usflyguy
Topic Author
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 7:29 am

UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:56 pm

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...ights-in-United-s-care-3796305.php

UA says they aren't responsible even though the dog was in the custody of their PetSafe program...
My post is my ideas and my opinions only, I do not represent the ideas or opinions of anyone else or company.
 
sulley
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:55 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:46 pm

Seriously, the Houston Chronicle needs to stop. Next thing you know they're going to put up articles when a pax has lost a bag.

You lost the HQ, Houston. Gt over it already.
In thrust we trust!
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:01 pm

Quoting Sulley (Reply 1):
Seriously, the Houston Chronicle needs to stop. Next thing you know they're going to put up articles when a pax has lost a bag.

You lost the HQ, Houston. Gt over it already.

Perhaps YOU need to get over it. Some people look upon their pets as family members. Besides, the "PetSafe" program WAS CO's and was touted as the best in the industry. Perhaps it's not as good as advertised. Somebody dropped the ball on this one. UA says that the death wasn't "transit related", but if it was in UA's care until it went to the vet, there must have been someone at UA that realized something was wrong and determined that a vet should be involved. Anyway, from the time an agent signs the airbill for shipping until the customer signs the airbill at destination, it IS UA's responsibility.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
HAWK21M
Posts: 29867
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:05 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:19 pm

If the airline was responsible yes......but depends on the circumstances too....could this have been avoided.
I may not win often, but I damn well never lose!!! ;)
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:24 pm

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 3):
could this have been avoided.

Sure, it could just not have been shipped. I don't know if UA has a temperature limit or not, but in DL's case, for example, most of the temps in the U.S., recently, have been WAY over the limit for carrying animals.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:29 pm

Tragic, but what about the item of the poor dog getting tangled up in it's own harness ? It could have been slowly choking to death without much noise to alert someone that something was wrong.

Yes the Petsafe program takes pretty darn good care of passenger's pets. Some pets have conniptions and should not be flown around by their owners, the pets do not handle being handled, around strangers, the loud noises of a airline operation or cooped up well at all. The pets are brought in from the ramp to the indoor offices to keep the pets out of the heat, cold or bad weather until it is time to load them onboard the aircraft as close to departure as possible. Have seen some pets that do not take the stress of flying or just even being locked in a crate very well at all.
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:38 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 5):
Tragic, but what about the item of the poor dog getting tangled up in it's own harness ? It could have been slowly choking to death without much noise to alert someone that something was wrong.

When we shipped them, we made sure there was no leash attached when the animal was inside the carrier just for that very reason. We usually attached it to the top.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
brilondon
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:56 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Well now it seems that we have another incident involving UA. I don't believe for an instant that UA is not somewhat to blame. I believe that there are rules surrounding the transportation of pets. Are there not temperatures that disallow pets to be carried in the hold of aircraft and stored at either end? I believe that there was an incident last summer with pets dying while en route to their destination and it was stated that airlines have guidelines about transporting pets during the hot summer months. I did a search for it but as usual the great search function of A-Net did not bring me up what was relevant or even close to what I was looking for.
Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
 
ca2ohHP
Posts: 657
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:14 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:41 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 2):
Some people look upon their pets as family members.

As an owner of a 12lb. dog (this one was 14lbs.) I would NEVER ship my dog with checked luggage, especially seeing how checked animals are often treated through first-hand experience. However, UA needs to review their program if they are going to make guarantees and protect animals from exposure to excessive heat in cities like IAH.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:44 pm

Quoting brilondon (Reply 7):

Yes, there have been several incidents and hate to say it, but DL has had their fair share of them. I'm hoping that they've gotten their act together on this. DL has a suspension on animals as checked baggage from May 15 until Sept 15, every year. They can be shipped as cargo but are still subject to temp restrictions (85F, I believe).
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
sulley
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 6:55 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:47 pm

CALTECH - spot on. While this is indeed tragic, it's happened before -- on all carriers. Funny how when we were CO the Chron never published these articles when something like this happened.
In thrust we trust!
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:50 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 6):
When we shipped them, we made sure there was no leash attached when the animal was inside the carrier just for that very reason. We usually attached it to the top.

Something went horribly wrong if the poor dog became tangled in it's own harness.

Quoting ca2ohHP (Reply 8):
However, UA needs to review their program if they are going to make guarantees and protect animals from exposure to excessive heat in cities like IAH.

The animals are brought in to airconditioned offices until the last possible moment. It may have been the harness choking the poor dog which ended it's life.
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 5:57 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 11):
The animals are brought in to airconditioned offices until the last possible moment. It may have been the harness choking the poor dog which ended it's life.

Someone could have made a mistake and left the dog, planeside, in the heat for a little too long. Mistakes DO happen, but there is no excuse for it. Besides, the vet's diagnosis was heat stroke, not asphyxiation due to choking.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:14 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 12):
Someone could have made a mistake and left the dog, planeside, in the heat for a little too long. Mistakes DO happen, but there is no excuse for it. Besides, the vet's diagnosis was heat stroke, not asphyxiation due to choking.

Sad tragedy, feel horrible for her loss, but her other two animals, cats of all things , made it ? Cats deal with heat much worse than dogs. Something missing here ? Her two other animals did not expire from heat stroke ?



http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...ights-in-United-s-care-3796305.php
"United Airlines said in an emailed statement that PetSafe was not responsible for the dog's death.

"We carefully reviewed the details surrounding this incident, and the veterinarian's examination of Ms. Estes' dog showed that the death of the dog was not transit related," the statement said.
Expressing condolences to Estes, the airline said it was reimbursing her the full cost of transporting all three animals.
On the dog's medical record at Animal Emergency Clinic Northeast, the reason given for the visit was: "found collapse(d) in carrier - tangled up in harness, and heat stroke …"
An employee at the emergency clinic, which operates 24/7, said confidentiality rules prevented her from discussing an animal's medical record."



Just as United transports numerous pets, and numerous passengers, some will not make the trip. Are heart attacks the fault of United now too ? Any medical condition ? There was a pit bull doggie that did not take kindly to being flown around. It escaped it's carrier and tore up the airplane.



[Edited 2012-08-18 12:00:05]

[Edited 2012-08-18 12:01:29]
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 7:36 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 13):

Just as United transports numerous pets, and numerous passengers, some will not make the trip. Are heart attacks the fault of United now too ? Any medical condition ?

No, and that's why health papers are required for pets. However, if UA is taking care of the animal as they said they were, there is no reason for the animal to die from heat stroke. Only if UA screwed up and left the animal in the heat, somewhere, should it get heat stroke. I can think of no other reason for this to happen. As I said before, once the UA cargo agent signed for this, it's UA's responsibility until the customer signs for it at destination.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
spink
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sat Aug 18, 2012 8:30 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 14):
No, and that's why health papers are required for pets. However, if UA is taking care of the animal as they said they were, there is no reason for the animal to die from heat stroke. Only if UA screwed up and left the animal in the heat, somewhere, should it get heat stroke. I can think of no other reason for this to happen. As I said before, once the UA cargo agent signed for this, it's UA's responsibility until the customer signs for it at destination.

If the pet was tangled up in its harness then this could of had a significant adverse affect on the dogs natural ability to egress heat which could of resulted in the heat stroke.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:05 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 14):
However, if UA is taking care of the animal as they said they were, there is no reason for the animal to die from heat stroke.

Well the article says "dog's medical record at Animal Emergency Clinic Northeast, the reason given for the visit was: "found collapse(d) in carrier - tangled up in harness, and heat stroke …". No where that I can read does it say the poor dog died of heat stroke. And it is not on the released portion of the Animal Clinic record.

http://pets.webmd.com/dogs/heat-stroke-dehydration-dogs

The poor dog flew all the way from Korea, the owner took 40 hours to complete her trip. How much water could the poor dog have consumed, as dehydration and physical exertion can lead to heatstroke. If this poor dog was agitated during the whole trip from Korea to Texas, this could have been the cause of the dog's death.Seems like there are a lot of assumptions and emotions going on. The owner's own account is at odds with the Vet's assessment. What would be good compensation ? One million dollars ? For me, nothing could replace the loss of a pet, but I would not expect a million dollars compensation either. Does it come down to just money again ?


Quoting spink (Reply 15):
If the pet was tangled up in its harness then this could of had a significant adverse affect on the dogs natural ability to egress heat which could of resulted in the heat stroke.

Only one side of the story. PetSafe is a great program. Sad that a dog was lost.
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:13 am

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 16):
Well the article says "dog's medical record at Animal Emergency Clinic Northeast, the reason given for the visit was: "found collapse(d) in carrier - tangled up in harness, and heat stroke …". No where that I can read does it say the poor dog died of heat stroke. And it is not on the released portion of the Animal Clinic record.

Since it also does NOT mention asphyxiation as a cause of death, I would be inclined to say it was probably, if not directly caused by heat stroke (which, apparently, it did have), the heat stroke was probably a contributing factor. If the dog was taken care of as it should, it shouldn't have even gotten heat stroke. Frankly, it probably shouldn't have been shipped at all and no matter how much pleading goes on from the customer, it is up to the agent to make the determination on whether the conditions are right for it to be shipped.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
RWA380
Posts: 4451
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 10:51 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 5:58 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 4):
I don't know if UA has a temperature limit or not, but in DL's case, for example, most of the temps in the U.S., recently, have been WAY over the limit for carrying animals

I thought all airlines were required to limit animal transporting at a certain temp or above, origin and destination. Or does each airline have it's own ability to set it's own requirements? Are there laws or rules set forth by the government?
Next Flights: PDX-HNL-OGG-LIH-PDX On AS, WP & HA
 
xdlx
Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 12:29 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:00 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 4):

Bottom line.... UA has failed to adopt the good practices of CO. And as another poster did earlier in the month they have now won "from FIRST to WORST" moniker.
 
PanAm1971
Posts: 440
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 4:28 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 2:10 pm

Airlines need to be more upfront with customers that shipping an animal entails risk... and no matter how many precautions are undertaken, those risks can result in the injury or death of the animal.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:06 pm

Quoting PanAm1971 (Reply 20):
Airlines need to be more upfront with customers that shipping an animal entails risk... and no matter how many precautions are undertaken, those risks can result in the injury or death of the animal.

You'd be surprised at the number of customers that know what the risks are, know full well that something could happen to their pet if the rules aren't followed, but try to get the airline to accept the animal, anyway. It's actually worse in the winter, when they have to have a written ok from a vet that the animals can handle low temperatures. Actually, the airlines have let this go on and so they are receiving the results of it. If agents stuck to their guns, nicely, and not give in, EVERYONE would be better off.

Quoting RWA380 (Reply 18):
I thought all airlines were required to limit animal transporting at a certain temp or above, origin and destination. Or does each airline have it's own ability to set it's own requirements? Are there laws or rules set forth by the government?

Well, that's my mistake......I believe the Dept. of Agriculture enforces the limits as set forth in the Animal Welfare Act.

Quoting xdlx (Reply 19):
Bottom line.... UA has failed to adopt the good practices of CO.

Well, I assumed that UA had adopted CO's "PetSafe" program, lock, stock and barrel. No matter, because they still have to comply with the same rules as everyone else. Sounds to me like the agent in Korea was the first to make a mistake, by accepting the animal in the first place, considering the temps at any connecting points and destination. 85F is the upper limit, I believe and that was the nighttime temp at many locations in the U.S. for a good portion of the summer.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
EWRamp
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:46 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:49 pm

United Airlines never takes responsibility for anything. I guess they feel they are never wrong.
 
boilerla
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 5:30 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:53 pm

This is just the Houston press being pissed off at UA and venting more steam. Every airline has had animals die in their care. Anyone remember deltareallysucks and "Delta Killed my Kitty"?

Quoting xdlx (Reply 19):
Bottom line.... UA has failed to adopt the good practices of CO. And as another poster did earlier in the month they have now won "from FIRST to WORST" moniker.

In fact, before the merger, CO lead the pack in doggie deaths:
http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/traveli...ths/story?id=11198807#.UDELnxqe7OQ
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:34 pm

Quoting boilerla (Reply 23):

In fact, before the merger, CO lead the pack in doggie deaths:
http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/traveli...ths/story?id=11198807#.UDELnxqe7OQ

Now, I didn't know that. With all the bad publicity that DL has gotten for this problem over the last few years, I just assumed that DL was leading the pack. Amazing how DL (especially on A.net) gets lambasted for doing so poorly while this is the FIRST account I've seen on here, concerning CO.

Wonder what that figure would have been if they lumped CO & UA together?
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 7:06 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 17):
Since it also does NOT mention asphyxiation as a cause of death, I would be inclined to say it was probably, if not directly caused by heat stroke (which, apparently, it did have), the heat stroke was probably a contributing factor. If the dog was taken care of as it should, it shouldn't have even gotten heat stroke. Frankly, it probably shouldn't have been shipped at all and no matter how much pleading goes on from the customer, it is up to the agent to make the determination on whether the conditions are right for it to be shipped.

  

Quoting xdlx (Reply 19):
Bottom line.... UA has failed to adopt the good practices of CO. And as another poster did earlier in the month they have now won "from FIRST to WORST" moniker.

United has adopted the PetSafe program from Continental.

Quoting mayor (Reply 21):
You'd be surprised at the number of customers that know what the risks are, know full well that something could happen to their pet if the rules aren't followed, but try to get the airline to accept the animal, anyway. It's actually worse in the winter, when they have to have a written ok from a vet that the animals can handle low temperatures. Actually, the airlines have let this go on and so they are receiving the results of it. If agents stuck to their guns, nicely, and not give in, EVERYONE would be better off.

Again   

Quoting mayor (Reply 21):
Well, I assumed that UA had adopted CO's "PetSafe" program, lock, stock and barrel. No matter, because they still have to comply with the same rules as everyone else. Sounds to me like the agent in Korea was the first to make a mistake, by accepting the animal in the first place, considering the temps at any connecting points and destination. 85F is the upper limit, I believe and that was the nighttime temp at many locations in the U.S. for a good portion of the summer.

At least a 40 hour trip. Poor dog, to be subjected to that.

Quoting boilerla (Reply 23):
In fact, before the merger, CO lead the pack in doggie deaths:

During those 5 years, 58 deaths out of 550,000, still unacceptable for the pet owners who lost their pets, but a pretty good record. And,
"Continental said that autopsy results of the 40 dogs that died in flight show that "none of these deaths were transit related." (Another 14 pets were injured and four others lost.) "

I have seen these dogs getting transported, some are quiet and seem to be taking things well, others are all worked up and physically exhausting themselves, which could lead to their passing. It is stressful for some of the dogs. Some dogs will not make it. Just like some passengers with heart problems get stressed out about flying, suffer heart attacks and do not make it to their destination. It happens, and those are the stories we hear about.

And how about stories from those same 5 years about the 549,942 pets and owners that made it safely with no problems ? Never hear about that. PetSafe is a good program for those who want to fly their dogs somewhere and it is the only way to get them there.
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Sun Aug 19, 2012 8:32 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 25):

At least a 40 hour trip. Poor dog, to be subjected to that.

I understand how it might have been a 40 hour trip, if it was all the way to the destination, but since the dog died in IAH, I don't see how the dog spent that much time in the air and on the ground. Not only that, but you can hardly reduce the amount of flying time when the animal has to travel that far.........all you can do is minimize the amount of ground time and make the animal as comfortable as possible during that time. I'm also guessing that this animal was shipped, as cargo and not checked as baggage. I would think that UA would have a suspension on animals as checked baggage during the summer as DL does.


The best thing that can happen with an animal, travelling from overseas, it to make sure it clears customs at the first gateway it arrives at and you don't have to worry about it arriving at its destination, either after hours for customs clearance or if there was no customs at destination, at all.

Domestically, you have to allow for a certain amount of connection time, but that doesn't mean that you can't put it on an earlier flight, if possible. I would transfer cargo animals to an earlier flight all the time, because it benefitted everyone, along the line. Another thing is to make sure any tracking information is updated, correctly......that's also a great benefit to everyone.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 3:52 am

The dog died in Houston after flying from Korea, yes?

NS
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 4:06 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 27):
The dog died in Houston after flying from Korea, yes?

Yes, it did. It was supposed to go from IAH to North Carolina (not sure which airport).
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
KBUF
Posts: 369
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 1:12 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 4:28 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 28):
It was supposed to go from IAH to North Carolina (not sure which airport).

CLT, according to the article.
"Starting today, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win a Stanley Cup."-Terry Pegula, February 22, 2011
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 19761
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 4:37 am

Quoting Sulley (Reply 1):

Seriously, the Houston Chronicle needs to stop. Next thing you know they're going to put up articles when a pax has lost a bag.

A dog is a living, breathing creature that can feel pain and suffering as it dies of heat exhaustion. It is also a very loved part of a family. A bag is an inanimate object.

This is not a novel concept, nor is this a "flying public vs. airline employees" issue. This is an issue of animal neglect leading to an animal's death.

This is not a slaughter for food, either. Those are supposed to be done quickly and painlessly. So don't try to make that comparison, since someone always does.

In one week UA has lost a child and now an animal has died. This is a PR nightmare.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:18 am

Quoting KBUF (Reply 29):

CLT, according to the article.

Yes, and I missed the reference, at least twice   
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 8:22 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 30):
In one week UA has lost a child and now an animal has died. This is a PR nightmare.

No child was lost. That is so factually incorrect.
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:01 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 32):

No child was lost. That is so factually incorrect.

Theoretically, she WAS lost. As far as the system is concerned, she WAS lost. If UA had no idea where she was until they were prodded, she WAS lost. If the parents had no idea where she was, as far as they were concerned (because they had not heard from UA) she WAS lost. Physically, she was NOT lost but in every other way, she was.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
PITingres
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:34 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 32):
No child was lost. That is so factually incorrect.

Ok, how about "UA lost track of an unaccompanied child"? GIven that the whole point of UM procedures is to NOT lose track of them, I think your "correction" is picayune at best.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Mon Aug 20, 2012 9:53 pm

Quoting CALTECH (Reply 13):

In my ramp class, they showed this same picture in training. Not surprised. I think the story went was after the flight, they tracked down the owners, escorted them onto the ramp and showed them the damage that their dog did....then told them that they would be billed for the repairs. Not sure how much truth to that is, but I do believe on the billing the customers for the damage though......

Here is my take on dogs traveling on commercial airlines, in general: I don't see the need or why a dog needs to travel with their owners. Dogs traveling on commercial airplanes are a HUGE life adjustment and stresses the dog out to the max, more than need to be. I see it as inhumane to do "force" a dog to endure this kind of hectic activity. You never know what could go wrong in transit. Death of a pet while traveling is a major risk.

Why dog owners are so jiggy about having their pet along with them on vacation is beyond me. Now, I can see the need for a pet to travel on an airplane if the owner and the pet is relocating elsewhere to live permanently, but on vacation?? You gotta be kidding me! I wouldn't let my dog travel in an airplane at all! Not worth the stress, for my dog and for myself.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
CALTECH
Posts: 2767
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 4:21 am

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:31 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 33):
Physically, she was NOT lost but in every other way, she was.

I think you just contradicted yourself there. She was lost in her parents minds, and that's tough for a parent. There was always someone who knew where Phoebe was. She was not lost.

Quoting PITingres (Reply 34):
Ok, how about "UA lost track of an unaccompanied child"? GIven that the whole point of UM procedures is to NOT lose track of them, I think your "correction" is picayune at best.

She was never "lost track of." Now to a reservation/help desk worker in India, or whereever the parents called, I am sure they were not keeping track of her to the second. And it might have seemed to her parents as though she was lost when they could not get a definitive answer from that desk employee in India.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 35):
In my ramp class, they showed this same picture in training. Not surprised. I think the story went was after the flight, they tracked down the owners, escorted them onto the ramp and showed them the damage that their dog did....then told them that they would be billed for the repairs. Not sure how much truth to that is, but I do believe on the billing the customers for the damage though......

Here is my take on dogs traveling on commercial airlines, in general: I don't see the need or why a dog needs to travel with their owners. Dogs traveling on commercial airplanes are a HUGE life adjustment and stresses the dog out to the max, more than need to be. I see it as inhumane to do "force" a dog to endure this kind of hectic activity. You never know what could go wrong in transit. Death of a pet while traveling is a major risk.

Why dog owners are so jiggy about having their pet along with them on vacation is beyond me. Now, I can see the need for a pet to travel on an airplane if the owner and the pet is relocating elsewhere to live permanently, but on vacation?? You gotta be kidding me! I wouldn't let my dog travel in an airplane at all! Not worth the stress, for my dog and for myself.

  
UNITED Would Be Nice
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:42 am

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 35):
Why dog owners are so jiggy about having their pet along with them on vacation is beyond me. Now, I can see the need for a pet to travel on an airplane if the owner and the pet is relocating elsewhere to live permanently, but on vacation?? You gotta be kidding me! I wouldn't let my dog travel in an airplane at all! Not worth the stress, for my dog and for myself.

You do realize people ship pets for other reasons, too, don't you? It isn't just always people going on vacation or relocating. I'd say that at least 50% of the animals that we shipped in SLC were probably from breeders.

I think we're blowing this stress thing out of proportion as well as the injury and death of animals. While the death or injury of an animal is unacceptable at all, out of all the animals that are shipped, nationwide, every year, the ones that die or are injured are a drop in the bucket. The reason it seems worse is that the media picks up on one or two of these incidents and everyone seems to think it's widespread. You don't see the media talking about all the animals that make it safely because that wouldn't be sensational enough.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 35):
In my ramp class, they showed this same picture in training. Not surprised. I think the story went was after the flight, they tracked down the owners, escorted them onto the ramp and showed them the damage that their dog did....then told them that they would be billed for the repairs. Not sure how much truth to that is, but I do believe on the billing the customers for the damage though......

Why should the customer pay for that? The dog, at the time, was in the airline's care. Nine times out of ten, when an animal gets loose from its carrier, it's because an airline agent has been fooling with the door and trying to pet the animal and failed to reclose it properly. That would be like someone mishandling a bag and a bottle of perfume inside breaks open and spreads to other bags in the bin. Is that the owner's fault? Hardly.


Ok......slightly off topic, but here goes.................


Quoting CALTECH (Reply 36):
Quoting mayor (Reply 33):
Physically, she was NOT lost but in every other way, she was.

I think you just contradicted yourself there. She was lost in her parents minds, and that's tough for a parent. There was always someone who knew where Phoebe was. She was not lost.

Not really.......she may have actually been sitting right there, but apparently, UA didn't know that and were unable to tell the parents where she was......that's what I mean........physically she wasn't lost....she was just sitting there, but as far as UA, in their system, knew, she wasn't where she was supposed to be, i.e. LOST. She wasn't on the proper flight....she was lost.


My take on this is the same as it has always been......UA screwed up, whether she was right there or not. The gate agent failed to keep track of her......whoever was supposed to get her to her next flight screwed up by NOT showing up to take her AND, I would imagine that the agent on the connecting flight should have know she was going to be coming to their gate and should have been watching for her. All they would have to do would be to get on the computer, check to see if she was on the incoming flight and if they didn't see her, someone could start to look for her. Pretty simple, actually.

Once she was "missing", their follow up was pretty bad, if you ask me and then they compounded it by not telling the parents that she wasn't on the original flight to her destination but was on the next one.

OK......back on topic, please?

[Edited 2012-08-20 19:45:29]
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:21 am

Quoting mayor (Reply 37):
Why should the customer pay for that?

It was their dog. They bought the kennel and is responsible for the kennel, not the company. In this case, the dog chewed out of its kennel and then chewed up the forward pit of the 757. I hope the customer paid for the dog's damage. This is not the company's fault whatsoever. Again, it is the owner's responsibility to ensure that he/she is following the rules and regulations in shipping their pet BEFORE they arrive at the airport.

Quoting mayor (Reply 37):
The dog, at the time, was in the airline's care

It doesn't matter. It is the customer's responsibility to make sure that his/her animal is secured in the kennel to the point where said animal cannot escape. PetSafe takes that one step further as a courtesy by applying white strap ties to the door so that the animal cannot be taken out. It is policy at UA. Under no circumstances can an animal be taken out by an employee who is NOT certified in the PetSafe department.

Quoting mayor (Reply 37):
You do realize people ship pets for other reasons, too, don't you? It isn't just always people going on vacation or relocating. I'd say that at least 50% of the animals that we shipped in SLC were probably from breeders.

Oh, I realize that. My point still stands in reply 35.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:56 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
It was their dog. They bought the kennel and is responsible for the kennel, not the company. In this case, the dog chewed out of its kennel and then chewed up the forward pit of the 757. I hope the customer paid for the dog's damage. This is not the company's fault whatsoever. Again, it is the owner's responsibility to ensure that he/she is following the rules and regulations in shipping their pet BEFORE they arrive at the airport.
Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
It doesn't matter. It is the customer's responsibility to make sure that his/her animal is secured in the kennel to the point where said animal cannot escape. PetSafe takes that one step further as a courtesy by applying white strap ties to the door so that the animal cannot be taken out. It is policy at UA. Under no circumstances can an animal be taken out by an employee who is NOT certified in the PetSafe department.

Once the agent accepts the shipment, by signing for it, the airline then becomes responsible for it, even if the kennel is not right or the door isn't secured. The agent, probably,should not have accepted a defective kennel or made sure that the door was secured. If the airline takes on the responsibility for a defective kennel, etc., then it doesn't make any difference who was right and who was wrong. Now, that doesn't mean that the animal should have been shipped. The agent should have rectified any of those problems before it could be shipped, including changing kennels if necessary. I'm sorry, but I accepted animals as cargo for more than 30 years and I know what I speak of.

BTW, we also used ties to make sure not just anyone could take the animal out, HOWEVER, they were special ones that allowed a qualified agent to remove the ties in case of emergency.

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
Again, it is the owner's responsibility to ensure that he/she is following the rules and regulations in shipping their pet BEFORE they arrive at the airport.

True, but it then becomes the airline's agent's responsibility to make sure they comply. If they don't, you don't sign for the shipment........that is just absurd.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
 
AirframeAS
Posts: 9811
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 3:56 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:29 pm

Quoting mayor (Reply 39):

Lets agree to disagree, because that is not what was presented in the new hire training at UA. They explicitly told us that.....

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
it is the owner's responsibility to ensure that he/she is following the rules and regulations in shipping their pet BEFORE they arrive at the airport.

The owners are responsible for their own dog during transit.

But again, lets agree to disagree and call it a day.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
 
User avatar
mayor
Posts: 6188
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:58 pm

RE: UA: Responsible For Dogs Death?

Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:07 pm

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 40):
Quoting mayor (Reply 39):

Lets agree to disagree, because that is not what was presented in the new hire training at UA. They explicitly told us that.....

Quoting AirframeAS (Reply 38):
it is the owner's responsibility to ensure that he/she is following the rules and regulations in shipping their pet BEFORE they arrive at the airport.

The owners are responsible for their own dog during transit.

But again, lets agree to disagree and call it a day.

Oh, I agree with that.......the customer must comply with the regulations......if they don't, you don't sign for it. Whether they comply or not, you DO NOT sign for it until they have complied..........that's just asking for trouble. I can't imagine UA wanting it any other way. There is no way, if the rules are complied with, that the customer can be 100% responsible for the animal during transit......too many things can happen.
"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: agrflyer, airmalta1, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], Dt91c, Dutchy, fla, JeremyB, jhdk, rbrunner, sdbelgium, Wolfman, Yahoo [Bot] and 263 guests