog during the flight. Or the owners flat out refusing to put their dog in the overhead and force the hands of the FA to escalate the issue to somebody who has some brains.
Mar 16, 2018, 8:04 am
#471
Join Date: Apr 2015
Programs: AA Gold, Enterprise PLT, Marriott Gold
Posts: 604
I know there are plenty of poor/snarky ticket counter and gate agents out there, but in my experiences FA's are the worst work group of all the Big 3 airlines in the US. I feel bad for the many great FA's who do a fantastic job, because sadly there are far too many one's like this one on UA, who likely think themselves as a authority figure liken to police. FAR too often I see FA's extremely snarky/rude, who escalate things, who are condescending. It's so frustrating to watch as a former airline worker. Nowadays people are too afraid to even politely question something because FA's are getting a bad name of being quick to toss people off flights at the snap of a finger.
The pax here do not go unblamed, I mean what person would allow this? I would get myself thrown off before I ever let them treat my pet like that. That being said, the majority of the blame goes to UA/FA in this case. I seriously hope they are sacked, and I expect UA will be making a big payout to this family. I also would like to see a sizeable donation personally to some pet organization as a good faith gesture. This is egregious and makes me sick that it ever came to this. Shame on the pax who sat by and watched, shame to the passengers who seriously listened to that crap let alone sit up there for hours barking (crying for help likely), but most of all, shame on that terrible FA. May they find a better career, bc FA is not for them.
The pax here do not go unblamed, I mean what person would allow this? I would get myself thrown off before I ever let them treat my pet like that. That being said, the majority of the blame goes to UA/FA in this case. I seriously hope they are sacked, and I expect UA will be making a big payout to this family. I also would like to see a sizeable donation personally to some pet organization as a good faith gesture. This is egregious and makes me sick that it ever came to this. Shame on the pax who sat by and watched, shame to the passengers who seriously listened to that crap let alone sit up there for hours barking (crying for help likely), but most of all, shame on that terrible FA. May they find a better career, bc FA is not for them.
Mar 16, 2018, 8:28 am
#472
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,405
Wait a minute:
The FA was the one who placed the dog in the overhead bin? This would be materially new information and make me far more skeptical that they didn't know a dog was in there. A carrier with a dog in it does not maintain uniform weight distribution; the dog would be moving around.
The FA was the one who placed the dog in the overhead bin? This would be materially new information and make me far more skeptical that they didn't know a dog was in there. A carrier with a dog in it does not maintain uniform weight distribution; the dog would be moving around.
Mar 16, 2018, 9:13 am
#473
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,025
There's been different reports about that. I've always assumed that the reports that say the FA placed the bag in the bin are sloppy, and that it was the pax who did it. Logic would suggest that if the FA picked up the bag, and fitted it into a likely crowded overhead bin, she would have noticed it was a pet carrier. I think I would, but who knows. (I haven't lifted any pet carriers lately.) Since this dog is quite small, though, maybe she wouldn't have noticed it. In any event, regardless, unless this flight attendant is the world's greatest actor, it seems virtually certain she didn't know there was a dog in the bin until the dog was dead.
I agree that the FA either didn’t know it was a dog or didn’t know that being in the overhead was a problem. I suspect the independent investigations will resolve that. My point has always been that they should have known it was a dog and that it was a problem to put a dog in the overhead. Also that it was unreasonable to expect a mother with a baby to deal with an FA that is fully resolved to do something. FAs are generally viewed, rightly or wrongly, with fear by most people because of their ability to bring law enforcement into customer service disputes.
Mar 16, 2018, 9:50 am
#474
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: body: A stone's throw from SFO, mind: SE Asia
Programs: Some of this 'n some of that
Posts: 17,263
I just had an epiphany. The only way to stop more animals from dying in the OHB is to ensure more people place animals in the OHB. That'll do it!!!!
Mar 16, 2018, 10:10 am
#475
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,950
Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana apparently disagrees, as he introduced legislation to prohibit airlines from allowing animals in overhead bins.
Mar 16, 2018, 10:12 am
#476
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,424
Mar 16, 2018, 1:10 pm
#477
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: USA
Programs: UA Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 1,189
If the carrier does not fit under the seat and United policy says that a dog carrier must be under thevseat, the dog should hnot have been allowed to fly. If UA knew the pet was on board, UA shoul have made sure the carries is properly stored. If the dog was smuggled, the blame is less clear.
I must really be missing something. Not really sure I follow the cause of death being related to being in an overhead bin.
There should be as much oxygen and temperature regulation in the overhead bins as in the rest of the cabin. They are part of the cabin and there is no seal, let alone a hermetic one. People suggesting there isn't enough "airflow" in the overhead bins don't seem to understand how diffusion works.
There should be as much oxygen and temperature regulation in the overhead bins as in the rest of the cabin. They are part of the cabin and there is no seal, let alone a hermetic one. People suggesting there isn't enough "airflow" in the overhead bins don't seem to understand how diffusion works.
Mar 16, 2018, 1:18 pm
#478
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,718
Good take on the airline "service dynamic" and how it discourages people from speaking up in cases like this, even when they are objectively right and the FA is objectively negligent or wrong:
https://slate.com/business/2018/03/w...rhead-bin.html
https://slate.com/business/2018/03/w...rhead-bin.html
Mar 16, 2018, 1:20 pm
#479
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NY Metro Area
Programs: AA 2MM Yay!, UA MM, Costco General Member
Posts: 49,025
They paid UA to carry the dog on board under approved conditions, i.e., that it was in a carrier that would fit under the seat in front of them. If the carrier did not fit properly under the seat in front of one of the passengers, they voided the contract. Yes, some seats have less room available under the seat in front due to where the seat supports are located but between the 2 seats cited, ONE of them should have had adequate room for the dog carrier.
You ARE missing something -- diffusion works slowly unless you have decent air flow. You don't have to have a hermetic seal to interrupt air flow and build up a concentration of gases. OHBs are neither designed to be sealed against air flow but they are also not designed for regular air flow. Try sitting for 3 hours with a paper bag over your head -- according to your diffusion hypothesis, you should be perfectly fine since it's not designed to be air tight and even has an open hole at one end.
You ARE missing something -- diffusion works slowly unless you have decent air flow. You don't have to have a hermetic seal to interrupt air flow and build up a concentration of gases. OHBs are neither designed to be sealed against air flow but they are also not designed for regular air flow. Try sitting for 3 hours with a paper bag over your head -- according to your diffusion hypothesis, you should be perfectly fine since it's not designed to be air tight and even has an open hole at one end.
Please read upthread where someone said that some rows on this aircraft won’t fit approved carriers. They wouldn’t know this until they were on the plane. They didn’t void anything as far as we know. Even if they did they should have been removed from the plane, not had their dog put in an untenable place on the plane.
Mar 16, 2018, 1:49 pm
#480
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 40
Please read upthread where someone said that some rows on this aircraft won’t fit approved carriers. They wouldn’t know this until they were on the plane. They didn’t void anything as far as we know. Even if they did they should have been removed from the plane, not had their dog put in an untenable place on the plane.