Mar 20, 2018, 10:55 am
Last edit by: WineCountryUA
Chicago Tribune
WSJ: 'United Suspends Cargo Program for Pets' (paywall)
United Airlines is suspending new reservations for pets traveling in the cargo compartment after three dogs were loaded onto wrong planes last week and a fourth died in an overhead bin.
United will honor reservations that have already been confirmed for PetSafe, its program for pets traveling in cargo, the airline said Tuesday. The suspension does not affect pets traveling with their owners in the cabin.
“We are conducting a thorough and systematic review of our program for pets that travel in the cargo compartment to make improvements that will ensure the best possible experience for our customers and their pets,” United spokeswoman Maggie Schmerin said in an emailed statement.
The airline said it would complete the review by May 1.
United will honor reservations that have already been confirmed for PetSafe, its program for pets traveling in cargo, the airline said Tuesday. The suspension does not affect pets traveling with their owners in the cabin.
“We are conducting a thorough and systematic review of our program for pets that travel in the cargo compartment to make improvements that will ensure the best possible experience for our customers and their pets,” United spokeswoman Maggie Schmerin said in an emailed statement.
The airline said it would complete the review by May 1.
Under fire for its handling of pets, United Continental Holdings Inc will stop taking reservations for its live-animal shipping program at least until May 1 while it reviews the program.
...
United will continue to transport animals with existing reservations during the program’s suspension. A spokesman said the review would be conducted with independent animal-safety experts.
...
United will continue to transport animals with existing reservations during the program’s suspension. A spokesman said the review would be conducted with independent animal-safety experts.
United Suspends Cargo Program for Pets (PetSafe)
Mar 20, 2018, 8:50 pm
#61
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: HNL
Programs: UA GS4MM, MR LT Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 6,447
While UA has the highest animal death rate, the systemwide death incident is very high. Per DOT, in 2017, 506,994 animals were transported by airlines, for a rate of 0.79 incidents per 10,000 animals transported. In 2016, 523,743 animals were transported, for a rate of 0.92 incidents per 10,000 animals transported. We wouldn't fly humans at those rates.
Mar 20, 2018, 9:05 pm
#62
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Chicago IL US
Programs: UA 1K; National Executive Elite; Hertz PC & Hotels Galore
Posts: 946
@HNLbasedFlyer I think you might be missing my point in your attempt to extrapolate.
To me, a lot depends on where one stands -- some people might find a rate of .79 injuries or accidents per 10,000 animals to be unacceptable. Personally, I've always felt that air travel poses an unnecessary risk for domesticated animals.
To me, a lot depends on where one stands -- some people might find a rate of .79 injuries or accidents per 10,000 animals to be unacceptable. Personally, I've always felt that air travel poses an unnecessary risk for domesticated animals.
Mar 20, 2018, 10:08 pm
#63
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Seoul
Programs: None anymore
Posts: 983
Why? I live in Korea and plan to ship my dog with me when I move to the US. Should I leave my dog, abandon it forever, and give it to a shelter where it will likely be killed? Please tell us about your humble opinions about this matter.
Mar 20, 2018, 10:16 pm
#64
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,165
No, pets are not human, but humans are also animals and all animals should be treated with kindness and respect. If United just can't figure out how to transport a well-prepared animal from A to B without losing or killing them, then it's obvious one should choose another airline if they need to transport their pet. If one really cannot stand sharing the passenger cabin with a service or emotional support animal, then one should consider flying private. Transporting a pet in a crate is not rocket science, especially when United supposedly has a process to do this, inherited from Continental - dedicated staff, transport vans, boarding/deplaning timing, and climate controlled waiting areas and cargo spaces. If they can't do this simple thing right, what hope is there for the really complicated parts of their operation?
Last edited by WineCountryUA; Mar 20, 2018 at 10:46 pm Reason: discuss the issue; not the poster(s)
Mar 20, 2018, 10:20 pm
#65
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: IAH
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 527
While UA has the highest animal death rate, the systemwide death incident is very high. Per DOT, in 2017, 506,994 animals were transported by airlines, for a rate of 0.79 incidents per 10,000 animals transported. In 2016, 523,743 animals were transported, for a rate of 0.92 incidents per 10,000 animals transported. We wouldn't fly humans at those rates. It all depends I guess on what you consider to be 'safe'. I don't feel like it's 'safe' to check the pet on any airline -- it should be a costly option of last resort.
Mar 20, 2018, 10:48 pm
#66
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 19,488
LOL. There's far worse in /PR.
Imagine if the human mortality rate on the Oregon Trail and other great migrations had been that low.
Imagine if the human mortality rate on the Oregon Trail and other great migrations had been that low.
Mar 20, 2018, 11:06 pm
#67
Join Date: Feb 2012
Programs: Hertz PC
Posts: 657
United Airlines Decision Will Strand Military Family Pets on Guam
Mar 21, 2018, 12:06 am
#70
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington DC
Programs: Delta DM CO PE OZ GE AMTRAK
Posts: 524
No, pets are not human, but humans are also animals and all animals should be treated with kindness and respect. If United just can't figure out how to transport a well-prepared animal from A to B without losing or killing them, then it's obvious one should choose another airline if they need to transport their pet. If one really cannot stand sharing the passenger cabin with a service or emotional support animal, then one should consider flying private. Transporting a pet in a crate is not rocket science, especially when United supposedly has a process to do this, inherited from Continental - dedicated staff, transport vans, boarding/deplaning timing, and climate controlled waiting areas and cargo spaces. If they can't do this simple thing right, what hope is there for the really complicated parts of their operation?
to put the DOT numbers in perspective, you have to neutralize all kinds of external factors, what kind of dogs is it (does UA take in higher % of at risk dogs?), what kind of trips is it? is UA trips on average longer and more complicated, more international routing, more connections? It is not as simple as comparing the odd across different airlines.
the odd of dogs getting killed on United is very very small. I suspect the law of small numbers is at play here. There is quite a bit random variability. just like talking about aviation safety in general. For example, out of billion passengers transported, 50 people died last year, 150 people died this year, with this can you claim this year is 3 times as unsafe as last year? of course not. anyone with some good statistical education knows it is more complicated than that.
it is possible UA need to change certain procedures, maybe having a more rigorous intake exam, etc. (just take less dogs, anything that doesn't look good, refuse transport). However, people on this forum and on the blogsphere, without any specialized knowledge and detailed data, are all ........ting here.
Mar 21, 2018, 12:09 am
#71
Join Date: May 2010
Location: AVP & PEK
Programs: UA 1K 1.8MM
Posts: 6,332
Mar 21, 2018, 5:14 am
#72
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: UA GS>1K>Nothing; DL DM 2MM; AS 75K>Nothing>MVP
Posts: 9,341
As for leaving the dog, as my wife would say "If it's a choice between you and the dog, guess who gets left behind."
Mar 21, 2018, 6:37 am
#73
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
My opinion is that it is traumatic for the pet to be transported in the hold and placed in quarantine.
Mar 21, 2018, 6:52 am
#74
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Seoul
Programs: None anymore
Posts: 983
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
Mar 21, 2018, 7:53 am
#75
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: IAH
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 527
how is transporting a dog in a crate not a rocket science? it is not simple. you have no idea what it takes. it is not like UA crews actively sabotage the dog or beat them to death. Dogs do die flying on airplanes. people don't understand it very well. there is always a small risk involved transporting live animals. not all dogs are the same. Some very healthy dogs react differently when put in the hold.
to put the DOT numbers in perspective, you have to neutralize all kinds of external factors, what kind of dogs is it (does UA take in higher % of at risk dogs?), what kind of trips is it? is UA trips on average longer and more complicated, more international routing, more connections? It is not as simple as comparing the odd across different airlines.
.
to put the DOT numbers in perspective, you have to neutralize all kinds of external factors, what kind of dogs is it (does UA take in higher % of at risk dogs?), what kind of trips is it? is UA trips on average longer and more complicated, more international routing, more connections? It is not as simple as comparing the odd across different airlines.
.
