United Airlines Kills a Dog

[Pacolovestacos]

So I heard on the news that the FA did not know a dog was in the bag. Was this from the language barrier or is she lying?

Lying

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

Yup. There have been so many stories lately of people being kicked off flights (or dragged off flights) for not following FA rules, and there are plenty of people on hear who think that's an OK thing to do. You can bet that if the woman had refused to put the dog up, and then the news had been of the woman and dog (and kids) being dragged off the plane, plenty here would blame the woman "because you're always supposed to do what the flight attendants say"

No one would have been dragged off if they got off of the plane under their own power.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

So I heard on the news that the FA did not know a dog was in the bag. Was this from the language barrier or is she lying?

See my previous comment:

"Another passenger on the plane said a flight attendant told the owner to stow the animal, in its carrier, in the overhead bin.

_______________
More and more information is coming out that from the passengers the FA knew it was a dog in the carrier.

United's statement now is:
"We have spoken to the family, our crew and a number of passengers who were seated nearby. We have learned that the customer did tell the flight attendant that there was a dog in the carrier. However, our flight attendant did not hear or understand her, and did not knowingly place the dog in the overhead bin. As we stated, we take full responsibility and are deeply sorry for this tragic accident. We remain in contact with the family to express our condolences and offer support."

Except the contradicts the passengers statements...Honestly I call BS on the FA's version. It's really terrible for someone to try and cover of their extreme error like this.

 

[Pacolovestacos]

See my previous comment:



_______________
More and more information is coming out that from the passengers the FA knew it was a dog in the carrier.

United's statement now is:
"We have spoken to the family, our crew and a number of passengers who were seated nearby. We have learned that the customer did tell the flight attendant that there was a dog in the carrier. However, our flight attendant did not hear or understand her, and did not knowingly place the dog in the overhead bin. As we stated, we take full responsibility and are deeply sorry for this tragic accident. We remain in contact with the family to express our condolences and offer support."

Except the contradicts the passengers statements...Honestly I call BS on the FA's version. It's really terrible for someone to try and cover of their extreme error like this.

That's what United does until they are dragged into court and then they tap out.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Why do people always have to be dragged off? Why couldn't she leave simply because the FA said the dog can't fly? Just grab her dog and kids and walk off.

And I'm not blaming her at all. I blame the FA almost entirely.

No one would have been dragged off if they got off of the plane under their own power.

__________________
I woud agree that it doesn't have to come to dragging off the airplane. I think more of what I was meaning is you're not supposed to push back when FA's tell you to do something. It just seems like things can escalate way too quickly given stories in the last couple of years. If passengers in general could count on a reasonable discussion to occur perhaps it would be easier to do so. But I think the mental image people have is if they push back too much things can get out of hand very quickly. And I think for other passengers on the plan adding more people into the fray can make it worse.

I've been wondering if the FA mentioned deplaning of something of the like. Like I mentioned in my previous comments the only two solutions to the issue of a carrier not fitting under the seat would have been dog in cargo if they qualify for the passenger needed to make alternative arrangements. But I guess that goes against her story of not knowing there was a dog in the carrier.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

That's what United does until they are dragged into court and then they tap out.

Yeah.

I'm really not believing the FA's story that she didn't know it was a dog in the carrier:
Passengers said it was mesh, etc and it looks like a pet carrier including the shape of it rather than a normal carry on.

 

[Pacolovestacos]

__________________
I woud agree that it doesn't have to come to dragging off the airplane. I think more of what I was meaning is you're not supposed to push back when FA's tell you to do something. It just seems like things can escalate way too quickly given stories in the last couple of years. If passengers in general could count on a reasonable discussion to occur perhaps it would be easier to do so. But I think the mental image people have is if they push back too much things can get out of hand very quickly. And I think for other passengers on the plan adding more people into the fray can make it worse.

I've been wondering if the FA mentioned deplaning of something of the like. Like I mentioned in my previous comments the only two solutions to the issue of a carrier not fitting under the seat would have been dog in cargo if they qualify for the passenger needed to make alternative arrangements. But I guess that goes against her story of not knowing there was a dog in the carrier.

But arguing until being dragged off might have worked in this case. Imagine if the woman had argued against putting her dog in the overhead bin until she was dragged off. Not only does her dog live, she would have received a 6 figure settlement at the very least.

 

[PollyannaMom]

Why do people always have to be dragged off? Why couldn't she leave simply because the FA said the dog can't fly? Just grab her dog and kids and walk off.

And I'm not blaming her at all. I blame the FA almost entirely.

That's exactly why I do blame her a little (but mostly the FA). If I was told I had to put my cat in the overhead bin, I would volunteer to get off the flight rather than do it. No dragging would be necessary.

But I imagine the woman was scared, and because of the language barrier, somehow believed the FA was assuring her it was perfectly safe.

(Again, though, even if it had been "safe", I think it's traumatic, and wouldn't do that to an animal.)

 

[Soldier's*Sweeties]

I saw them on GMA this morning. Poor family... That little girl crying hit me right in the gut.

She said it was under the seat in front when the flight attendant told them to move it. I don't know why they would have to do that since it met regulations. I'm not buying the language barrier thing either. The daughter speaks perfect English even if the mother doesn't.

Frenchies are sensitive to heat and prone to breathing problems. I wonder if that played a part.

I'm with other posters who said they would have left the plane though. I wouldn't have put my dog in an overhead bin.

 

[Imzadi]

I agree that ONLY firing the FA would be simply passing the buck and not fixing the problem. However, the FA is guilty of gross negligence in her job duties and as such, I'm shocked that she wasn't immediately terminated for cause. I guess the unions must have really put their foot on United's throat.

I call B.S. on the flight attendant saying she didn't know there was an animal in the bag.

And I'm not blaming her at all. I blame the FA almost entirely.

Except the contradicts the passengers statements...Honestly I call BS on the FA's version. It's really terrible for someone to try and cover of their extreme error like this.

This is precisely why FAs should lose their jobs over an incident like this. If they don't have enough moral compass, ethics, integrity or basic humanity to care about losing the life of an animal, maybe they care enough about losing their JOB to do the right thing, once they are properly retrained. They should have personal accountability for something of this nature. As long as they don't, the "retraining" will just go in one ear and out the other for some - like this FA.

Does she feel any remorse at all? I doubt it since she's lying to cover herself up. Me? I'd be crying in the airport with the mother & child that I accidentally killed their dog.

 

[asta]

I saw them on GMA this morning. Poor family... That little girl crying hit me right in the gut.

She said it was under the seat in front when the flight attendant told them to move it. I don't know why they would have to do that since it met regulations. I'm not buying the language barrier thing either. The daughter speaks perfect English even if the mother doesn't.

Frenchies are sensitive to heat and prone to breathing problems. I wonder if that played a part.

I'm with other posters who said they would have left the plane though. I wouldn't have put my dog in an overhead bin.

I did not see the family on GMA this morning but I did hear the little girl yesterday say that the bag was partially in the pathway. It sounds like they are changing their story if she now says that it was under the seat. I do not know who is telling the truth but it sounds very suspicious when you give different stories. Some here are quick to say the FA is lying. Maybe she is, maybe she isn’t but you don’t know for sure. But it is obvious that family it’s not being honest. One of the girl’s stories has to be a lie.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I did not see the family on GMA this morning but I did hear the little girl yesterday say that the bag was partially in the pathway. It sounds like they are changing their story if she now says that it was under the seat. I do not know who is telling the truth but it sounds very suspicious when you give different stories. Some here are quick to say the FA is lying. Maybe she is, maybe she isn’t but you don’t know for sure. But it is obvious that family it’s not being honest. One of the girl’s stories has to be a lie.

The FAs story is that they did not hear or know that there was a live animal in the bag. That seems very unlikely, given the passengers accounts, the type of bag it was, etc.

I really do find it hard to believe that an FA, who I'm assuming has some knowledge of a pet carrier and I would assume has had training given their job position on what a pet carrier looks like, wouldn't want to ensure that there was not a live pet inside the carrier if they were going to have the passenger place the bag in the overhead bin.

I do find it much more likely that the FA simply thought in their mind that all would be well with the dog in the overhead bin. I don't think the FA thought the dog would actually die.

 

[Imzadi]

I did not see the family on GMA this morning but I did hear the little girl yesterday say that the bag was partially in the pathway. It sounds like they are changing their story if she now says that it was under the seat. I do not know who is telling the truth but it sounds very suspicious when you give different stories. Some here are quick to say the FA is lying. Maybe she is, maybe she isn’t but you don’t know for sure. But it is obvious that family it’s not being honest. One of the girl’s stories has to be a lie.

Some other TV show, maybe Inside Edition(?) got on board the same type of plane (while empty) with the same type of pet carrier. They showed that the carrier partially fit under the seat ahead, but that a section was jutting out into the feet area. It wasn't sticking out in the aisle where people walk.

I have a carry-on bag that does the same thing. Depending on which airplane I'm on, sometimes the whole bag neatly slips under the whole seat and is totally out of the way. Other times, a good 3-4 inches sticks out and I have to kind of turn my feet sideways. Depending on the FA going down the aisle, making sure that everyone's seat belt is fastened, she may or may not make me move the bag to overhead.

I didn't care that my feet were crooked. And I had a window seat, so no one else had to go past the bag. But one of them explained that in case of an emergency, they want to make sure I have a clear, open path to move my feet and get out.

A couple other times, since all the overhead bins were full, they just placed my bag and another couple of bags against the front wall partition, separating first class from coach. There was a wide enough space there. I though all things need to be secured down during take off & flight, but I guess not.

Other times, I've seen some planes have something like an extra "closet" area for oversized items. I've actually seen people bring their whole set of golf clubs on board and they go in that closet. I guess they already know about that area. Some people bring their tennis racket, hoping it will fit in the overhead bin. But, once other people have stuffed all their stuff up there, the tennis racket won't fit. So it goes in the oversize closet.

In this dog situation, it would have been better if that FA had used either of those spaces instead of the overhead bin. But, since it wasn't technically a coast to coast flight, they might have been on one of the smaller planes that don't have those extra spaces.

 

[sam_gordon]

Some other TV show, maybe Inside Edition(?) got on board the same type of plane (while empty) with the same type of pet carrier. They showed that the carrier partially fit under the seat ahead, but that a section was jutting out into the feet area. It wasn't sticking out in the aisle where people walk.

I have a carry-on bag that does the same thing. Depending on which airplane I'm on, sometimes the whole bag neatly slips under the whole seat and is totally out of the way. Other times, a good 3-4 inches sticks out and I have to kind of turn my feet sideways. Depending on the FA going down the aisle, making sure that everyone's seat belt is fastened, she may or may not make me move the bag to overhead.

I didn't care that my feet were crooked. And I had a window seat, so no one else had to go past the bag. But one of them explained that in case of an emergency, they want to make sure I have a clear, open path to move my feet and get out.

A couple other times, since all the overhead bins were full, they just placed my bag and another couple of bags against the front wall partition, separating first class from coach. There was a wide enough space there. I though all things need to be secured down during take off & flight, but I guess not.

Other times, I've seen some planes have something like an extra "closet" area for oversized items. I've actually seen people bring their whole set of golf clubs on board and they go in that closet. I guess they already know about that area. Some people bring their tennis racket, hoping it will fit in the overhead bin. But, once other people have stuffed all their stuff up there, the tennis racket won't fit. So it goes in the oversize closet.

In this dog situation, it would have been better if that FA had used either of those spaces instead of the overhead bin. But, since it wasn't technically a coast to coast flight, they might have been on one of the smaller planes that don't have those extra spaces.

Even the same "type" of plane can have the seats arranged different, so I'm not sure Inside Edition truly did an accurate "test". I do remember reading here someone saying the bag was out in the aisle, which I could understand the FA saying "the bag can't stay there".

 

[donaldbuzz&minnie]

IMO United Airlines has become the equivalent of the old Northwest Airlines in terms of lack of respect for their passengers of any species. A shame because I can remember when United was our favorite airline.

Fly Southwest or Alaska! We have flown several times with our little (well-behaved) dog under our seat on SW and encountered nothing but professional and friendly flight attendants.

 

[jdb in AZ]

United messed up again! https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-new...plane-makes-unscheduled-landing-1188024387958

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

United messed up again! https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-new...plane-makes-unscheduled-landing-1188024387958

I just saw that on the news a bit ago!

 

[LSUmiss]

United messed up again! https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-new...plane-makes-unscheduled-landing-1188024387958

Oh c’mon! They can’t be serious!!

 

[sam_gordon]

I think United needs to say "no animals" until they get their act together. Yes, they'll lose some business, but it can't be as much as these screw ups are costing them.

Although now that I write that, I'm guessing they have to accept "service animals" and we're back to square one.

 

[bethwc101]

United messed up again! https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-new...plane-makes-unscheduled-landing-1188024387958

How do you confuse Japan with Kansas City?