Parents Now Protected From Having To Pay Extra To Sit With Their Kids On Flights

[NJlauren]

I'm going based off of what the Transportation Secretary said in a press conference. It sounded like they were going to let airlines handle it themselves and in 4 months, they were going to make sure they were doing it or they were going to make it a law. I can't wait to get me some free seat selections.

I hope they make it law, honestly. Will make it much easier for everyone

 

[sam_gordon]

anyone who's ever tried to sneak an older kid in as a lap child knows (unhappily) that airlines have systems for this.

And no, it wasn't me

Not the same. Yes, they want to see ID for a LAP CHILD (so one under 2). But, if the child has their own seat booked, no ID required. Think about it... you check in online, TSA just scans the BP (some don't even need to look at ID any more), and the BP gets scanned at the gate (I think name and seat assignment come up on their screen, but not age). Would anyone know the "James Smith" listed at age 5 in the airline computer is actually "James Smith" aged 15?

If I'm the airline, I would seriously consider adding $25 to every ticket and making seat selection free (included), or doing away with basic economy. Otherwise, you're going to end up with people who paid for their seat getting moved to an undesirable seat.

 

[midwestdee]

I don't disagree with what you're saying. But, riddle me this...

Most airplanes are 3x3 (three seats together, an aisle, then 3 seats together). Most (all) passengers would prefer a window or aisle over a middle, yes? So if it's that important to people, they purchase those seats. So (just to keep the math easy), lets say there are 20 rows of seats. Each row has 2 windows, 2 aisles, and 2 middle seats. With me so far? This is extreme, but let's say the first 80 people purchase all the windows and aisles (by purchasing them). So only middle seats are left. A mom with a 5 year old purchases two seats. Now, Rows 1-20, Seats A, C, D, E. Who do you move from their purchased seat to a middle seat?

I read through the entire thread before I posted. Your logic has been spot on throughout. There is no point to a theoretical riddle. If I had any point, it’s that the children are unfortunately the ones in no position to make decisions. Logic is wonderful, it doesn’t always jive with a compassionate point of view. I almost think some people view the “debate” of this issue as a chess game .

 

[midwestdee]

IDK read enough stories about parents asking people to move from their seats and then getting rude, nasty, hostile, name calling and more and you may change your viewpoint.

Actually, idiot parents are at the center of my viewpoint.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Actually, idiot parents are at the center of my viewpoint.

The idiotic parents would be the ones refusing to pay the fee now and expecting others to move, I really did not get that from your comment that you were saying that.

You put compassion together with being pro child as if they are one in the same.

And your "think of the kids" comment, we're not talking about preference here. If we're talking about the inability to take care of one's own self means a seat should be next to so and so without an additional fee that is very different from "little act of kindness on our part may be just what a child needs to make it through the day". That is framed like it's a choice and a choice should be treated like everything else which means a fee attached if you want to select a seat next to you just like everyone else.

So I guess I'm confused then where your opinion lies here, TBH.

 

[midwestdee]

The idiotic parents would be the ones refusing to pay the fee now and expecting others to move, I really did not get that from your comment that you were saying that.

You put compassion together with being pro child as if they are one in the same.

And your "think of the kids" comment, we're not talking about preference here. If we're talking about the inability to take care of one's own self means a seat should be next to so and so without an additional fee that is very different from "little act of kindness on our part may be just what a child needs to make it through the day". That is framed like it's a choice and a choice should be treated like everything else which means a fee attached if you want to select a seat next to you just like everyone else.

So I guess I'm confused then where your opinion lies here, TBH.

Good Lord. I don’t have a particular opinion as to which side is “right”, which seems to matter a lot to you. My point is the bigger picture of just keeping in mind there’s children involved with no choice. As to the last sentence in my original post, it is more of a personal statement (outlook on life, if you will), not related to the seating debate.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Good Lord. I don’t have a particular opinion as to which side is “right”, which seems to matter a lot to you. My point is the bigger picture of just keeping in mind there’s children involved with no choice. As to the last sentence in my original post, it is more of a personal statement (outlook on life, if you will), not related to the seating debate.

I was wondering because based on what you posted when I responded about how people can react you responded with a response where I didn't get that you were talking about idiotic parents in your first comment.

I wasn't asking which side you were on because I don't even think there are sides, it's a mixture of things probably why I reacted to the compassion put in with pro child because someone can be compassionate and yet feel a certain way. I haven't interacted with you on this thread before (well at least I don't think so) so I can't figure out how you would think it matters that much to me. I just responded to your response, just like I just responded to your first comment, it's just a comment nothing more nothing less.

I asked where your opinion was because I was confused what you were meaning between your first comment and your second comment as you told me that you were speaking about the idiotic parents but I don't know what that means to you. I did offer up my opinion on who that would be (although I don't tend to describe people that way) but that's just mine.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I'm sure you're creative enough to figure out some of the many other options beyond those two extremes. In fact you mention Southwest right there, which has another approach that is IMHO fair and reasonable and has been pretty successful.

SWA is fairly fair IMO but it still doesn't mean you don't hear gripes about people wanting seating with each other. Some people book the airline AND then ask questions about it only to find out they have an open seating policy.

While we do primarily fly SWA I can say we rarely have issues with "um excuse me can you move over here so I can sit with X" I know it happens but it just isn't an issue that is consistent enough and my husband who has flown many more times with SWA (for work) hasn't reported back issues with that either.

It works more IMO because there is all one type of seat, they all are the same and the only seats with additional leg room are exit rows and speaking of children that's a moot point since they can't be under 15 and sit there anyhow.

 

[FlippityFlier]

SWA is fairly fair IMO but it still doesn't mean you don't hear gripes about people wanting seating with each other. Some people book the airline AND then ask questions about it only to find out they have an open seating policy.

Yes you hear gripes, it's good but not perfect, but the point was that no, there aren't just two options, there are a ton of ways to implement seat selection.

 

[FlippityFlier]

The idiotic parents would be the ones refusing to pay the fee now and expecting others to move

This idiotic parent wants the airline to fix the problem it caused: Assessing a fee on parents which is optional but basically isn't since sitting next to their small child is not optional, so declining the fee has the potential to cause problems for others. I don't expect others to move, I expect Spirit to work things out. (In reality, as I've mentioned above, it is almost for certain that nobody will have to move -- most people on Spirit are cheapskates so didn't pay the seat selection fee either.)

 

[FlippityFlier]

Not the same. Yes, they want to see ID for a LAP CHILD (so one under 2). But, if the child has their own seat booked, no ID required. Think about it... you check in online, TSA just scans the BP (some don't even need to look at ID any more), and the BP gets scanned at the gate (I think name and seat assignment come up on their screen, but not age). Would anyone know the "James Smith" listed at age 5 in the airline computer is actually "James Smith" aged 15?

It feels like you don't accept that airlines actually have the ability to make system changes. Yes, it's the same thing -- the issue in both cases is proof of age for a person who does not carry ID. With a lap kid you have to carry a birth certificate to prove they're eligible to fly free. With a 15-year-old traveling on a free-kid-seating ticket booked for a 6-year-old you'd have "Y6" printed on the boarding pass just like I have "TSA PRE", and the gate agent would notice the discrepancy and ask for proof of age. If they don't have one they pay the fee or go take an unoccupied middle seat or whatever. It's that simple.

 

[Cheburashka]

Being forced to pay something that's optional for others is the opposite of "special treatment". You wrote earlier "I refuse to risk being separated from my [young] kids." I'm totally with you there, you just ensured it by paying fees that I don't think should reasonably be mandatory.

If you have children you bear the responsibility of paying for them yourself. That includes the responsibility of paying for assigned seats.

 

[Cheburashka]

I see both sides of this debate. Unfortunately, the child/ children aren’t making these decisions. We are either a society that values compassion/ pro child, or we decide it’s every man for himself. I think there’s a vested interest in looking out for children. While parents are ultimately “responsible “ for their kids, shouldn’t all of us encourage family friendly policies?

The policy that would look out for children in this instance would be to require all parents to select seats when booking flights with their children, and not allow them to book basic economy. Not foisting the problem on other paying travelers later on.

 

[EACarlson]

I'm sure you're creative enough to figure out some of the many other options beyond those two extremes. In fact you mention Southwest right there, which has another approach that is IMHO fair and reasonable and has been pretty successful.

No comment on it being a discount rather than an upcharge? Your position is airlines should remove discounts available to those not travelling with small children to appease those that are? Forcing everyone else to pay more so it would be "fair" in your opinion?

I'm going based off of what the Transportation Secretary said in a press conference. It sounded like they were going to let airlines handle it themselves and in 4 months, they were going to make sure they were doing it or they were going to make it a law. I can't wait to get me some free seat selections.

It was a nice speech by SecTrans, but he does not have the authority and there is almost 0 chance this would ever get through Congress, especially after next week.

Not the same. Yes, they want to see ID for a LAP CHILD (so one under 2). But, if the child has their own seat booked, no ID required. Think about it... you check in online, TSA just scans the BP (some don't even need to look at ID any more), and the BP gets scanned at the gate (I think name and seat assignment come up on their screen, but not age). Would anyone know the "James Smith" listed at age 5 in the airline computer is actually "James Smith" aged 15?

If I'm the airline, I would seriously consider adding $25 to every ticket and making seat selection free (included), or doing away with basic economy. Otherwise, you're going to end up with people who paid for their seat getting moved to an undesirable seat.

When the BP gets scanned the information provided to SecureFlight by the airline pops up on the screen. Including Name, DOB and a picture if one is available in the system. Most DL and passports are in the system. I could certainly see airlines requiring proof of age be presented at check in, meaning you wouldn't be able to check in online, only at the airport. How many people here would spend the extra $25 to not have to check in at the airport?

If this becomes actual law or enforceable regulation I think you would see basic economy go away and it go back to what it was 25 years ago.

 

[sam_gordon]

If this becomes actual law or enforceable regulation I think you would see basic economy go away and it go back to what it was 25 years ago.

That's what I think also.

 

[FlippityFlier]

The policy that would look out for children in this instance would be to require all parents to select seats when booking flights with their children, and not allow them to book basic economy. Not foisting the problem on other paying travelers later on.

No, there are plenty of options. Like there's a "Sit together" option without specific seat selection. Or there's no charge to select seats when booking with small children.

If you have children you bear the responsibility of paying for them yourself. That includes the responsibility of paying for assigned seats.

I don't understand people at a Disney site having such antipathy towards parents. Not sure why airline profits are so important to you.

 

[FlippityFlier]

No comment on it being a discount rather than an upcharge? Your position is airlines should remove discounts available to those not travelling with small children to appease those that are? Forcing everyone else to pay more so it would be "fair" in your opinion?

I've made my position clear, and no that's not it.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

This idiotic parent wants the airline to fix the problem it caused: Assessing a fee on parents which is optional but basically isn't since sitting next to their small child is not optional, so declining the fee has the potential to cause problems for others. I don't expect others to move, I expect Spirit to work things out. (In reality, as I've mentioned above, it is almost for certain that nobody will have to move -- most people on Spirit are cheapskates so didn't pay the seat selection fee either.)

...."refusing to pay" "and expecting people to move" were part of my comment and it was connected to my first comment about enough stories about when someone does not want to give up their seat. People's attitudes in the last several years is atrocious. It does play on how people view the topic. Like I said though I don't tend to describe people as idiotic, the PP did though.

I don't know why you would expect Spirit to work things out for you. Are you purposefully booking a flight (on any carrier) that doesn't have 2 seats next to each other and then getting mad at the airline for that and as a byproduct the passengers? Because that's exactly who I was talking about in my earlier comment. And if most people aren't selecting their seats on Spirit wouldn't that mean you would have a better choice of the plane to select your seats? You're not winning any points by willingly not doing so when Spirit advises you by doing so you won't be guaranteed seats together and expecting the airline to just handle it for you. That is not the behavior I would want to impress upon children nor a good way to start off your vacation.

 

[RoseGold]

My small kiddo has almost 100 flights, and would have more without Covid. I usually don't pay to upgrade seats, and I have never, ever had a problem getting adjacent seats on all the airlines. The gate agent will reassign someone and call them up, if they have to. They aren't always the best seats, but this has never been an issue. I was thinking this was creating a problem that doesn't exist, but then I don't fly Southwest.

This has got to be a Southwest issue. I'm guessing people won't move for kids, and it's causing chaos. I'm guessing this leads to boarding priority for kids <12 on Southwest, which makes sense, to be fair.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

My small kiddo has almost 100 flights, and would have more without Covid. I have never, ever had a problem getting adjacent seats. The gate agent will reassign someone and call them up, if they have to. They aren't always the best seats, but this has never been an issue.

This has got to be a Southwest issue. I'm guessing people won't move for kids, and it's causing chaos. I'm guessing this leads to boarding priority for kids <12 on Southwest, which makes sense, to be fair.

Have you flown SWA enough? Because that's is the opposite of what is going on. SWA doesn't have the same issues that other airlines with assigned seating does. Somehow the open seating policy works out better. SWA also has the higher age bracket than other airlines. They are 6 and under. Delta for instance is 2 and under. Plus the guidance isn't talking about SWA because they don't charge for any fee for any seat selection...because they don't have one. You may want to read into it more. The guidance is actually aimed more at airlines that presently charge a fee to select seats.

ETA: from the July 2022 guidance: ".” Section 2309 states that “[w]hen considering any new policy under this section, the Secretary shall consider the traditional seating and boarding policies of air carriers providing scheduled passenger interstate or intrastate air transportation and whether those policies generally allow families to sit together.” In addition, Section 2309 does not authorize the Secretary to “impose a significant change in the overall seating or boarding policy of an air carrier providing scheduled passenger interstate or intrastate air transportation that has an open or flexible seating policy in place that generally allows adjacent family seating…”

So you've got it backwards who this is aimed at.