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.