RANT: I don't care if you want to sit next to your kids on the airplane

[GrnMtnMan]

I, and others, feel parents, if that's what they want, should take appropriate steps so they're sitting with their child and not rely on the airline/strangers to ensure that happens.

I understand the instinct to take a stand against rudeness and entitlement, but I don't think this is the right place to do so. Otherwise you're just contributing to an increase of rudeness and entitlement in the world.

 

[robinb]

Yup. I know. I may need therapy too.

You poor thing !

 

[macraven]

I think opposite

Reading a thread like this let's us examine ourselves and learn how not to make the same mistakes

We all do things we are not aware of at times

This is a message board to exchange ideas
Obvious there is an interest in the topic or the thread would have died out by page 2

 

[KelNChrisKYDis]

I was reading this entire thread looking to see if OP ever replied... I skipped starting at page 19 and never saw a reply. Anyone know?

I just wanted to add that we flew to WDW last year as a family of 4 for the first time... DH, me, DD (age 2, almost 3) and DS (age 6). DH & I have taken a few trips together, but honestly, we've only flown maybe half a dozen times in the past 15 years. So we're not completely inexperienced, but we're not well seasoned, either. This being a big trip (for us), I was very anxious to get us on a very specific flight. I booked our tickets in Nov 2015 for our Apr 2016 trip, through Expedia. I didn't even realize I was not given an option to select my seats at the time of purchase, I was just excited to have bought the tickets. It wasn't until about a week before our trip that I realized I didn't know our exact seats. I logged in online to view availability and my heart sunk; there weren't even any double seats anywhere, let alone 4 seats in close proximity. I contacted Delta and they said we'd have to make our own arrangements with other passengers. I was frustrated, because I'd bought my tickets 6 months ago, and didn't have any idea that I would need to go through Delta to book specific seats. It just never dawned on me. Fortunately, we were able to swap with other people so that at least I could sit with my DD. (and she was a handful, if no one had switched I think they would've ended up calling for an emergency landing, hahaha.) On the trip home we had to do something similar, although the guy my DH asked to switch with said he couldn't "legally" do it at first because they'd never allow 1 adult with 2 children. (WTH does he think single parents traveling with kids do?)

I know better now, and next time I will do better, but not everyone is well versed on the ever evolving rules of travel. If I had paid extra for my seat, I would be hesitant to switch as well. Not saying there's no circumstance where I could see myself switching, but I would not expect someone to do it just because. Honestly though it's more for their comfort than mine, as even *I* didn't want to sit next to my kid, lol. Fortunately she's ... matured... a bit... since then.

 

[bcla]

If you read the quoted language literally, it says the airlines can't charge an extra fee to see the child adjacent to the family member. it doesn't say the airlines can't require the family member to purchase an assigned seat ticket if they are traveling with a child. So mom has to pay to buy the assigned seat ticket and then can choose the seat for the child at no additional fee.

I certainly don't expect that any regulation (and conforming airline policies) written to conform with the law is going to meet that definition. It would defeat the purpose of the legislation, which is to prevent airlines from charging extra to allow a guardian to sit next to a child under 14.

The way many airlines operate these days with 3 across configurations is to charge extra for window or aisle as "premium" seats. So in that case it's normally not possible to select two seats together at or soon after purchase with a 3+3 configuration without selecting a "premium" seat with an upcharge. However, if the airlines someone do as you believe, the easy way for the passenger to handle it isn't that the child gets a middle seat and the guardian gets a premium seat. It's that the guardian selects a middle seat and the child gets the "premium" seat without the upcharge. I fully expect that one guardian in a middle seat will probably be able to get surrounding window and aisle seats for kids without the upcharge. If the airlines try to figure a way to get out of this, I would expect the DOT to promptly slap it down.

 

[bcla]

I was reading this entire thread looking to see if OP ever replied... I skipped starting at page 19 and never saw a reply. Anyone know?

I just wanted to add that we flew to WDW last year as a family of 4 for the first time... DH, me, DD (age 2, almost 3) and DS (age 6). DH & I have taken a few trips together, but honestly, we've only flown maybe half a dozen times in the past 15 years. So we're not completely inexperienced, but we're not well seasoned, either. This being a big trip (for us), I was very anxious to get us on a very specific flight. I booked our tickets in Nov 2015 for our Apr 2016 trip, through Expedia. I didn't even realize I was not given an option to select my seats at the time of purchase, I was just excited to have bought the tickets. It wasn't until about a week before our trip that I realized I didn't know our exact seats. I logged in online to view availability and my heart sunk; there weren't even any double seats anywhere, let alone 4 seats in close proximity. I contacted Delta and they said we'd have to make our own arrangements with other passengers. I was frustrated, because I'd bought my tickets 6 months ago, and didn't have any idea that I would need to go through Delta to book specific seats. It just never dawned on me. Fortunately, we were able to swap with other people so that at least I could sit with my DD. (and she was a handful, if no one had switched I think they would've ended up calling for an emergency landing, hahaha.) On the trip home we had to do something similar, although the guy my DH asked to switch with said he couldn't "legally" do it at first because they'd never allow 1 adult with 2 children. (WTH does he think single parents traveling with kids do?)

I know better now, and next time I will do better, but not everyone is well versed on the ever evolving rules of travel. If I had paid extra for my seat, I would be hesitant to switch as well. Not saying there's no circumstance where I could see myself switching, but I would not expect someone to do it just because. Honestly though it's more for their comfort than mine, as even *I* didn't want to sit next to my kid, lol. Fortunately she's ... matured... a bit... since then.

Yeah - even if you can't select your seats through an online travel agency at the time of purchase, you can typically check/select them by going to the airline website and entering your flight info with confirmation code. Not always, but it's usually the case that you can do it. I've done it and sometimes seats were already assigned but I could change them, or they weren't already assigned and I could select them. In a few cases I couldn't select seats until check-in, but those were for specific discount fare classes or perhaps international flights.

Also - my experience with Delta (or at least Skywest) was that they made a serious effort to make sure that I or my wife was sitting next to our six year old. We made two bookings because my kid and I had some Delta credit from a cancelled international ticket for us, but my wife purchased separately using credit card points. We also modified our itinerary by the next day, which cost us extra. I couldn't select two seats together on the outbound flight and that was a regional jet with a 2+2 configuration and no upcharge since all seats were window or aisle. We also were seriously late getting there. As soon as we got to the gate while boarding had already been going on for maybe five minutes, the gate agent asked why we didn't come up earlier to request an accommodation for two seats together. Of course we were running late, but they actually had a seat held back next to one of the seats we had selected and changed one seat assignment.

There's also no rule that says one adult can't be with two children. The basic airline rule I know of is that one adult can only get one lap infant for free. If you've got infant twins, then at least one is required to have a ticket.

I also don't get the contention that the answer to all this is just to spend more money. It's almost like there's a resentment by those without young children that families with young children will be accommodated, or by families that do pay extra and resent that others don't and get accommodated. I certainly don't expect that totally voluntary help will be forthcoming, but most airlines will find a way because they don't like dealing with the typical outcome when people start complaining.

 

[sam_gordon]

I also don't get the contention that the answer to all this is just to spend more money. It's almost like there's a resentment by those without young children that families with young children will be accommodated, or by families that do pay extra and resent that others don't and get accommodated. I certainly don't expect that totally voluntary help will be forthcoming, but most airlines will find a way because they don't like dealing with the typical outcome when people start complaining.

Here's the problem. General travelers (those with no kids) have sometimes spent money in order to sit in a certain seat (aisle, window, front, back, whatever). I can understand resentment if I've spent money to sit in a certain seat and a parent wants me to swap with them (generally for a worse seat... middle, back, whatever). And again, I think there is a judgement going on regarding whether the parent truly needs to sit with a child.

 

[bcla]

Here's the problem. General travelers (those with no kids) have sometimes spent money in order to sit in a certain seat (aisle, window, front, back, whatever). I can understand resentment if I've spent money to sit in a certain seat and a parent wants me to swap with them (generally for a worse seat... middle, back, whatever). And again, I think there is a judgement going on regarding whether the parent truly needs to sit with a child.

I get the resentment over it, but not the insistence that others should have to pay. Like it or not, airlines have always tried to make accommodations for children flying with parents/guardians. There's always been preferential boarding for families with young children. I've personally seen airlines go out of their way to change seats.

And most airlines do hold back seats from being available for selection just for this sort of thing. It's not just for kids though. It might be for a disabled passenger who has an attendant fly for free (I think this is an ADA requirement).

Even before I had a child I was thankful that parents would be next to kids. I was somewhat amused by a toddler popping up over the seat to say hi from Detroit to SFO, but his dad did keep it from becoming excessive. I don't know if another passenger would have been quite as understanding. Once I was having some difficulty with my kid even sitting next to us on an international flight. It was the first time our kid had ever been on a flight longer than 2 hours, and one guy just laid into us like somehow yelling at us would help rather than further agitating our kid. Now if we hadn't been able to sit next to our then 3 year old, who knows what would have happened.

 

[piccolopat]

I certainly don't expect that any regulation (and conforming airline policies) written to conform with the law is going to meet that definition. It would defeat the purpose of the legislation, which is to prevent airlines from charging extra to allow a guardian to sit next to a child under 14.

The way many airlines operate these days with 3 across configurations is to charge extra for window or aisle as "premium" seats. So in that case it's normally not possible to select two seats together at or soon after purchase with a 3+3 configuration without selecting a "premium" seat with an upcharge. However, if the airlines someone do as you believe, the easy way for the passenger to handle it isn't that the child gets a middle seat and the guardian gets a premium seat. It's that the guardian selects a middle seat and the child gets the "premium" seat without the upcharge. I fully expect that one guardian in a middle seat will probably be able to get surrounding window and aisle seats for kids without the upcharge. If the airlines try to figure a way to get out of this, I would expect the DOT to promptly slap it down.

Or the parent and the child get two middle seats in adjacent rows.

 

[bcla]

Or the parent and the child get two middle seats in adjacent rows.

You really believe that the DOT will consider that an "adjacent seat"? Or that it meets the definition of "maximum extent practicable"?

 

[piccolopat]

You really believe that the DOT will consider that an "adjacent seat"? Or that it meets the definition of "maximum extent practicable"?

I had read somewhere (sorry I don't recall where) that adjacent was being defined as including the rows directly in front of, in back of or across the aisle from where the child would be sitting.

 

[dotfurio]

In virtually any situation with a so-called normal child over 8 years old, any parent claiming "my child NEEDS to sit next to me" really means "<I> need to sit next to my child."

Yes, that's true. There's plenty of things my child would want to do on her own that I feel I should supervise. Just because my kid wants something doesn't mean she's mature enough for it. It's easy to judge other people's motives and say their kids should be fine and the parents are being ridiculous, but you don't know the individuals personally to make that judgement. I know my child best, I know her needs, and God forbid in an emergency she would not be just fine on her own.

 

[sam_gordon]

I get the resentment over it, but not the insistence that others should have to pay.

I think you're missing the point. I think people are saying IF parents want to ensure they are sitting in seats they want (in this case next to their kids), they should have to pay, just like the person who wants to sit in seat 7A needs to pay (because it's a "preferred" seat or whatever). Why are you (general) insisting that parents should get for free what others have to pay for?

 

[Allison]

You really believe that the DOT will consider that an "adjacent seat"? Or that it meets the definition of "maximum extent practicable"?

I think that is possible.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

ETA: more of the quote for better context. See bolded part for more of what my comment is in regards to.

I just wanted to add that we flew to WDW last year as a family of 4 for the first time... DH, me, DD (age 2, almost 3) and DS (age 6). DH & I have taken a few trips together, but honestly, we've only flown maybe half a dozen times in the past 15 years. So we're not completely inexperienced, but we're not well seasoned, either. This being a big trip (for us), I was very anxious to get us on a very specific flight. I booked our tickets in Nov 2015 for our Apr 2016 trip, through Expedia. I didn't even realize I was not given an option to select my seats at the time of purchase, I was just excited to have bought the tickets. It wasn't until about a week before our trip that I realized I didn't know our exact seats. I logged in online to view availability and my heart sunk; there weren't even any double seats anywhere, let alone 4 seats in close proximity. I contacted Delta and they said we'd have to make our own arrangements with other passengers. I was frustrated, because I'd bought my tickets 6 months ago, and didn't have any idea that I would need to go through Delta to book specific seats. It just never dawned on me. Fortunately, we were able to swap with other people so that at least I could sit with my DD. (and she was a handful, if no one had switched I think they would've ended up calling for an emergency landing, hahaha.) On the trip home we had to do something similar, although the guy my DH asked to switch with said he couldn't "legally" do it at first because they'd never allow 1 adult with 2 children. (WTH does he think single parents traveling with kids do?)

I know better now, and next time I will do better, but not everyone is well versed on the ever evolving rules of travel. If I had paid extra for my seat, I would be hesitant to switch as well. Not saying there's no circumstance where I could see myself switching, but I would not expect someone to do it just because. Honestly though it's more for their comfort than mine, as even *I* didn't want to sit next to my kid, lol. Fortunately she's ... matured... a bit... since then.

I will say though on the flipside reading/researching something you are buying isn't reliant on evolving rules of travel.

I do know there have been complaints in the past for Expedia regarding misrepresentation so I don't know if at the time you booked if there was some fine print outlining seat rules such as "you must contact Delta to request a specific seating assignment" or "you have the option of selecting your seats during the purchase" or "you must select your seats after the purchase" or something to that effect so there is def. some benefit of the doubt on how Expedia worded things for your situation.

But as a general thing it is the responsibility of the person to read/research when purchasing something.

It's like the Delta Basic Economy rules with overhead bin space not allowed and no ability to select seats. A passenger can go and make a stink on the plane with their seat saying they need to be moved for whatever reason but if they purchased Basic Economy the terms for that lower fare were spelled out during the purchasing. The responsibility on reading and accepting those terms falls on the passenger who bought the fare not the other passengers on the plane.

I guess what I'm trying to say is while I completely understand that for your situation it could have been a lack of knowledge of what you were purchasing or Expedia's wording on their webpage or a combination of both and yet at the same time it would be unfair to treat each person as if this is the case for them or that lack of knowledge should be used as a rationale for switching seats.

 

[bcla]

I think you're missing the point. I think people are saying IF parents want to ensure they are sitting in seats they want (in this case next to their kids), they should have to pay, just like the person who wants to sit in seat 7A needs to pay (because it's a "preferred" seat or whatever). Why are you (general) insisting that parents should get for free what others have to pay for?

Well - if I'm flying with my wife I'm OK either way, but I'm generally cheap and don't pay for a window or aisle seat. We'll sit apart if we have to. And typically the aisle or window seats get released for everyone at check-in time, so sometimes we get lucky.

First, I don't see this new rule as being deemed "inappropriate" because it's pretty simple on its face and obviously serves a useful purpose whether or not the airlines want it. However - this proposed rule seems to be eliciting a lot of response on this forum hoping that the final regulation represents some bastardization of the intent, and a hope for a bureaucratic response to give it as little teeth as possible. There is zero chance it was written to mean that a child has to get a middle seat so that an accompanying adult still needs to pay for a premium seat. And if "adjacent" means the next row, then it doesn't address the intent either.

 

[bcla]

Why are you (general) insisting that parents should get for free what others have to pay for?

Just as a clarification, it doesn't really bother me either way. Right now my kid is six and can generally sit alone fairly well, although no six year old is really all that predictable. I usually don't ask myself, but wife is bolder than I am and it's typically worked. However, she won't throw a fit if it doesn't happen, and typically the passenger she asks would otherwise be sitting next to our kid and understands what might happen. On top of that, we'll never ask for two people to move just do both of us can sit next to our child, and that's something that a lot of passengers resent being asked.

However, there are two issues. One is that airlines have generally been pretty accommodating when it comes to an older companion (not always a parent) flying with a younger child. Sure they'd like to collect the fees if they can, but when it comes down to it they don't particularly want to deal with the complaints of passengers that a kid sitting alone is acting up. That's why many flight attendants will offer freebies for volunteers willing to exchange seats. I know not everyone wants alcohol coupons, but there are other ways to do it. Personally I'd be willing to do it for a lounge pass. I know some might bring up unaccompanied minors, but that's a special situation where the airline is paid a fee and where the flight attendants are specifically tasked with dealing with the child.

The other issue is the new "family seating" rule, and that some here seem to want it to fit some sort of overly bureaucratic interpretation where nobody can be seated "for free" because they're not or because they're willing to pay for it.

 

[mummabear]

Nice stretch there But not even the right analogy. The right analogy would be paying $100 less for a ticket and not being able to use the bathroom. Still a silly argument which makes me assume that you don't have anything reasonable to say, so you resort to that, but at least the right analogy. And, no, in that situation, I wouldn't take the discount. In BCLA's I may have taken or I may not have. As I said, he made a very reasonable choice in choosing money over being able to select seats, but he cannot pretend that it wasn't a choice (which he was doing).

It is no more ridiculous to suggest that using the "toilet" is a choice than it is suggesting sitting next to your 3 year old is.
Whether it is a charge to use it/sit next to your child, or a discount to not is simply semantics.

Not even nearly the same. The customer has a choice of whether to purchase a ticket on an airline that charges for a bathroom use. Just like a parent has a choice (before they buy the ticket) of whether to purchase an assigned seat.

So you are saying they can be the same then. You would be happy for airlines to "charge" for having access to the toilet, as long as you can choose whether or not to do so.

I have zero sympathy for people who are too cheap to pay for seat assignments.

But you need to look at this from the other side, I dont really have a choice about needing to sit next to my 3 year old, and you are living in a different planet if you think it's okay to put a 3 year old on the other side of a plane from a parent.
So I am being forced into paying a charge for both of us so that I can actually supervise my child. You can say there is a choice but there is t really.

 

[chelynnah]

I know this is really old, but since it's resurrected from the dead I'll chime in. It's people like this why my family decided to pay $500 more to upgrade to guarantee seating together after they changed our flight time by 20 minutes and scattered my family to the four corners of the sold out economy section of plane (we had orginally selected seats together). I may be a pessimist but I never count on the kindness of strangers. And I figure those people who won't budge from their seat probably wouldn't be too willing to help the child either if they needed any help with anything or there was an emergency.

Nope. I may or may not give up my seat, but I will happily chat with, assist and otherwise make sure your child is fine while next to me, and alert you if they need something I can't provide. And in an emergency I would help anyone I could given my own physical struggles (and would potentially even risk my own pain to ensure a child's safety).

So depending on the situation, my likely response would be I'm really sorry, but I can't change seats. I am happy to keep an eye on your child and let you know if there's a problem. This is assuming the child isn't an infant and doesn't have legitimate needs that can be met only by a parent or caregiver.

OTOH I find it appalling that these days airlines aren't automatically ensuring young children are with parents or passengers on the same ticket booking aren't kept together. So to me that's where the real responsibility lies

(Edited for horrible typos)

 

[mnrose]

Well - if I'm flying with my wife I'm OK either way, but I'm generally cheap and don't pay for a window or aisle seat. We'll sit apart if we have to. And typically the aisle or window seats get released for everyone at check-in time, so sometimes we get lucky.

First, I don't see this new rule as being deemed "inappropriate" because it's pretty simple on its face and obviously serves a useful purpose whether or not the airlines want it. However - this proposed rule seems to be eliciting a lot of response on this forum hoping that the final regulation represents some bastardization of the intent, and a hope for a bureaucratic response to give it as little teeth as possible. There is zero chance it was written to mean that a child has to get a middle seat so that an accompanying adult still needs to pay for a premium seat. And if "adjacent" means the next row, then it doesn't address the intent either.

All the legislation that passed did was authorize the secretary of transportation to "review" the issue and "if appropriate" make some rules. There is NO rule at all at present. I also tried to research whether there are draft regulations out there, and have come up with a big fat zippo. Obviously, since nearly a year has passed, I'm going out on a limb and saying this isn't of high priority.

We shall all have to wait and see what, if any, rules actually come out of this bill. To date, there are none.