Some passengers bend the rules, and some broadcast it. A United Airlines flyer who brought his blind, 19-year-old dog into first class…outside its carrier…managed to do both.
Man Flies United First Class With His 19-Year-Old Dog In His Lap, Dividing The Internet
Here’s a story, flagged by One Mile At A Time, that’s part heartwarming, part absurd, and fully divisive. A “dog content creator” shared a video in which he flew United first class with his 19-year-old dog, Piper, seated on his lap, bypassing the carrier’s requirement for pets to remain in carriers for the entire flight. The dog, blind and deaf, was clearly beloved, but the stunt rubbed many viewers the wrong way, including me.
But first, I want to start with a compliment to the man. He could have just lied and said the dog was a service animal. Had he done that, he would not have had to pay anything and the dog could have been out in the cabin without restriction. Kudos to him for at least not lying about his pet being a service animal (in reality, this aging dog requires a service human…).
View this post on Instagram
In the video, the traveler cuddles with Piper, feeds him a tiny snack, orders “water for the dog,” and holds him throughout the flight. But when a flight attendant reminds him that “your pet needs to be in its carrier at all times,” he presses back: “The whole time?” The attendant confirms it must be. The dog visibly dislikes being in the carrier, and the owner warns, “This is going to get ugly.” After that segment, a second flight shows Piper strapped in a chest-mounted carrier-like contraption intended for a baby, with a hat over his head. No problems on that flight with his “wink, wink” baby.
Yes, this might be social media theater more than full compliance with two separate flights, but either way, the video went viral. Dog lovers see devotion. Rule-observers see policy violation. And United’s flight attendant was simply doing their job by pointing out the carrier requirement.
United’s policy for in-cabin pets is clear: non-service animals must remain in a carrier for the duration of the flight. That’s standard across airlines for safety, space, and comfort. Thus, this video raises questions about boundaries, enforcement, and how far some will go for content or compassion.
As an aside, I find the issue of human euthanasia to be among the most difficult medical ethical dilemmas we face as a species, but I thought Pete made a good point on Ben’s blog when he said, “Blind, deaf, decrepit, and nineteen… It’s not for the dog’s benefit that he’s being forced to live like this.” That’s another discussion for another day…
As much as this cute dog tugged at my heart, the rules exist for good reason. Ultimately, all this shows what a disaster the current guidelines are concerning dogs. I still think a network (not just Bark Air) could make money by creating a pet section similar to the old smoking sections, but flouting the rules like Piper did really isn’t cute.
CONCLUSION
This stunt shouldn’t be taken as a model for pet travel. If you bring a non-service animal on a flight, use approved carriers and follow the rules. It’s time for the Department of Transportation to allow carriers to ban all dogs, even service animals, but a smart carrier could certainly market itself as a pet-friendly airline…I would applaud that innovation, even though I would also avoid that carrier. Most importantly, this story may amuse and provoke, but it shouldn’t encourage bending rules for Instagram reactions.
How would you judge Piper?
OMAAT was on this before you, Matthew. But, at least, you were ahead of Gary, this time. I look forward to reading the same bogus arguments from the anti-dog folks. ‘But, but… the rules!’ We know. But… ‘cuteness.’
I appreciate OMAAT review of this story. It’s refreshing he acknowledges pets should travel in a cabin, however this is matts usual anti dog article.
Dogs belong at home.
Bad dog! I mean, good boy! Leave it… Oh, wait, do you go by ‘Matt’ or ‘Matthew’? Sorry, sir. Still relatively ‘new’ here. Had given most of by eyeballs and beep-boops to VFTW and DoC, but I respect your work at LALF, as well as Ben’s at OMAAT, very much.
All pets belong at home. Every time I travel I am thankful I don’t have to encounter this sort of nonsense so prevalent in the US.
Not to get too ‘meta’ here, but, Gary waited a day later (Tuesday) to post about this… wonder if that’ll make the commentariat over there more or less rabid… like a dog, get it…
Regardless of opinion regarding this particular episode, it’s sad and pathetic that many people believe that pet’s rights outweigh human rights and that pets deserve more respect and courtesy and health care than other humans. Pets should not be eating caviar while children are starving, pets shouldn’t get elite expensive healthcare while people cannot even get basic healthcare. A runner shouldn’t have to risk injury and/or allergic reaction by jumping away from an ill-behaved pet who leaps at the runner at the last possible second as they’re passing on a sidewalk.
Hardly anyone is literally picking dogs over humans, but, I suppose, it is an easy strawman.
That said, isn’t it curious how some demagogues will use dehumanizing language to rile up their base into a fervor… like, referring to their opponents as ‘animals’ or ‘vermin’… yeah, that’s not good.
1990, Re “… Hardly anyone is literally picking dogs over humans, but, I suppose, it is an easy strawman.” Not a strawman at all. Maybe YOU haven’t seen it but it does happen. The NYC millionaire who left her entire fortune to her cat. People will gladly pay any amount for healthcare for their beloved pet while at the exact same time complaining about a much lower charge for healthcare for their child being outrageously exorbitant. Pet owners everywhere allowing their pets to jump on others without permission, without knowing if the person has an allergy or phobia. Pet owners not moving their pet to the side of the sidewalk when a person is coming in the other direction. Pet owners bringing their “service” animals on an airplane and then allowing the pet to impose upon other pax. Everyone of those situations, and MANY more, pets are being picked over humans.
Leona Helmsley left nearly her entire fortune to her dog.The woman was no dummy,a match for Martha Stewart in terms of business sense(though stewart never married to get ahead financially),another dog/animal lover btw.What they” get “,is that the pets truly loved them and weren’t feigning oodles of xoxoxo,when in fact they are waiting for madame/monsieur to drop dead asap and get their anticipated inheritance.
Re: Helmsley and Stewart: Excellent examples of rich nasty arrogant entitlement, maybe great business sense but despicable human beings. Leona Helmsley “Only the little people pay taxes”. 30 years ago an acquaintance of mine was starting a limousine company and received a call to bring Martha Stewart from her home in Connecticut to JFK airport, about 60-90 minute drive. He chose to make the drive himself, pulled up to her home, holds the back door open for her, she walks out of the house down the long walkway with an assistant, gets into the car, he says “good morning Ms. Stewart”, assistant says “Ms. Stewart doesn’t talk to the help.” Her securities fraud conviction where she threw her broker under the bus. Helmsley also looked the part of a despicable human being. (Both of them are just like the current MAGA dear leader except there’s little valid evidence he has good business sense, every one of his businesses would have done much better if they had been run by a savvy businessperson.)
Leona Helmsley left nearly her entire fortune to her dog.The woman was no dummy,a match for Martha Stewart in terms of business sense(though stewart never married to get ahead financially),another dog/animal lover btw.What they” get “,is that the pets truly loved them and weren’t feigning oodles of xoxoxo,when in fact they are waiting for madame/monsieur to drop dead asap and get their anticipated inheritance.You know,like people do everyday!
Leona Helmsley is clearly an outlier. Most pet owners are not ultra-rich or crazy; they just love their dogs, like family.
Over a dog.
Dogs are wonderful but…they have needs at a certain age. Like people, dogs may enjoy spending their retirement years in a comfortable environment and not stressed because a human puts their wants ahead of good sense. There is a growing anti-service dog movement because lying per owners exploit their animals. Shameful.
Most dogs never live to be anywhere near 19 yo,that speaks volumes for the power of love and bonds that form between certain humans and their pets.I wish this owner strength and courage when the inevitable meets their blessed journey.
Nicely said
Does the rule about keeping dogs/cats in carriers make sense? Yes. Then, no exceptions. It’s pretty much the definition of “entitlement”: the rules don’t apply to me. I don’t know what it’s like to be a blind, 19yo dog, but I’m guessing taking a flight isn’t its idea of fun.
I knew a couple of married United Airline employees while flying in first class back to their west coast city were they worked and lived and the woman let her dog out of the kennel in the first class cabin. The flight attendant repeatedly told the woman told the woman to put the dog back in the kennel and she refused; yes, there was quite alot of alcohol consumed by the woman. Upon arrival other destination, the couple were met by a United supervisor ( only became a supervisor because he was too lazy to do the ramp service work) and the supervisor covered the whole event up and did not discipline the employees for their violation of the rules involving dogs on a flight. Many years after that incident, she was fired for showing naked pictures of her husband at work.
The United soap opera!
My goodness, Matthew! The stories that I could tell you; I should have written a book. Here is one more. Over thirty years ago there used to be a bar in a trailer park a couple of miles from the airport. The ramp guys would pile into a United vehicle and drive to the bar for some drinks. They would take a radio with them so they could hear the ops guy call that the flight would be landing soon so they could race back to the airport and be ready to work the flight. True story!
It’s lame that so many of you are throwing a hissy fit over this. An old blind and deaf dog got comfort from feeling their human’s presence and no one was hurt or injured. The irrationally intense emotional response from the author and a significant portion of the commentariat speak volumes.
“Rules for thee, but not for me”
Who exactly in our society today is actually bound by the rules? Rules for thee and not for me may as well be the 28th amendment
Let’s just hope Amendment XXII is respected in 2028…
It’s an airline rule, not a constitutional amendment. Rigid rules systems without sensible carveouts and exceptions benefit no one, and I guarantee that every person commenting here has received an exception to rules like this at some point and enjoyed it
Louder, for the people in the back, Matthew!
“No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”
It’s pretty, freaking, clear. He cannot run again.
I get tired of people who suggest, “but i have a good reason (a special case).” Miss the cutoff to check bags (I ran into traffic). But, my dog is so small (blind, deaf, etc.) and well-behaved. My 30 month old is small for their age and should be a lap enfant. I’m regularly concerned about the safety during evacuation as a fake service animal freaks out, a pax struggles to grab a pet in a carrier blocking aisle access, or this guy tries to evacuate with a blind/deaf dog in arms. But, remember at your loved one’s funeral that he was so kind to the dog that survived evacuation, unlike your loved one.
Where’s Kristi Noem when we need her?
The dog owner should not have been given any service due to ignoring the crew’s instructions. Further, a supervisor should have met the flight upon arrival and informed the offending passenger that he was banned from UA for ignoring flight crew instructions. As for the dog, flying had to have caused anxiety and discomfort, all for the sake of an influencer trying to get more views – disgusting.
Wrong.
Exactly. That man should be put on UA’s no-fly list. So tired of these entitled
Interesting description of the dog’s “chest-mounted carrier-like contraption”. Maybe that could represent a compromise between an unhappy animal yapping its objection to being confined, much to passenger displeasure (I like to nap on flights) and being happily confined on his owner. yet not infringing on any fellow passengers. Perhaps there is a marketing opportunity to get such a contraption approved; one that would not impede his owner’s evacuation (or anyone elses since you know an owner would be undertaking to take the under-the-seat kennel with him and slowing the process down.
OMG entitled peopole fly on Untied. Off load them at once!
OMG entitled people fly on Untied. How can this happen? Offload them at once!