DOT Threatens
Right to Have Hearing Dogs in Airplane Cabin
Editor:
Just when I think I've seen it all when it comes to trampling on the
rights of people with disabilities, some agency demonstrates that they
can be even more clueless than I had imagined. Here's a story from
Justice for All that you just won't believe!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Jusice
for All, AAPD,
September
11, 2005
Right to
Travel with a Service Animal in the Airline Cabin Threatened by DOT
Proposed Rule
The United
States Department of Transportation has issued proposed rules permitting
airlines to charge disabled passengers traveling with large guide,
hearing or service dogs for an extra seat. If their canine assistants
cannot fit in the floor space in front of them, DOT suggests three
options unacceptable to the disabled community. These are charge for a
second seat; separate the team and ship the dog in cargo or make them
wait for a later flight which might or might not be less crowded. These
alternatives penalize, disempower and discriminate against the disabled
traveler. Friends and members of the International Association of
Assistance Dog Partners (IAADP) flooded the DOT public comment site with
more than 1,000 responses critical of these proposed rules. There is
strong support for IAADP's common sense alternative proposals. This
issue is critical to maintaining the right to freedom of travel for
assistance dog partners.
We believe
our fellow AAPD members will be outraged at this attack on our right to
fly AND join us in opposing this proposal. DOT is currently in the
process of writing the new rules and we urge AAPD members to contact
their Congressional and Senate representatives to write to DOT Secretary
Norman Minetta opposing the proposed language and substituting the IAADP
alternative language. At this stage in the process, political pressure
seems to be the only viable approach!
The Problem
In the
Notice of Proposed Rule Making published by the Department of
Transportation in the Federal Register on November 4, 2004, the
following language appears:
"If
the service animal does not fit, it should be relocated to another space
in the cabin if possible in the same service class. If no single seat
will accommodate you may offer the option of purchasing a second seat,
traveling on a later flight or having the service animal travel in the
cargo hold."
Purchasing
a second seat is not a viable option since the financial burden would
exclude most disabled people with large guide, hearing and service dogs
from traveling by air. Traveling on a later flight does not guarantee
the issue will be resolved, since the same circumstances may exist on
the later flight. Taking a later flight would interfere with the
disabled traveler's ability to make appointments and meet commitments.
Shipping the assistance dog in cargo is an option unacceptable to
assistance dog partners. In addition to the safety of the assistance dog
in the cargo hold, what about the independence, safety and quality of
life issues for the disabled partner?
These
recommendations would impose a set of conditions that would make air
travel unpredictable and stressful for those of us working with large
canine assistants. In fact, they would become barriers to air travel by
a segment of the disabled population.
The
Solution
IAADP has
suggested the following language be substituted as advice to airline
personnel:
"You
may offer the passenger sitting in a seat adjacent to the disabled
passenger traveling with a large service animal a seat in the same class
of service in another part of the cabin. If no seats are available in
that class of service, you may ask for a volunteer willing to occupy the
seat next to the disabled passenger requiring sharing of leg room. If no
volunteer is forthcoming and seats are available in another class of
service in another part of the cabin, you may ask the adjacent passenger
or the disabled passenger to occupy a seat in that other class of
service."
These
suggestions would place no financial burden on the airlines nor would it
inconvenience other passengers. This language would maintain current
practice throughout the airline industry.
Outraged? Here's
a letter you can use as a model for the one you're writing to your
representative!
