Dog dies on IAH-LGA after FA supposedly insisted pax store dog overhead
#151
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: TX
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 729
Its believable to me though that since multiple people on every flight every day bring too many or too large carry ons onto flights and then argue with FAs about where to stow them, the FA never fully comprehended that there was a dang dog in the carryon, lest I have to believe she or he never would have demanded it travel in the OH, for the many reasons you and others have cited. (FAA policy, UA policy, and just generally not being a psycho person)
#152
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SAN
Programs: 1K (since 2008), *G (since 1990), 1MM
Posts: 3,219
I agree. Which really makes UA responsible here.
Its believable to me though that since multiple people on every flight every day bring too many or too large carry ons onto flights and then argue with FAs about where to stow them, the FA never fully comprehended that there was a dang dog in the carryon, lest I have to believe she or he never would have demanded it travel in the OH, for the many reasons you and others have cited. (FAA policy, UA policy, and just generally not being a psycho person)
I hope UA decide pets are too much of a liability in the cabin and ban them.
#154
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,854
FT Discussion Rules Reminder
This unfortunate incident has generated a lot of discussion. Vigorous discussion is fine, but discussion of the other posters is not permitted on the FT site rules.
A number of inappropriate comments have been removed. So discuss and disagree but do not violate the site rules.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
This unfortunate incident has generated a lot of discussion. Vigorous discussion is fine, but discussion of the other posters is not permitted on the FT site rules.
12.2 Avoid Getting Personal
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.
If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
#156
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wichita
Posts: 628
f the passenger had an ounce of common sense they would question the request made by the flight attendant and make alternate arrangements. The passenger is just as responsible as the flight attendant. If someone asked you to steal a candy bar would you do it? I think the same thing applies here.
#158
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Francisco/Sydney
Programs: UA 1K/MM, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Something, IHG Gold, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 8,157
Perhaps if the FA had attended Compassion Training then (s)he would not have insisted on putting the dog in the overhead? Just a thought...
#159
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PHX
Programs: AAexp, AC75k, HertzPC, NationalEE, Accor/MariottP, Hilton/HyattG
Posts: 3,614
This is so sad... RIP dog
#160
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Houston
Programs: UA Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 12,693
Can you provide some citations for that?
#161
Moderator: American AAdvantage, Travel Safety/Security & Texas, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: AUS / GRK
Programs: AA, HHonors, Hertz
Posts: 13,485
There are animal cruelty laws here in Texas. If it is decided that the FA knowingly told the passenger to put the pet in the overhead bin, then the FA could be held to that law.
It is an election year, so my guess is that charges will be filed.
My guess is UA will pay off the passenger to keep them quiet. I'm not so sure they can pay off PETA, the SPCA, etc.
It is an election year, so my guess is that charges will be filed.
My guess is UA will pay off the passenger to keep them quiet. I'm not so sure they can pay off PETA, the SPCA, etc.
#162
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA GS 1MM
Posts: 693
I think that is likely to happen but then people will be screaming that they can't take their dog on United. I am sad about the dog but really feel for UA on this, there is just too much outrage/judgement in our society these days. Let the investigation proceed and ensure something similar can never happen again.
#163
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SNA
Programs: AA EXP, UA 1K (until it expires then never again), *wood Plat, Marriott Gold
Posts: 9,239
Looking at the bag in the photos it seems the mesh part is on the long side of the bag, while the OHB are not airtight by any means there's a) less airflow up there b) if the bag was placed such that the mesh sides were against other bags or the side of the bin I could see that bag becoming very stuffy quickly and with full flights and fuller OHBs these days the likelihood of the carrier having lots of airspace around it seems low c) as mentioned that breed of dog is prone to breathing issues in the best of scenarios. Given the available information I'd guess the dog did suffocate, which is all around crappy. While I can fully see how an inexperienced traveler could be intimidated by an FA and the reports are they did argue initially, they probably didn't want to end up being the next news story of a pax removed/arrested for not obeying an FA so I can understand why they might have relented for take-off....why they didn't take the dog down after that I do not understand. Which in no way exonerates the FA in question as clearly the instruction to place the dog in the bin was against policy (and just plain dumb), they like to throw down the our policies are basically The Word Of God card when it suits them so they need to be responsible for the outcomes when people follow said instructions. As for a lawsuit, other than the price of the dog they aren't likely to get much given dogs are considered property but I will give UAs PR team some credit for handling this much better than previous incidents...my guess is they pay out something under NDA due to the media coverage/emotional component (the pictures of the dead dog are just sad). As for the FA, seems she violated policy and several witnesses claim they heard the passenger tell her it was a dog so the "I didn't know" card shouldn't work, probably a tossup if she is canned. Near zero % that a CS issue will get an FA fired but violating policy that resulting a major PR CF...I could see it happening but then again I could also see the union fighting/winning a termination as well.
#164
Join Date: Feb 2006
Programs: UA, Starwood, Priority Club, Hertz, Starbucks Gold Card
Posts: 3,952
Truly despicable of the FA. I agree with one of the posts at the beginning of this thread that says that there seems to be a power trip going on, where we pax are intimidated into obeying crew “instructions” or face immediate removal from the aircraft. And I don’t need to hear the other side of the story to know that the FA (and by extension UA) was 100% wrong for putting the dog in the overhead bin.
Following up on the other thread about empathy training, perhaps UA can hone in the idea to its staff that sometimes when we pax object to a crew “instruction,” it’s not necessarily out of spite or antagonism, but because we have a valid point to make. But empathy begins with respect, and that’s in short supply among UA’s frontline staff.
Following up on the other thread about empathy training, perhaps UA can hone in the idea to its staff that sometimes when we pax object to a crew “instruction,” it’s not necessarily out of spite or antagonism, but because we have a valid point to make. But empathy begins with respect, and that’s in short supply among UA’s frontline staff.
#165
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,079