airplane -- seats not together with 5 year olds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had good luck and bad luck. The one time I really couldn't get anyone to switch I went and told the flight attendant and the pilot, who happened to be standing there, we needed to get off the plane and have our luggage taken off, as my 5-year old was petrified of sitting alone and I very calmly shared what my experience as a mother to this child told me would happen if we tried to force him to sit alone in a middle seat. The flight attendant, who up to that point had taken a "your problem, not mine" attitude, was quickly moved to action. It helped I think that the pilot was appalled to learn that a scared 5-year old was expected to sit alone (in between two large men, one of whom was already obviously drunk or high or both).
Now I simply won't take a plane if I can't book two seats together at the time of booking. This makes Southwest a no-go from the start. While my family is by no means rich, I am fortunate that I can opt to pay more for this.

Your kid sounds like a spoiled, sheltered brat.

The child is 5. I would ask to get off the plane too with my 5 year old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP,

So far, we've always had luck. People don't like seeing families separated and most people don't want to deal with a young child next to them on their own.

I think this is a further deterioration of airline service. Don't know what airline you're on, but for United, only by paying a few hundred more could you be guaranteed a seat next to your toddler or young child. Absolutely ridiculous.

DO you have difficulty reading? OP booked a month out, and there were only middle seats available. How on earth is this the airline's fault? The airline is supposed to hold rows open in case a family wants to book a last-minute vacation and needs to fly together? You're an idiot.

Yes the airline should hold rows for this and other similar situations. Because sometimes you do have to travel at last minute with your kids. Things happen. Even when it's just a vacation - flights are expensive and schedules can be tough. Why is so much animosity directed towards OP and not where it belongs - at the airlines that have created these ridiculous situations. 10-15 years ago stuff like this didn't happen because a) airlines didn't charge extra for certain seats and b) they held rows for families and disabled travelers to seat those that needed it together. It's the new normal of charging for certain seats and the free for all attitude that have caused these problems. I actually get that airlines need to make money too and I respect that the rising prices of oil and other factors do make it difficult for them, but the general attitude airlines have towards their travelers (and their own gate and flight employees stuck dealing with these situations) is very much to blame for this situation. The real problem here is not OP - it is the travel environment created by the airlines.

So people who book earlier should not have their choice of seats, because someone like OP decided a month out she wants to take a vacation? I have to sit in a middle seat, even though there are open aisle and window seats, in case a family decides to fly? Bullshit.

One thing you're forgetting - families who fly twice a year and look for the cheapest fares possible are not moneymakers for an airline. Frequent flyers are. There is actually a financial disincentive to procedures like this. And as you've made clear, families couldn't possibly be expected to PAY for this special treatment - so the argument is "cheap seats, help until . . . when? Can others book them 3 weeks out? 2? 1? We all should, in the form of increased fares across the board, pay for parents to have this privilege? And what's the age cutoff? Unaccompanied minors can fly at 5 - but what about little Alexandra, who is 7 and terrified of leaving her mother? No. What you propose is completely unworkable.

Like it or not, airline travel is becoming commoditized. You are not entitled to special treatment, for free, because you are traveling with a child. You may think it is unfair, but it is the reality, and has been for some time. The reason that there is animosity as to OP is that she ignored that reality and is perfectly fine inconveniencing others. That's crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP,

So far, we've always had luck. People don't like seeing families separated and most people don't want to deal with a young child next to them on their own.

I think this is a further deterioration of airline service. Don't know what airline you're on, but for United, only by paying a few hundred more could you be guaranteed a seat next to your toddler or young child. Absolutely ridiculous.

DO you have difficulty reading? OP booked a month out, and there were only middle seats available. How on earth is this the airline's fault? The airline is supposed to hold rows open in case a family wants to book a last-minute vacation and needs to fly together? You're an idiot.

Yes the airline should hold rows for this and other similar situations. Because sometimes you do have to travel at last minute with your kids. Things happen. Even when it's just a vacation - flights are expensive and schedules can be tough. Why is so much animosity directed towards OP and not where it belongs - at the airlines that have created these ridiculous situations. 10-15 years ago stuff like this didn't happen because a) airlines didn't charge extra for certain seats and b) they held rows for families and disabled travelers to seat those that needed it together. It's the new normal of charging for certain seats and the free for all attitude that have caused these problems. I actually get that airlines need to make money too and I respect that the rising prices of oil and other factors do make it difficult for them, but the general attitude airlines have towards their travelers (and their own gate and flight employees stuck dealing with these situations) is very much to blame for this situation. The real problem here is not OP - it is the travel environment created by the airlines.

So people who book earlier should not have their choice of seats, because someone like OP decided a month out she wants to take a vacation? I have to sit in a middle seat, even though there are open aisle and window seats, in case a family decides to fly? Bullshit.

One thing you're forgetting - families who fly twice a year and look for the cheapest fares possible are not moneymakers for an airline. Frequent flyers are. There is actually a financial disincentive to procedures like this. And as you've made clear, families couldn't possibly be expected to PAY for this special treatment - so the argument is "cheap seats, help until . . . when? Can others book them 3 weeks out? 2? 1? We all should, in the form of increased fares across the board, pay for parents to have this privilege? And what's the age cutoff? Unaccompanied minors can fly at 5 - but what about little Alexandra, who is 7 and terrified of leaving her mother? No. What you propose is completely unworkable.

Like it or not, airline travel is becoming commoditized. You are not entitled to special treatment, for free, because you are traveling with a child. You may think it is unfair, but it is the reality, and has been for some time. The reason that there is animosity as to OP is that she ignored that reality and is perfectly fine inconveniencing others. That's crap.

Hmm. Aren't the airlines quasi-governmental? Like airwaves don't the skies belong to the US public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most of you are ridiculous. No, everyone can't just pay more or take another airline. Those options aren't always available. One month isn't last minute, and sometimes work schedules, family emergencies, etc make it difficult or impossible to plan further ahead. And yet, little kids should not have to sit alone. Airlines created this problem by holding out SO many seats for which passengers must pay extra, greatly limiting the availability of "regular" seats. Guess what? Almost no one wants those seats, so they sit unreserved, until the day of the flight when they are given to whoever doesn't have a seat, without having paid extra. Meanwhile, families can't book seats (either at all or without paying a lot more) together because of the airlines' BS attempts to mickle and dime us for every damn thing. It's the airlines' fault, but it doesn't kill people to be nice and trade seats. With a family of four like OP's, just 2 of 8 possible people need to change seats. It's unlikely they all have some condition making this difficult. DCUMers love to wag their tongues about "entitled" parents who should have just done this or that, but fortunately, most people in real life are nicer and more helpful.

I agree with this. This thread is crazy.

I do like the idea of offering money. Heck, there was a time in my life I would have switched for $20.

So you are, no questions asked, going to switch out of your aisle/window seat into a middle seat for a 5-hour cross country flight?

NP here -- I would if the airline offered me a free ticket or even some $$ toward my next flight with them. Absolutely.

PP--I would as well, but that's not the scenario. The scenario is OP asking you to trade your window/aisle seat for a middle seat.

I hate the window seat so I'd do it in a heart beat. I like the aisle. I would switch as long as the people next to me were ok with me getting up multiple times to go to the bathroom. They'd regret not moving and having me move. Really - for a young child, it is not unreasonable to ask to sit next to them. If you are talking 3-4-5 kids with one parent, then yes, that is a bit much, but for 1-2 kids and one parent (if two parents are flying obviously they can switch off next to the kids or one parent do it).

[Anonymous]

I have like the smallest bladder of any human walking the earth. I book an aisle. Early. Because I don't want to drive anyone crazy with my constant restroom breaks. My DH and DC turned down a free trip to Japan over spring break (miles) because there were only middle seats and that is one long flight.... So yes, I think it is unreasonable for the OP to ask people to give up their better seats. I also would never have booked this flight. It's selfish in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

I would be so pissed if I had to sit next to OPs "needy crying" 5 year old because she couldn't figure out how to book an airline ticket.

[Anonymous]

I'd rather sit next to a 5 yr old in the middle and need to entertain them periodically or help with snacks etc than either move to some shitty middle seat (esp if it's further back, I like to be as close to the front as possible) or have an adult crammed into the middle next to me. I'd be happy to make the kid feel safe and comfortable if it meant keeping my carefully chosen seat. Now if OP had a better seat and wanted to trade, then sure.

[Anonymous]

I think it's really shitty that this is happening in the airline industry. It was NEVER like this 5 years ago. It's all about the money to the airlines.

I don't think a month out is 'last minute', either.

Perhaps OP should declare loudly that her 5 year old has a fever and chills. That would get people moving away and giving up their seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's really shitty that this is happening in the airline industry. It was NEVER like this 5 years ago. It's all about the money to the airlines.

I don't think a month out is 'last minute', either.

Perhaps OP should declare loudly that her 5 year old has a fever and chills. That would get people moving away and giving up their seats.

that would be more likely to get them kicked off the plane entirely. Who wants those germs circulating through the recycled air system? I'd be beyond pissed of someone knowingly got on a flight with the flu. A run of the mill cold is one thing but pneumonia, flu, stomach virus... Stay home.

[Anonymous]

If you paid $100 extra for your aisle seat, would you ask OP --- or whomever wanted you to switch to a crappy seat -- to reimburse you the extra fee that you paid?

[Anonymous]

I would tell her "hey, did ypu know you can pay extra for certain seats?"

Then I would offer her kid the armrest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you paid $100 extra for your aisle seat, would you ask OP --- or whomever wanted you to switch to a crappy seat -- to reimburse you the extra fee that you paid?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Seriously, if someone tried to make me responsible for taking care of their child because they did not plan ahead to make sure they were seated with their minor -- I would do nothing for their child but ring the call button every time the child fussed or needed something. I would certainly not attend to their child myself, because someone that irresponsible and deluded would also probably be ridiculously and irrationally litigious.

[Anonymous]

This is the type of situation that money was invented for.

The upside value of the trade for the OP is greater than the downside value for the other person, since the OP is getting both a better seat and the chance to sit next to their kid, while the other person is getting a worse seat but not necessarily worse seatmates. So they should be able to come to a deal that fairly compensates the other person for the seat downgrade, while still giving OP a net gain from the trade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously, if someone tried to make me responsible for taking care of their child because they did not plan ahead to make sure they were seated with their minor -- I would do nothing for their child but ring the call button every time the child fussed or needed something. I would certainly not attend to their child myself, because someone that irresponsible and deluded would also probably be ridiculously and irrationally litigious.

You sound charming and a pain. Just switch seats. Problem solved.