Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Bawlmerian

Service Dog Vs Passenger Rights on Plane

122 posts in this topic

4 minutes ago, EL-FLIPPO said:

Has the idea of segregating passengers with service animals ever occurred to anyone?

Similar to segregating 1st and 2nd class compartments.

Unless you let them ride in the luggage area, there is no cost effective way to do that.  The airlines "need" every inch of space filled to maintain their profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Struds said:

Unless you let them ride in the luggage area, there is no cost effective way to do that.  The airlines "need" every inch of space filled to maintain their profits.

Understood.

Then I propose a "compromise".

All passengers with service animals must ride 2nd class. Those who wish to avoid proximity to animals while flying then have the option of flying 1st class.

Just a thought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, EL-FLIPPO said:

Understood.

Then I propose a "compromise".

All passengers with service animals must ride 2nd class. Those who wish to avoid proximity to animals while flying then have the option of flying 1st class.

Just a thought...

Why do passengers with service animals have to ride "2nd class" (I don't even know what that is.)  Is that like being 2nd class citizens? :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EL-FLIPPO said:

Understood.

Then I propose a "compromise".

All passengers with service animals must ride 2nd class. Those who wish to avoid proximity to animals while flying then have the option of flying 1st class.

Just a thought...

Good thought... won't work. There is only ONE (to my knowledge) air circulation system in any given aircraft. Which services 1st, 2nd and yes the cargo area for the cages.

Yes in theory air filters and such might keep dander and whatever from affecting people with allergies. But, if that were true....then people should have been able to smoke in the planes also. What about the doggy that sat in the seat on the flight before the person with the allergy will sit in.

I really thought it was hilarious when not smoking on a planes started to be phased in. There first attempt was that all smokers had to be in the BACK of the plane. Like you were in a moving bus with the windows open and the smoke would be pulled out. HAHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAH

Too funny.

Since retirement I haven't flown at all...a couple of  years now. Can't wait to see what kind of poop I get when I whip out a bag of peanuts and start munching away. :D I am sure poor Bobbies mommy will be in my face....even though poor Bobby is 10 rows away from me.

 

Edited by Guido2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might start traveling with a couple cans of sardines.  If I get stuck in a row with a person with an emotional support German Sheppard I might get a hankering for some canned fish. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bawlmerian said:

I might start traveling with a couple cans of sardines.  If I get stuck in a row with a person with an emotional support German Sheppard I might get a hankering for some canned fish. 

To be candid. I would rather the Sheppard sit besides me than most humans. Especially the ones that are built like 'double wides' and smell like a locker room. Flying as much as I did at one time.....boooooy oooohhhhh boooyyyyy .... I had MORE than my share of those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guido2 said:

To be candid. I would rather the Sheppard sit besides me than most humans. Especially the ones that are built like 'double wides' and smell like a locker room. Flying as much as I did at one time.....boooooy oooohhhhh boooyyyyy .... I had MORE than my share of those.

I would imagine the humans in your life are tough to deal with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Charges have now been filed against the passenger who caused the scene.   Good.  Usually it ends with these types of prissy idiots getting rewarded for their hissy fits in some way.  Sounds like this time it will be different.  

Quote

 

Daulatzai is facing a handful of charges including disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.  Witnesses say what started as a verbal complaint launched into a confrontation with police after she claimed to be deathly allergic to two dogs on board, including a service animal but couldn’t show proof.  “If she really had a deathly, deadly allergy to the dog, the sensible thing for her would have been to get off the plane,” said airline passenger William Aronstein.

William is one of many travelers to tell WJZ, in this instance, he backs the airline.  “Southwest was being asked to decide between two passengers,” he said.

Southwest issued a statement:  “Our policy states that a customer without a medical certificate may be denied boarding if they report a life- threatening allergic reaction and cannot travel safely with an animal on board.”

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2017/09/28/southwest-charges-mica-removed-forcibly-allergies-baltimore/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's is great and I hope they throw the book at her.

I am getting tired of (and sure many of you) these various butt heads that seem to think they are empowered to do what ever they want...whenever they want ...even if it screws up other peoples lives.

Again where is the cert and more importantly ....still.... why should the service dog owners have to bow to her will. The had certs also. And also as I said before....that planes air if it previously had dogs on it.....EVEN IN THE CARGO HOLD. Dander etc are still in that air system and also on the seats.

If she was so deathly allergec.....then she should have driven here own car ....seeing as how...a train or bus could present the same problems. AND here is  a simple fix......get an OHSA rated for pollen and dander mask to wear. Given her situation I know I would.

But then again I am not a self centered butt head looking for free miles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, cprenegade said:

Charges have now been filed against the passenger who caused the scene.   Good.  Usually it ends with these types of prissy idiots getting rewarded for their hissy fits in some way.  Sounds like this time it will be different.  

 

SW wasn't asked to choose between two passengers. SW knows that the assistance animals had an explicit legal right to be on the aircraft. The professor, however, does not. And she doesn't get to stomp her feet and get her way.  I am still amazed that someone with a life-threatening allergy to dogs doesn't carry documentation -- or even an Epi device.  I still say that her story is a bunch of baloney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guido2 said:

That's is great and I hope they throw the book at her.

I am getting tired of (and sure many of you) these various butt heads that seem to think they are empowered to do what ever they want...whenever they want ...even if it screws up other peoples lives.

Again where is the cert and more importantly ....still.... why should the service dog owners have to bow to her will. The had certs also. And also as I said before....that planes air if it previously had dogs on it.....EVEN IN THE CARGO HOLD. Dander etc are still in that air system and also on the seats.

If she was so deathly allergec.....then she should have driven here own car ....seeing as how...a train or bus could present the same problems. AND here is  a simple fix......get an OHSA rated for pollen and dander mask to wear. Given her situation I know I would.

But then again I am not a self centered butt head looking for free miles.

Well...you're not looking for free miles.

 

j/k!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, PinkFlamingo said:

Well...you're not looking for free miles.

 

j/k!

;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2017 at 8:38 AM, Sprightly said:

SW wasn't asked to choose between two passengers. SW knows that the assistance animals had an explicit legal right to be on the aircraft. The professor, however, does not. And she doesn't get to stomp her feet and get her way.  I am still amazed that someone with a life-threatening allergy to dogs doesn't carry documentation -- or even an Epi device.  I still say that her story is a bunch of baloney.

So if she had the documents would she have the right to Kick the dogs out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bawlmerian said:

So if she had the documents would she have the right to Kick the dogs out?

No. She would have been asked to take another flight. Who said that life is always fair?  I also question why she didn't have emergency medication in case she experienced an event. Dogs are everywhere. Look, I know that people abuse the law and have animals for "support" and/or "comfort." I see it often. No doubt. However, there are people who truly do benefit from these animals. There has been speculation that her religion makes dogs objectionable. Not sure if that's true but were I to have a life-threatening allergy, I would be sure to be able to document it. 

Now, what are we to do about crying babies on long-haul flights? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sprightly said:

No. She would have been asked to take another flight. Who said that life is always fair?  I also question why she didn't have emergency medication in case she experienced an event. Dogs are everywhere. Look, I know that people abuse the law and have animals for "support" and/or "comfort." I see it often. No doubt. However, there are people who truly do benefit from these animals. There has been speculation that her religion makes dogs objectionable. Not sure if that's true but were I to have a life-threatening allergy, I would be sure to be able to document it. 

Now, what are we to do about crying babies on long-haul flights? :)

 Why is life always fair for the person that needs a dog for the jittery nerves? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Bawlmerian said:

 Why is life always fair for the person that needs a dog for the jittery nerves? 

I don't think life is always fair for the person who has a legitimate need for a service animal. But, they are protected by laws. The passenger complaining? Not-so-much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering What she is supposedly a "Professor" of. Anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sprightly said:

I don't think life is always fair for the person who has a legitimate need for a service animal. But, they are protected by laws. The passenger complaining? Not-so-much.

What if we see allergies as a disability?  What about a person that was attacked by a dog and suffers from PTSD?  Might that be a disability?  Or is this just a pro dog agenda thing so that no matter what the dog person wins?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bartman said:

Just wondering What she is supposedly a "Professor" of. Anyone?

Your google is broken?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bawlmerian said:

Your google is broken?

No, just Lazy and the guy ahead of you already had it up before you.

Just read a bit about her "Studies". Now That's a BS Professorship if I ever heard of one. We all know Women have it Bad under Islam, doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to figure that out. By the same token I should get a Professorship in Casinos, Gambling & Strip Clubs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sprightly said:

No. She would have been asked to take another flight. Who said that life is always fair?  I also question why she didn't have emergency medication in case she experienced an event. Dogs are everywhere. Look, I know that people abuse the law and have animals for "support" and/or "comfort." I see it often. No doubt. However, there are people who truly do benefit from these animals. There has been speculation that her religion makes dogs objectionable. Not sure if that's true but were I to have a life-threatening allergy, I would be sure to be able to document it. 

Now, what are we to do about crying babies on long-haul flights? :)

Put them in the cargo bay. :D

I just realized something.....but I just realized that when I was flying for business a lot....it was always the cross countries that had the screames. That is when my 'buds' became my buds. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bawlmerian said:

 Why is life always fair for the person that needs a dog for the jittery nerves? 

ohhhhh pppuuuuuuhhhhhlllleeeeaaaassssee.

Now you are just instigating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sprightly said:

I don't think life is always fair for the person who has a legitimate need for a service animal. But, they are protected by laws. The passenger complaining? Not-so-much.

It seems to me......if the poor allergic person had more or less gotten in line early and purchased the ticket BEFORE any of the people with dogs. More than likely the people with dogs would have been told to book another flight.

But then said person likely would have had to produce DOCUMENTATION about that just like the dog owners had to. But I bet dollars to doughnuts that she has no documentation that pre-dates the time of the fiight.  IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0