As a dog lover, I can’t help but find this to be very cute, though admittedly it’s a bit controversial…
In this post:
Traveler finds “hack” to avoid putting dog in carrier on plane
A self-proclaimed “dog content creator” on Instagram posted a video a couple of days ago, which has since gone viral, and has been viewed millions of times.
In the video, he can be seen flying United first class, with his dog in his lap. For what it’s worth, his dog, Piper, is 19 years old, and is blind and deaf. As a dog lover, huge credit to this guy in general, as he loves helping dogs, fosters them, etc. Anyway, I digress…
He can be seen cuddling with his dog and feeding him a goldfish snack, and the flight attendant takes drink orders. He orders a Diet Coke for himself, and a water for his dog. After taking the order, the flight attendant politely reminds him “your pet needs to be in its carrier at all times.” He responds by asking “the whole time?” The flight attendant responds “the whole time.”
The dog apparently doesn’t like being in the carrier, so he says “this is going to get ugly.” The video then moves on to what he claims is the second flight, where he writes “this is the second flight, and I came up with a dog travel hack.” The dog can be seen in what almost looks like a baby carrier, strapped to his chest, with a hat over his head.
Now, I’m not sure to what extent this was for social media rather than “real” (in terms of whether there were actually two separate flights, or whether he just filmed all of this on the same flight). Either way, you can see the video for yourself below.
As you’d expect, the internet is divided on this…
There are varying opinions regarding the “stunt” this guy pulled off. On the one hand, the policy is clear — if you have an in-cabin pet (and not a service animal), they need to be in the carrier for the entire flight. The flight attendant did nothing wrong here — he was simply enforcing the company’s policy.
At the same time, most dog lovers find this to be adorable, and see nothing wrong with what the guy did. As a dog lover, I absolutely fall in that camp, while of course acknowledging that it violates the rules.
This guy seems like a great “dog dad,” and it doesn’t look like Piper was bothering anyone. Then again, there are all kinds of dog parents with very poorly behaved four-legged friends, who also think their dogs are perfect little angels.
I’ve long thought that there need to be more humane ways to travel with pets. Admittedly traveling in a carrier in the cabin is actually one of the more humane ways to travel, as my biggest issue is with putting dogs in the cargo hold (since dogs of a certain size can’t travel as pets in the cabin).
What also makes this kind of silly is that if this guy had simply claimed his dog was a service animal (as all too many people do — not that I’m condoning it), he could’ve kept the dog in his lap the whole flight, and also wouldn’t have had to pay the fee for an in-cabin pet.
Bottom line
A traveler flew United first class with his adorable senior dog, and had him in his lap. The flight attendant told him he needed to place the dog in the carrier (fair enough), so he did that. However, on the next flight, he decided to try a new method, and placed the dog in a carrier around his chest, using a baseball cap to cover his head.
As someone who loves dogs, it put a smile on my face to see this senior dog living his best life with his favorite human. That’s not to say I agree with breaking the rules, but it still brought me joy.
What do you make of this United first class dog situation?
I love the baby sling idea, if a dog is small and will tolerate it. Just as much confined as in a typical carrier. My dog would not tolerate a baby sling or a carrier. She would hate the whole airport experience so she stays home.
Technically, it is a carrier...
Piper is 19 please let the fur baby stay on Dad's lap what's the Big deal. Piper is not bothering anyone. I LOVE YOU PIPER ❤️
I'm allergic to dogs - can you imagine being sat next to this guy? Leave your pet at home unless its a service animal. Wish airlines would strictly enforce the rules.
Margo take a pill and chill
Yeah Margo, calm down. Hilarious to see a person complain about someone else's accommodation while in the same sentence insisting on their own.
The dog is deaf & blind! It's also small enough to be carried on the passengers chest. How about a little compassion here? The dog's presence isnt causing a disruption or health issues. Let them be.
Let's compare this to other countries and regions of the world and airline policies. This is another example of inconsistent enforcement of policies. Look at the situations that happen with US airlines that do not happen overseas. Part of this is people know that the policies are relaxed and think they can get away with it. Very few people try to do the kinds of things that happen with US airlines. Everyone thinks their situation...
Let's compare this to other countries and regions of the world and airline policies. This is another example of inconsistent enforcement of policies. Look at the situations that happen with US airlines that do not happen overseas. Part of this is people know that the policies are relaxed and think they can get away with it. Very few people try to do the kinds of things that happen with US airlines. Everyone thinks their situation is unique. As someone else commented many situations make it seem unfair for others that really need it. Cute or not cute is not the point.
The dog was in a carrier. The owner just thought outside the box when defining “carrier.”
Yes, the man was breaking the "rules," but a 19-yr-old, deaf and blind dog should have special treatment. Piper looks like a well-behaved boy! Sweet thing. I love my dog to bits, I can relate.
Leave the guy alone he's just trying to make it comfortable for his very elderly pet. Find something else to be "pissed" about there's plenty of other things to be up in arms about.
Hey I want to travel with my two cats. Can I let them walk all over the cabin? Everyone loves cats, right?
Only if you post a video of it on socials! /s
What a t*at.
Who? What? The dog? The owner? The FA?
“Be more constructive with your feedback, please.” — The Hiphopopotamus.
In the context of current rules and regulations, and the inconsistent enforcement of them, I am ambivalent on all of this. I would note that some people really love dogs and want more of them around them in all situations while others are deeply uncomfortable with dogs (or any pets) in situations where they don’t expect them, and both sides need to acknowledge the other. We see this divide across all society these days.
As...
In the context of current rules and regulations, and the inconsistent enforcement of them, I am ambivalent on all of this. I would note that some people really love dogs and want more of them around them in all situations while others are deeply uncomfortable with dogs (or any pets) in situations where they don’t expect them, and both sides need to acknowledge the other. We see this divide across all society these days.
As dog ownership continues to grow, what I am *really* looking for is innovation on the part of airlines to make traveling with dogs more comfortable and economic for dog owners and to also accommodate those that are allergic and/or uncomfortable with dogs. This will have to happen relatively soon
Hopefully, United bans him...
As Ben said, he is of two minds. But you, are just a loser, no matter what your mind is.
Well said, Alan. Those who rush to automatically ban others from things are being silly. If they were treated as harshly as they wish for others to be treated, I doubt they’d be urging for such things.
It is good to see you here. Hope all is well in Malta. Coincidentally, smaller dogs, such as the Maltese, would actually make for good travel companions as they should fit in most carry-on carriers with relative ease...
Well said, Alan. Those who rush to automatically ban others from things are being silly. If they were treated as harshly as they wish for others to be treated, I doubt they’d be urging for such things.
It is good to see you here. Hope all is well in Malta. Coincidentally, smaller dogs, such as the Maltese, would actually make for good travel companions as they should fit in most carry-on carriers with relative ease and comfort.
So, perhaps, the size of the pups is part of the issue here. Larger dogs on planes really seem to get some folks worked up. 20 lbs and up may be the breaking point. Hard to say.
I was thinking of bringing on Maltese Falcon.
"The stuff that dreams are made of..."
Well, thats a pretty imbicilic response. But whatevs dude.
Every dog is adorable until part of your face is in their mouth.
No non-service animals in the passenger area. Very simple!
Of course he should be able to
He’s paying top dollar and let’s be frank here -The dog is part of his family like cats can be!!
It’s not like he’s encroaching on anybody that’s sitting very close..
Only people that are not animal lovers will complain !!
Bad luck -
What about the other people in the cabin who have paid and dont want to be around a dog?
They should fly private.
For most people, ‘flying private’ is not an option. (Even flying commercial, in Economy, is more of a middle class privilege, globally.) Generally, private aviation is a horrible value proposition (think, tens of thousands of dollars for even a shorter charter flight, like 2-3 hours). So, if you can afford it, you do you. You probably knew all this already anyway, and were just being disingenuous. *sigh*
Why shouldn't the dog owner fly private?
If you/they can afford it, why not (oh, the environment, I guess? Don’t tell the Swifties!); but, honestly, even those who can afford First Class on a domestic flight cannot reasonably afford to fly private.
Good on you Ben. This article is why I come here more often and rarely if ever read the Jerry Springer of airline blogs (Matthew Klint) who always posts after the news has gotten out with an acerbic and comically late take on almost every situation.
But there you are always, venting. And complaining about OMMAT when it suits your purpose. Please stop being a total hypocrite.
Good to see you here, Maryland. Thank you for setting some of these 'fellas' straight. I've already 'ruffled some feathers,' myself, proudly. Keep up the good work!
And here you are living on my every word. With your gas bag friend.
Hi Cairns. How's it 'down under' these days? No, not Australia... a bit lower, and hotter, too.
I flew American first class with my cat. He is a nervous traveler. I had him in his carrier on my lap with my hand in the carrier to pet and comfort him. The flight attendant said that was not allowed and the cat carrier had to remain on the floor. I'm still puzzled why it was an issue to have the carrier on my lap.
Consider yourself lucky, because, apparently, some of our fellow commenters who love 'the rules' and hate 'pets' would like to see you automatically 'banned' from flying, if not worse.
Have you people every heard of "turbulence"? And if a pet gets loose, panics and runs through the airplane, you certainly won't expect someone else to get your pet for you, right?
No, Mark. This is a travel, aviation, credit card blog, so none of us have ever heard of ‘turbulence’ or experienced such a thing. Please, give us your dissertation on fluid dynamics. And, don’t worry, I’ll call Norway to nominate you for next year’s Nobel Prize in Physics. Well done, sir!
I'm a dog nut but I work with blind people in my profession and I think it is wrong to pretend that your animal is a service animal. I agree that some rules are silly but with so many people pretending to have a "service" animal, it makes it difficult for people who really need them to be believed. (Many legally blind people do not "look" blind so it is already difficult for them to be believed & get the help they need.)
It is a criminal offense to pass off a dog as a service dog without proper credentials. I think the dog should have been in a pet carrier for the safety of everyone on board - including the dog.
So is speeding (definitely a 'safety' issue), and also, the obligation to report all income, worldwide, as US citizens, yet what truly makes the difference with all laws, rules, and norms is 'enforcement.' It's not 'gravity'... it ain't gonna enforce itself. Good luck out there!
As a person with severe allergies, I find it really disheartening to see this kind of news. It shows a lack of respect for fellow passengers. I have to travel frequently for work, and I don’t have much choice — unlike many pet owners who travel with them for leisure
And if the first class cabin had two or three pets in their kennels, that would be no problem for you?
It’s less bad. Pet allergies are usually worse when the dog is moving around, since that stirs up dander.
Yesterday I flew Alaska Airlines from Tampa to San Diego and there was a couple who boarded with a small dog in their arms and a dog bed.
Very strange. The dog was silent until landing but I thought of the potential danger to the dog ( and perhaps others ) in the event of an emergency
If the dog is your greatest concern during an emergency, then, good news, you should be distracted from the far greater likelihood that a serious accident may kill you (not the dog.) Like, by all means, stress out about dogs as you plummet to the Earth. I’d try to think of other things, too, rather than the abyss.
Let’s be honest
Much much safer than travelling in a car!
But it IS much safer BECAUSE of regulation, redundancy, training and procedure. If we just let passengers and crew do whatever they want everywhere all the time then it wouldn’t. The rule’s there for a reason.
Hi Michael. Yes, still here. You know that 'the rules' are there for a reason, yet 'enforcement' can also be heavy-handed, excessive, or impractical. We don't want any 'power-trips' now, do we?
For instance, it is very much a 'rule' to not have your phone making noises during the flight (silence it, wear earbuds, etc.).
Let's say that 'rule' is in-part for 'safety' (because passengers need to hear announcements from the crew), but...
Hi Michael. Yes, still here. You know that 'the rules' are there for a reason, yet 'enforcement' can also be heavy-handed, excessive, or impractical. We don't want any 'power-trips' now, do we?
For instance, it is very much a 'rule' to not have your phone making noises during the flight (silence it, wear earbuds, etc.).
Let's say that 'rule' is in-part for 'safety' (because passengers need to hear announcements from the crew), but also, for the comfort of your fellow passengers (who don't want to hear your phone's noises throughout the flight as they try to relax, sleep, etc.)
So, should the crew be policing every row through the entirety of the flight, listening to whether any phones are producing noises? Maybe on 'your' airline, but probably not on most. (Finnair is an exception; they rigorously enforce these things. It's 'a bit much.')
Yet, what if a passenger has their phone on full-volume, playing a game or receiving texts via the on-board WiFi, 'ding!' repeatedly. In those circumstances, hopefully another passenger who is offended might calmly notify the crew of that alleged violation, then the crew can attempt to enforce its rules, maybe, by asking politely that the offending passenger please silence their phone. Sometimes that goes well. Other times... they end up on r/AirRage, then on here and other travel blogs for the commentariat to argue over.
Let's be clear, though, the goal is compliance with such rules through de-escalation. On the other hand, we can just auto-'ban' people for minor infractions, as some are foolishly suggesting. My, my, my... if we imposed the same strictness on them as they wish on others.
with the "discretion" FAs seem to have over whether to do aspects of their job that they don't like (hanging jackets, PDBs, etc.) it sure seems like a *choice* to focus on a dog that is bothering no one
I laughed out loud at his creativity.
I love dogs.
And I hope he get's banned.
Once you allow people to choose which rules they will follow and whether or not they will listen to FAs you have problems.
How very ‘burn the witch!’ of you. Whether you like or dislike dogs (or kids, or seniors, of ketchup) is irrelevant.
We shouldn’t be hoping others get banned from flying. That’s not a great way to run an airline, much less, a society.
Making mountains outta mole hills. Thank goodness ‘the internet’ isn’t judge, jury, and executioner, like some of y’all think it is.
For what??
Your opinion is ridiculous!!!
Banned come on…
This is a great example of life not being black and white. And those who thinks most problems (social or political) should think on this scenario and others like it. This is why managing people is hard and rules can't apply to 100% of situations. I am completely conflicted on this. I know what my heart wants to say vs what my brain wants.
Falsely claiming a pet is a service animal on a flight should be a federal offense with prison and/or large fines. $10,000 or 6 months in prison is about right.
Great example of hyperbole! Let’s see…failing to report as income that $20 you found on the sidewalk should be an summary execution, you know, ‘frontier justice.’ Or, how about, 1 million years dungeon!
What happens in case an emergency situation on landing like overrunning a runway. Can the pet be a hindrance in the evacuation of the aircraft. If so, I don’t care how cute it looks, It needs to be inside the carrier. You cannot jeopardize the safety of the people on board.
Ah, rollover, like a dog, or like DL4819. I’d rather the dog be in the passenger cabin than the baggage compartment, that’s for sure.
Bbt, you bring up a good point! In the carrier or not, if you need to evacuate the aircraft in an emergency, do you take the dog? The dog could slow down the evacuation and cost a human being their lives.
We gonna do the whole ‘leave the bags behind’ debate again on here? Yeah, the rules are one thing; in-the-moment is another. If it’s your dog, and you can take them with you, obviously, do that. If you or it is incapacitated, then, bets are off. If you cause another passenger’s death in an evacuation, I donno man, hard to prove negligence in those cases; usually liability would be on the airline, and even then,...
We gonna do the whole ‘leave the bags behind’ debate again on here? Yeah, the rules are one thing; in-the-moment is another. If it’s your dog, and you can take them with you, obviously, do that. If you or it is incapacitated, then, bets are off. If you cause another passenger’s death in an evacuation, I donno man, hard to prove negligence in those cases; usually liability would be on the airline, and even then, are we really gonna do a deep dive on torts or, if it was an international flight, the freaking Montreal Convention. Get real.
So the dog is strapped to him and goes with him. But if it's in a carrier, he has to leave it behind, while you, my enlightened one, manage to take your laptop and carry-on with you. How very Solomon like. Heads you win, tails the dog loses.
Animals and children has nothing to do in first class.
Nah, I'd take dogs and children over folks who think like you do, any day.
Without question !!
Well said .
Some of these comments are just storm in a teacup..
People with no understanding or proper judgement!!
Find me the people who think it's OK to flaunt FAA policy on pets because they're heckin' cute pupperinos. and I'll tell you who they voted for.
This has nothing to do with partisanship, or who anyone voted for.
(And, if you drive, you likely go over the speed limit, so looky here, you flaunt our laws, too!)
So, I'm pretty sure I know who you voted for, based on your silly suggestion.
Not a very good comparison. Guy with dog was wrong. Should be kicked off plane.
It's apt. Speeding kills.
And, I think we know who you voted for, too.
This is not about the dog or dog lovers. This is about him posting this video and everyone is shitting on the flight attendant instead of the owner who is breaking not only the airline's policy, but the FAAs too. He's openly bragging about not following those rules and not following the flight attendants instruction, and quite frankly it pisses me off.
This is what bothers me the most. It's not that he's getting away with it and moving on. It's that he's posting it and after going viral there's countless morons out there with aggressive dogs who think "why can't my precious Rambo fly like that too? He's special to ME. Ima do that next week".
No, nearly all dog owners (pets and service animals) take traveling with those animals quite seriously. I have not had issues with 'bad' dogs on flights. Yet, I've witnessed a few 'bad' passengers, over the years, which, if I had to guess, you'd fit that category...
This old dude is looking for social media attention. It's sad someone that age feels the need to be validated on line like a 20 year old would want to be.
Hi, George Nathan, good to see you, sir.
I agree with Kira. This really pisses me off. The entitlement this dude feels is sicking. And others who want to skirt the rules because they think the rules don't apply to them.
This is me, not shitting on the FA. In this case, I am of two minds, like Ben.
Sorry, but rules are rules for a reason and the dog being adorable isn't an excuse. Where do you draw the line? Have we not seen enough dog biting incidents on planes? A dog's an animal and they can't think like a human. They can be fine at one moment and then the next feel threatened by a flight attendant or another passenger, they can get stressed out just by flying, or simply not feel...
Sorry, but rules are rules for a reason and the dog being adorable isn't an excuse. Where do you draw the line? Have we not seen enough dog biting incidents on planes? A dog's an animal and they can't think like a human. They can be fine at one moment and then the next feel threatened by a flight attendant or another passenger, they can get stressed out just by flying, or simply not feel well and bite someone. Technicalities and "carrier" semantics aside, I think any reasonable person understands how this rule works. This viral "hack" is only going to lead to one thing: People who aren't as smart as this guy with less behaved dogs trying the same stunt, and innocent passengers are going to get hurt. At the very least there will be some flight diversions and fights between those dog owners and passengers who aren't going to put up with people getting cute with this nonsense.
Cool story, bro.
Except drink, stuff their pie hole, and snear at coach passengers filing in after them.
@Michael: Thank goodness passengers don't have meltdowns.
Good one, Alan! Michael's a bit stiff. Oh, how quickly 'rules are rules' becomes 'just following orders.' Beware, I think... Mikey no like-y (me, at least).
Give me a break. Dogs need to remain the carriers. Follow the rules!
Ah, 'dogs on a plane,' a classic in the rotation of articles on sites like this. And, here, I thought it was only Gary Leff that would dish-out these stories... OMAAT, got us covered! Niccce.
And yet here you are. Again.
Yup. How 'Helpful' of you.
Dude you don't have to be here. Go get a job.
Same to you. Wait, is this 'your' job?
Except you don’t seem to enjoy being here very much so why not do something more productive with your time rather than whining like a little bitch all the time about content? If you don’t like the free content go write your own blog for your mom to read and leave this space to an actual meaningful discussion.
‘I know you are, but what am I?’
"Piper, is 19 years old, and is blind and deaf."
OK I get it. I'm team Piper.
Poor Piper.
Piper needs his service human or emotional support human.
But seriously Piper needs to respect the rule.
This idiot needs to stay inside his cage at Piper's feet the entire flight while Piper is sitting in his seat.
Piper can put a leash and let this human idiot crawl around after landing but not in flight.
The passenger should have put the dog in the carrier, per the regulation. If he refused, they should have kicked him and the dog off the plane. In fact, they should consider banning him from the airline if he makes a stink. The passengers around him have rights too.
I am so tired of people with fake "service dogs" or other reasons to bring animals into public spaces where they are prohibited. I see this...
The passenger should have put the dog in the carrier, per the regulation. If he refused, they should have kicked him and the dog off the plane. In fact, they should consider banning him from the airline if he makes a stink. The passengers around him have rights too.
I am so tired of people with fake "service dogs" or other reasons to bring animals into public spaces where they are prohibited. I see this in my local grocery store. The store manager is instructed that if they say it's a service dog, don't question it. BS.
The rules exist for the safety of crew and passengers.
Another rule is that you're supposed to have your seatbelt on at all times, even when the seatbelt sign is off, for your own safety. Do I have to bring up the speed limit example yet again?
No 1990 (guessing you were born that year as you're not that wise). Seatbelt on is a recommendation, unless light on, then its a rule. Guy with dog is an idiot. You're being one with your examples. If I don't wear a seatbelt, I get hurt. The dog shouldn't be on the plane.
Unlike you, I don't have to repeat myself on here... apparently, age has not made you any wiser. Laws, rules, norms, or mere suggestions, etc., are human constructs. It all comes down to enforcement; sometimes we rule with an iron fist, other times, nearly all the cars on the highway are going 5 mph over the speed limit. *gasp* So far, the only consequence with this story is that we're talking about it. Aww.
I know it is rule on LH. I often see FA's walking the aisles telling passengers to buckle. Usually, it's with humor. " Sir, I don't want to scrape you off the overhead."
No 1990 (guessing you were born that year as you're not that wise). Seatbelt on is a recommendation, unless light on, then its a rule. Guy with dog is an idiot. You're being one with your examples. If I don't wear a seatbelt, I get hurt. The dog shouldn't be on the plane.
Ah, fine, the second time you said it was slightly better, no?
Agreed
More fiber or stool softener could help with your issues.
@ Steve
Frankly, if everything bothers you so much, you can always go Greyhound.*
*Pun intended.
Zing! Some would say that bus is... ruff!
String him up. But first, award him ten thousand points for creativity.
Bah! Reminds me of... "Welcome to Whose Line Is It Anyway?, the show where everything's made up and the points don't matter.”
Blind, deaf, decrepit, and nineteen... It's not for the dog's benefit that he's being foced to live like this.
It's not animal abuse if Piper is cute even if you exploit Piper for the free contents.
It's not even child labor if parents abuse the heck out of their children for content, most of not all are without the kid's consent. It's called parenting.
What'r you talking about... that dog's living its best life... probably has spent more time up-front than you have. Bah!
Probably best for Piper's health that he stays with his person rather than in a crate down below or in a dog boarding kennel. And if nothing else, this guy seems to take better care of his dog than Hasan Piker.
Oh, so you're with PETA now? I'm assuming (because you apparently don't like Mr. Piker) that's 'people eating tasty animals' and not People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Hmm. Yeah, just keep blaming 'leftists' for all your problems...
For the record, my opinion is that a blind, deaf, decrepit 19yo pet should have been euthanised long ago. There’s no way that any animal in that condition is living its best life. Animals are not people. Period.
Thanks for clarifying, Pete.
Depending on the circumstances, that may (or may not) be a humane choice, but we don't know the full story, like what a vet has advised, etc.
Just curious, if it were your pet (you know, a member of your 'family' for 19 years), and your trusted veterinary advised euthanasia, would you choose to stay with your dog for that procedure, until the last breath, or would you just...
Thanks for clarifying, Pete.
Depending on the circumstances, that may (or may not) be a humane choice, but we don't know the full story, like what a vet has advised, etc.
Just curious, if it were your pet (you know, a member of your 'family' for 19 years), and your trusted veterinary advised euthanasia, would you choose to stay with your dog for that procedure, until the last breath, or would you just 'drop it off' and try to move? Just want to get a feel for where your head is really at here.
Of course, euthanizing people who are blind, deaf, decrepit at the equivalent age of 92 to 101 in human years. No, no... that'd be inhumane. For instance, they should keep their seat in the United States Senate and/or Supreme Court. Good call, sir.
Speaking of dogs, how's Winston? It's been a minute since you've talked about him and I hope he's doing alright!