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 21, 2018, 8:17 am
#76
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
Mar 21, 2018, 8:43 am
#77
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 3,361
Is it more or less traumatic than separating from your pet forever? Remember, they don't understand why you're gone, just that you abandoned them. They'll look for you forever, and you just won't ever show up again.
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
Mar 21, 2018, 8:55 am
#78
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
Anybody who suggests that moving an animal is simple, does not understand what is involved. If one drops a suitcase and it is destroyed, that is a simple dollar calculation and the passenger is made whole through a payment. UA and other carriers do what they can to prevent loss and damage, but everyone accepts that there is a risk and it is monetized. Not so for pets. It won't do to have UA send a text saying, "sorry your pet died enroute because we dopped its crate. We think that the bet is worth $500 and will send you a check next week."
If there is a market for pet transport, especially long-haul, someone will fill it. But, it will likely include:
1. Specialized crating.
2. Care at departure, connections and arrival.
3. Medical review at the point of departure.
4. RFID tracking.
All of this is expensive and resource-intensive. But, customers cannot have it both ways. Pressure to keep fees low means a lack of safety for the pet. Too much loss of safety and there is a mess for the carrier.
None of this has anything to do with plain incompetence, e.g., stuffing the pet in the OH where it suffocates.
If there is a market for pet transport, especially long-haul, someone will fill it. But, it will likely include:
1. Specialized crating.
2. Care at departure, connections and arrival.
3. Medical review at the point of departure.
4. RFID tracking.
All of this is expensive and resource-intensive. But, customers cannot have it both ways. Pressure to keep fees low means a lack of safety for the pet. Too much loss of safety and there is a mess for the carrier.
None of this has anything to do with plain incompetence, e.g., stuffing the pet in the OH where it suffocates.
Mar 21, 2018, 9:08 am
#79
Join Date: Feb 2015
Programs: united
Posts: 1,636
Moderator Note
This a the United forum and discussion here is scoped to be United related. Please focus discussions on United, the PetSafe program, the temprorary suspenion of the PatSafe program for this thread. The issue of if pet travel is appropriate or not is a good OMNI topic but here we discuss issue related uniquely to United, not broader social issues.
Thank you for your cooperation
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
This a the United forum and discussion here is scoped to be United related. Please focus discussions on United, the PetSafe program, the temprorary suspenion of the PatSafe program for this thread. The issue of if pet travel is appropriate or not is a good OMNI topic but here we discuss issue related uniquely to United, not broader social issues.
Thank you for your cooperation
WineCountryUA
UA coModerator
It's amazing to me when people say that United (or any airline) HAS TO figure out a way to transport pets safely,. Says who? I have moved with pets before and it's no picnic, even with air travel. I've also had to go by road and that's inconvenient. So, yea, it would be great if the airlines sorted out a way to make it safe, but do they have to?
I don't really think so., If there is a market for this and people are willing to pay enough to make it work, a solution will emerge. But, saying that airlines have to guarantee safe passage for pets reminds of those people who, when there is a delay, go to the gate agent and say, "But you don't understand, I HAVE to in Cleveland tonight!
Airlines deal with the public and they can't satisfy everyone. I suspect that these incidents have been happening for a while, and we only recently hear about them so much because people love to whip out their cellphones any time something bad happens on an airline. I'm not saying the airlines arne't making mistakes, but it's crazy to look at this as a simple issue where there is a simple answer.
I suspect that airlines will start dropping out of pet travel, or jack up the price. Anyone who is traveling with pets enough for this to be a major problem is an outlier.
I don't really think so., If there is a market for this and people are willing to pay enough to make it work, a solution will emerge. But, saying that airlines have to guarantee safe passage for pets reminds of those people who, when there is a delay, go to the gate agent and say, "But you don't understand, I HAVE to in Cleveland tonight!
Airlines deal with the public and they can't satisfy everyone. I suspect that these incidents have been happening for a while, and we only recently hear about them so much because people love to whip out their cellphones any time something bad happens on an airline. I'm not saying the airlines arne't making mistakes, but it's crazy to look at this as a simple issue where there is a simple answer.
I suspect that airlines will start dropping out of pet travel, or jack up the price. Anyone who is traveling with pets enough for this to be a major problem is an outlier.
If I knew I was likely to be moving around a lot, or moving to a foreign country, I would not own a dog. The presumption that it is kind to the pet to be flying her around all the time seems wrong to me, and strikes me as being more about the owner than about the pet.
Mar 21, 2018, 9:09 am
#80
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
Is it more or less traumatic than separating from your pet forever? Remember, they don't understand why you're gone, just that you abandoned them. They'll look for you forever, and you just won't ever show up again.
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
This is why I did not get a dog for the last 4 years when I really wanted one.
Mar 21, 2018, 9:12 am
#81
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: 42,205
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.
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.
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, 9:15 am
#82
Join Date: May 2014
Location: DMV
Posts: 2,092
The problems in pet and juvenile human transport are similar. It's about negotiating the right of people to transport something by air to suit their personal preference vs the rights of the rest of the passengers to have an acceptable flight experience. Animals in some way are the easier issue to tackle because they cause no problems to the other passengers when in the cargo hold, whereas kids can only be transported in the cabin where they are a potential problem for everyone.
Mar 21, 2018, 9:24 am
#83
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington DC
Programs: Delta DM CO PE OZ GE AMTRAK
Posts: 524
It's clear that flying with a pet on UA is significantly more risky than other options, so the odds of something going wrong are very, very high compared with other airlines. The statistics speak for themselves, and I am not going to slice and dice the numbers to give an excuse to United for what is obviously unacceptable performance. Worse, they *have* a program and process, so the high incident rate should not be happening, and I don't believe so many dogs are being transported with health issues, but rather they are being mishandled, either deliberately or through neglect. Apologize all you want, but it's obvious something is going wrong here - and why else would United suspend their program and refuse to carry animals if everything was perfectly fine and just a 'statistical anomaly'?
Mar 21, 2018, 9:36 am
#84
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 208
It is traumatic for pets to fly around at all.
If I knew I was likely to be moving around a lot, or moving to a foreign country, I would not own a dog. The presumption that it is kind to the pet to be flying her around all the time seems wrong to me, and strikes me as being more about the owner than about the pet.
If I knew I was likely to be moving around a lot, or moving to a foreign country, I would not own a dog. The presumption that it is kind to the pet to be flying her around all the time seems wrong to me, and strikes me as being more about the owner than about the pet.
Mar 21, 2018, 9:51 am
#85
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: IAH
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 527
Mar 21, 2018, 12:33 pm
#86
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: BOS
Programs: 1MM, UA 1k
Posts: 529
Again UA is damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Mar 21, 2018, 1:06 pm
#87
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
" Delta does not accept pets as checked baggage, but will continue to transport allowable pets in aircraft cabins. Delta will also accept shipment of pets for travel within the United States as freight through Delta Cargo." https://www.delta.com/content/www/en...trictions.html
Mar 21, 2018, 1:26 pm
#88
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: IAH
Programs: UA Silver
Posts: 527
Is it more or less traumatic than separating from your pet forever? Remember, they don't understand why you're gone, just that you abandoned them. They'll look for you forever, and you just won't ever show up again.
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
To me, 12 hours in a cargo hold for a lifetime of their happiness is well worth it.
Mar 21, 2018, 1:54 pm
#89
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Programs: UA 1K 1MMer & LT UC (when flying UA); Hyatt Credit Cardist; HHonors Diamond; Marriott Gold via UA 1K
Posts: 6,956
Not to "stray" off topic, but I once drove a fellow volunteer to LAX so that she could accompany a dog (in cargo) on an LAX-BOS PMUA redeye, to its new home in Maine. The dog actually was fine when they landed.
Mar 21, 2018, 7:43 pm
#90
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Seoul
Programs: None anymore
Posts: 983
Im sitting here with my 9 week old Boxer on my lap. I get crap from friends for buying from a breeder & not adopting. In a close group of 5 couples there are 8 adopted dogs between them. The dogs are perfectly fine & happy, they aren't sullen or spastic running around looking for their first owners.
If the pet was put up for adoption, I have no doubt some on this board would recommend the new pet owner should schedule the pet for 6-12 months of weekly sessions with a well respected pet psychiatrist in order to help the pet recover from the deep emotional scars, depression, and nightmares resulting from the abandonment. But I will let you in on a little secret. After the new owner has fed the mutt its second can of dog food, that dog will have forgotten the original owners ever existed.
People in this thread need to realize that pets aren't just "an animal" to some people, but rather a part of the family. You may not agree, but you need to understand that to some people leaving their dog behind is the same thing as leaving a child behind. To write off how people feel doesn't get us anywhere.