Originally Posted by
SayMach
Does the legal phrase “ must accommodate” mean must allow to ride free? If not, there is an easy fix. Charge $200 for the animal in a crate in the cargo and charge $300 to go in the cabin. Make it clear to the passenger that it’s cheaper for the animal to ride in a crate.
Motion seconded.
This whole fake ESA stuff clearly bloomed like Florida algae all the sudden because ppl wanted to avoid fees while taking the family pet with them. A small portion of that is the airlines faults because of a few awful and 100% preventable instances of pets being mishandled. That should never happen and if we put the same redline paranoia into that as we do D-0 then it wouldn't.
With all the call to actions out there we need one that completely eliminates ESA's and provides those exemptions for bona fide service animals only, which could include the equivalent of ESA's but they'd have to be trained and actually documented to the same standard. Otherwise they go in a crate and if too large to fit under the seat then they go in the bin. At that point its on us to step it up and guarantee their care and there's no reason there can't be accurate temperature monitoring and even picture tracking sent to people's phones especially when sometimes it costs more than a transcon loss leader ticket anyway.
ESA's have become the universal life church equivalent of "ordained ministers" and it needs to be walked back.