LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12668 posts, RR: 13 Posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1883 times:
Per the below link to a news story in MSNBC, in the USA, as of June 15th, airlines must offer info on the history of problems with the transportation of animals on flights as well as new rules on when/where/how. This is to reduce the loss of animals during flights and to inform animal owners as well of the airlines of the rules, rights and responsiblities on the transport of animals. I wonder how much the airlines have to charge to cover this new law?
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21310 posts, RR: 60 Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 1858 times:
There were lots of lawsuits due to mishandling of animals, and airlines treating them as "lost luggage" and not giving a damn.
Continental a few years back instituted a change and a new program, PetSafe, for pets that is really responsible. It's a good service, with climate controlled transfer vehicles and connection buildings at IAH. They are treated as traceable cargo, can be tracked online (if you aren't flying with them), have a 24 hour animal help desk, and earn FF miles based on dollars spent (not miles flown). I brought a cat to my Mom that way and felt very comortable with their policies and procedures.
It might have been nice for MSNBC to look for any airlines that have tried to address the issue as examples. They singled out SWA for not carrying pets, then chose UA (at random) which is just average, normal ops that have been run for years. A good reporter might have looked for an innovative carrier to see what can be done voluntarily to provide better service.
[Edited 2005-06-03 21:03:59]
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
1rocco From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 119 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1784 times:
I think this is a good law. If any of you have ever had to transport a pet with a airline it can be a very stressful time. I had a good experience thanks to the priority pet program at NWA. Being a flight attendant you come into contact with many people who are traveling with there pets and many are very nervous about doing it. The programs at NWA and Continental are great because of the step taken to ensure your pets safety.. My pets are like my children and treat them as such. If I had children I would never drop my 8 year old off at the ticket desk and hope he/she makes there connections to get to there destination without using a UM program. More airlines need to follow NWA and CAL's lead on this one.
Srbmod From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 17267 posts, RR: 51 Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1745 times:
Honestly, unless you're moving somewhere and that's the only way to transport your pet, people shouldn't put their pets on flights. If you can't go on vacation without Rover or Fluffy, then perhaps you need to take vacations that are within driving distances. The entire flying experience is very traumatic for animals, even if they are tranquilized. The noise (Imagine what kind of high-frequency noises those engines and APUs makes) and commotion that goes on out on the ramp, plus there have been many well-documented cases were the pet escaped from the shipping cage (There's been incidents where the animal kept the ramp crew at bay after getting loose inside of the bin and also doing their business on the other bags) and either getting hit out on the ramp or completely runs off of the property. Incidents where animals were improperly handled and they suffered injury or death (I remember one such incident back when FL handled F9 @ ATL.). When I was working for EV, I always felt sorry for any animals being loaded or unloaded an a/c. Most of them looked like they were scared to death, a few were pretty happy go lucky, wagging their tails, begging for attention. The airlines that refuse to handle animals as a checked item or cargo are doing the right thing. The only animals that should be onboard any flight are service animals.
LegendDC9 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1726 times:
Quoting Srbmod (Reply 4): Honestly, unless you're moving somewhere and that's the only way to transport your pet, people shouldn't put their pets on flights
This is so true, so pet lovers beware. I have seen during my career 4 pets that were DOA when the flight came in. They are all horrible but the absolute worst one was a dog that died from blood loss when he cut his nose and mouth open trying to chew out of a kennel. There are so many things that can happen that the airline has little control over that it seems like a major hassle to take on this responsibility, with very little to gain on the revenue side. Not to mention how it opens you up to legal action if and when something terrible happens to the animal along the way. There is no way to anticipate an animal's behavior during flight and it does not matter how sedated or calm you think your pet is. Putting an animal in the cargo bin is equal to animal cruelty and I will never put my dog through this, no matter how far I end up having to drive.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21310 posts, RR: 60 Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1715 times:
Yes, but when it is the only way to get your pet there (moving, long term relocation) things must be done. Most pets going on flights in the hold are results of moves, I would guess.
Those little yip yip dogs that owners can't do without for 1 day are usually in cabin.
But again, all it really takes is a program like CO or NW that understands there is a need and takes the challenge head on to protect the animals better than a samsonite, and most accidents should go away. You can't stop a spooked dog from eating through a kennel, but if you have special personel involved in care and transport, accidents like dropping and misplacing in the aircraft are greatly reduced.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
LegendDC9 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1707 times:
Anything you focus on, build programs, throw more people at it, will improve results. Whatever is worth doing is worth doing well... and so on and so on... The question is, how much money are you spending and how much revenue is coming in. If someone was willing to pay me $5000 to take care of their cat, they would be eating caviar on a silver tray up in first class but with the nominal fees that are being charged, it seems like a losing effort. WN and B6 do not allow to check in pets and you can't really say that it has affected their image or bottom line.