Merged flight attendant forces dog into overhead bin resulting in death

Last edited:
Darat said:
I do wonder if the breed did contribute to the death, they are well known for having respiratory problems caused by the breed standard for flat faces.
Click to expand...
And in fact airlines are aware of this and many have policies that these breeds must travel in the cabin.
 
Dumb owner

Dumb airline for letting pets in the passenger area that aren't guide/assistance dogs
 
There is another one that just came up. This time humorous

http://time.com/5199514/united-flies-dog-to-japan-kansas-mistake/

United Airlines Mistakenly Flies Dog to Japan, Instead of Kansas

By ASSOCIATED PRESS 11:55 AM EDT

(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) — United Airlines says it’s investigating after mistakenly flying a Kansas family’s dog to Japan.

KCTV reports that Kara Swindle and her two children flew from Oregon to Kansas City, Missouri, Tuesday on a United flight.

They went to a cargo facility to pick up 10-year-old Irgo, a German shepherd, but were instead given a Great Dane. Swindle, of Wichita, Kansas, learned Irgo had been put on a flight to Japan, where the Great Dane was supposed to go.

Airline officials in Japan put Irgo on a flight back to Kansas City. It isn’t clear when the dog will arrive.

The news of Irgo’s unplanned odyssey comes as United admits another dog died after a flight attendant forced it to travel in an overhead bin on a Houston-to-New York flight.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
It is not only not a requirement, it is a violation of company policy and standard practice. The woman paid $125 to use a pet carrier that would be stowed under the seat, like a duffle bag. The airline has offered apologies.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/13/business/united-dead-dog.html
Click to expand...

So, *did* the carrier fit under the seat? If not, what should the attendant do when faced with a person bringing a pet in a non-compliant carrier?
 
Obviously, the flight attendant really screwed the pooch on this one . . .

I understand that the passenger paid extra to bring the dog in an approved carrier. What I'm not seeing is if this was indeed an approved carrier. I know they exist because I have seen them before on many flights. I have also seen that once the "fasten seatbelt" sign is off, those dogs are often brought out of the carriers and carried on laps. If the passenger did not bring an approved carrier and/or the carrier did not fit under the seat, then the only option should have been for the passenger not to board the flight.
 
GodMark2 said:
So, *did* the carrier fit under the seat? If not, what should the attendant do when faced with a person bringing a pet in a non-compliant carrier?
Click to expand...

Note that she had already been boarded by the gate agents, who are usually pretty eager to grab oversized and non-compliant baggage. And as she had fulfilled airline requirements, including paying the pet fee, there's no reason to believe she wouldn't have used an approved carrier, which are widely available.
 
GodMark2 said:
So, *did* the carrier fit under the seat? If not, what should the attendant do when faced with a person bringing a pet in a non-compliant carrier?
Click to expand...

In an ideal world, use their intelligence to realise the rule is carp, allow the dog, then make representations to their bosses about the stupidity of the regulation.
 
Bob001 said:
Note that she had already been boarded by the gate agents, who are usually pretty eager to grab oversized and non-compliant baggage. And as she had fulfilled airline requirements, including paying the pet fee, there's no reason to believe she wouldn't have used an approved carrier, which are widely available.
Click to expand...

It's entirely possible that the gate agents didn't notice the size of the bag. It has happened to me before. I boarded with one "personal" item and one overhead item. The personal item was too large for underseat stowage so the FA made me check one of the items.

The thing is that we don't know what kind of carrier was used. We don't know the size of the dog. The ones I've seen are used for toy and teacup breeds. Anything larger than that isn't going to fit. This article says that the bag extended into the aisle and includes a picture, but it's hard to judge the size.

The fact that the passenger paid for the carrier doesn't mean much if the passenger brought a non-compliant carrier. Here is United's policy:

A pet traveling in cabin must be carried in an approved hard-sided or soft-sided kennel. The kennel must fit completely under the seat in front of the customer and remain there at all times. The maximum dimensions for hard-sided kennels are 17.5 inches long x 12 inches wide x 7.5 inches high (44 cm x 30 cm x 19 cm). The recommended maximum dimensions for soft-sided kennels are 18 inches long x 11 inches wide x 11 inches high (46 cm x 28 cm x 28 cm). Soft-sided pet carriers may exceed these dimensions slightly, as they are collapsible and able to conform to under-seat space without blocking the aisle. With the exception of birds, there may only be one pet per kennel, and the animal must be able to stand up and turn around comfortably.
Click to expand...
So if the kennel did not fit all the way under the seat, then it doesn't matter if the passenger paid extra. Now, obviously, the FA should not have allowed the pet to board if it didn't meet requirements -there's no stipulation for carriers in the overhead bins, presumably because of the danger to the animal. They care enough about the safety and comfort of the animal to make the highlighted a requirement. This was a monumental screw-up by the FA and United should be held responsible for their actions.
 
GlennB said:
In an ideal world, use their intelligence to realise the rule is carp, allow the dog, then make representations to their bosses about the stupidity of the regulation.
Click to expand...

So they should override safety rules about blocking aisles? Doesn't sound like a good idea on airplanes. . . No, in an ideal world, the FA would have refused boarding to the passenger with a non-compliant pet.
 
xjx388 said:
It's entirely possible that the gate agents didn't notice the size of the bag. It has happened to me before. I boarded with one "personal" item and one overhead item. The personal item was too large for underseat stowage so the FA made me check one of the items.

The thing is that we don't know what kind of carrier was used. We don't know the size of the dog. The ones I've seen are used for toy and teacup breeds. Anything larger than that isn't going to fit.
....
Click to expand...

United has apologized unreservedly. They haven't claimed that the passenger did anything wrong. The dog was a puppy of a small breed. And if it didn't fit under the seat, stuffing it into the overhead wasn't the solution. Why look for excuses for the attendant, who violated her own airline's procedures?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/13/business/united-dead-dog.html
 
Bob001 said:
.....

The flight attendant has supervisors on the plane, including a senior flight attendant, the co-pilot and the pilot. Assuming that any random flight attendant has complete and final authority is not correct. The problem is that the bosses seem to reflexively side with the attendant, even when the attendant her/himself is violating company policy and the law in ways that will get the airline in big trouble later. The final authority on the aircraft is the pilot. It's not unreasonable to ask him to intervene.




You are simply misinformed. The TSA approves pet travel cases intended to stow small pets under seats, and this passenger paid $125 to the airline for that privilege. The larger question of "emotional support" animals on planes has been written about at length. Passengers can and do travel routinely with small pets, sometimes larger ones, in airline cabins, usually without incident.
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/2014/08/27/traveling-dogsand-cats-and-other-small-pets
http://traveltips.usatoday.com/airline-requirements-pet-carrier-22006.html
Click to expand...

Where under the seat? Under the seat isn't big enough.
 
xjx388 said:
So they should override safety rules about blocking aisles? Doesn't sound like a good idea on airplanes. . . No, in an ideal world, the FA would have refused boarding to the passenger with a non-compliant pet.
Click to expand...

If the photo is realistic then it's a tiny bag and would comfortably fit on the owner's lap without much weight. If not then it wouldn't fit in the locker anyway, and would certainly be less obtrusive on a lap than 50lb 'emotional support' dogs.

The dog within the bag within the locker? ... I'd expect it to suffocate pdq. If that was the case then all concerned parties are morons.
 
GodMark2 said:
So, *did* the carrier fit under the seat? If not, what should the attendant do when faced with a person bringing a pet in a non-compliant carrier?
Click to expand...
It's subjective depending on how far the bag sticks out.

But the error was before boarding as far as the size of the bag. Many airlines have a container you can use to check the bag's size, it it fits there it will fit under the seat.
 
xjx388 said:
... The thing is that we don't know what kind of carrier was used. ....
Click to expand...
There's a picture of it with the dead dog in it in the link.

It looks like a normal soft sided pet kennel (carrier) and the requirement was a soft or hard sided kennel (carrier).
 
Bob001 said:
You keep saying that. The airlines say otherwise. Small bags are routinely placed in the space under the seat in front of the passenger. What are you talking about? Have you ever been on a plane?
https://www.ebags.com/category/luggage/underseat-luggage
Click to expand...

*Dryly* Yes I'm been on planes a... time or two.

United's website describes the underseat "personal item" space as 9x10x17 inches.

The smallest soft sided carrier I could find listed on Petsmart was 17x11x10.5 (and this one looks about the same as the one shown in pictures related to this incident, but exact size isn't always easy to judge through pictures.) Maybe an empty one could be crumpled up and shoved under the seat but one with even a tiny dog in it? No way. Any size of hard sided carrier? No way.

So yes I am saying that on any practical level pet carriers do not fit under seats.

In other 20 years of routine plane travel I've never been able to fit anything beyond a mid-size laptop under a seat.
 
Last edited:
Only dogs that have business being in the passenger section are guide dogs.
I HATE this whole "I need this dog for emotional support" crap.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
There's a picture of it with the dead dog in it in the link.

It looks like a normal soft sided pet kennel (carrier) and the requirement was a soft or hard sided kennel (carrier).
Click to expand...

But there is also a size requirement and a stipulation that it not stick out into the aisle (I assume they mean aisle in front of the seats). The picture (plus the one I linked to) does not convey whether or not the carrier conformed.
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
United has apologized unreservedly. They haven't claimed that the passenger did anything wrong. The dog was a puppy of a small breed. And if it didn't fit under the seat, stuffing it into the overhead wasn't the solution. Why look for excuses for the attendant, who violated her own airline's procedures?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/13/business/united-dead-dog.html
Click to expand...

Where have I looked for excuses for the attendant? I said in that same post:

Now, obviously, the FA should not have allowed the pet to board if it didn't meet requirements -there's no stipulation for carriers in the overhead bins, presumably because of the danger to the animal. . .This was a monumental screw-up by the FA and United should be held responsible for their actions.
Click to expand...

I place the blame squarely on the FA for not following the airline's policy; the dog and owner should have been refused boarding for not conforming to the pet carrier requirements.
 
Bob001 said:
United has apologized unreservedly. They haven't claimed that the passenger did anything wrong. The dog was a puppy of a small breed. And if it didn't fit under the seat, stuffing it into the overhead wasn't the solution. Why look for excuses for the attendant, who violated her own airline's procedures?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/13/business/united-dead-dog.html
Click to expand...
Game over.

1. United admitted they were in the wrong
2. United admitted their staff violated their own procedures

A large payout will be made to the pet owner to keep it out of court. It doesn't matter what people think about pets on flights or emotional support dogs, or pet carrier sizes or anything else... its all irrelevant.

End of discussion..... until the next time United cocks something up.
 
a single puppy dies on a plane and there is a Bill in two days. 17 kids die and nothing.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
a single puppy dies on a plane and there is a Bill in two days. 17 kids die and nothing.
Click to expand...

I reckon that if 17 kids had died from being stuffed in overhead bins then there would be a bill.

It's rare that I agree with xjx388 but I reckon (s)he's nailed it.

If the carrier did not adhere to the requirements then owner and pet should have been refused boarding.
 
The Don said:
It's rare that I agree with xjx388 but I reckon (s)he's nailed it.

If the carrier did not adhere to the requirements then owner and pet should have been refused boarding.
Click to expand...
OTOH, there's the curious case that JoeMorgue makes, viz., that the actually available size under the seats is smaller than the size limits that United posts on their website. So, it could be that the kennel the owner brought adhered to the requirements, but still stuck out into the aisle.
 
ddt said:
OTOH, there's the curious case that JoeMorgue makes, viz., that the actually available size under the seats is smaller than the size limits that United posts on their website. So, it could be that the kennel the owner brought adhered to the requirements, but still stuck out into the aisle.
Click to expand...

In which case, they should have been allowed boarding and different arrangements made for the pet carrier.
 
How are pets flown now if they are not in the passenger compartment? There are a variety of compartments on most planes, some pressurized and heated and some not, beyond the cargo hold and passenger compartment per se. I know many long haul jets have a small sleeping compartment for the crew. Carry-on that is judged at the last minute to not fit in the overheads is held at the jet way and placed in some compartment accessed from the outside of the plane (is this the normal baggage compartment?) and offloaded immediately on arrival. I presume there are probably a variety of other small to medium sized areas out of reach of the passengers. Are some of these used for pets?

What can the experts here about these? Do most jets have small pressurized areas that are sued, or can be converted at least in theory, to pet transport? Isn't part or all of the large baggage compartment already pressurized, given pets are flown down there now and 36,000 feet unpressurized would be fatal?
 
Amazing the things people do just because somone -- especially someone in authority -- told them to!
 
mifune said:
Maybe I am tripping but I have traveled a fair bit by air in the UK/Europe and I have never ever once seen an animal in the cabin. AFAIK if you want to move pets overseas they travel in a pressurised/heated hold. If you dont have EU papers they go into 4 month quarantine as well (inwards to the UK anyway).
Click to expand...

I think distance factor's in a bit. My wife and I debated which would be the least ****** way to transport our elderly cat, 2 day drive or 4 hour flight? That was only half way across the US.

It used to be rare but now you see a pet on just about every flight, probably because people figured out they could do it for free if they claimed it was an emotional support animal.
 
I wonder if the flight attendant would've survived a trip in the overhead bin? Maybe an experiment is in order.
 
Giordano said:
How are pets flown now if they are not in the passenger compartment? There are a variety of compartments on most planes, some pressurized and heated and some not, beyond the cargo hold and passenger compartment per se.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that every area within the fuselage is pressurized. It would compromise the design of the fuselage if it weren't so. It's simply easier to pressurize the round shape of the fuselage rather than design the flat floors of the passenger area to be pressure barriers.

Heating and ventilation are different matters of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom