To expect to be allocated airline seats next to my kids?

[correllia]

My partner and I are off on holiday to menorca at the end of September with Monarch. They have emailed us to tell us we can check in online now, which saves time at the airport.

So far so good - but to complete the process I have to prebook my seats at the cost of £5 per seat per flight. We are on a tight budget and deliberately haven't bought the seats in advance to save the pennies.

Kiddies are 2 and 4, whilst I don't mind our sitting 2 and 2 apart from each other but looking at the seat plan even this option is fast disappearing! Can the airline force such young children to sit next to strangers?

Am I unreasonable to demand that we sit with them?

PS this is my first post, so please be genttle :-)

Michael O'Leary is the boss of Ryanair, and he has become a caricature of himself in his drive to increase profits at the expense of, well, sanity - he's put forward proposals for charging for the loo, and even for sitting down at all (luckily I don't think the aviation authorities are that keen on seatless planes).

Actually, yes, 2 year olds are a sector of society that needs extra help, regardless of whether their parents are feckless or not. For once there is a parallel with disability of other kinds. We're not talking about getting a sodding buggy on a bus here for the convenience of parents- like it or not a 2 year old cannot manage alone on a plane! Like loads of people have said, this is about not paying extra money to ensure the basic safety of your child. Bottom line is that airlines should not charge you to adhere to CAA guidelines.

I was told that they always seat under 5 s with their parents, do not pay, it's a scam

Some parents have 'expectations' that run into unrealistic, Fontsnob. Whilst many people might be willing to accommodate an expectation that a parent wants them to move to accommodate their sitting with their child, that is down to goodwill. If you (general) rely on 'goodwill' to achieve all of your 'wants', sooner or later you will be disappointed and need to quickly come up with a contingency to deal with that particular problem facing you.

All this talk of 'blackmail' is really daft. Don't fly! Don't give them the money in the first place. The airlines are not going to come demanding it from you.

Some people's expectations clearly need to be 'managed'.

as several posters have said, booking seats does not even guarantee you get them. but what astounds me is this "I'm alright Jack" attitude which prevails. why on earth would other passengers not swap, to help out a child in need?

a couple fo years ago, we flew to Australia. we are frequent flyers, know the pitfalls of travelling by air, and know what we need to do to ensure as smootha flight as possible. following a hideous time booking seats on a BA flight to California the previous year (the computerised seating system kept moving dd1 downstairs out of the top deck business class section, on her own - she was 3) we knew we needed to keep on top of it all.

we used a travel agent, and told them they woudl need to be on top of ensuring we sat together (dd1 was 4, with severe ASD. dd2 was 2, and still bf. both needed to be with me, preferably)

travel agent stuffed up, and we were seated for one sector in 2x2 seats, eg seats 1A and 1B, and 2A and 2B. since we were travelling business, this meant that one dd was not going to be able to see me at take off - big disaster.

the cabin crew asked the entire cabin (we were also travelling with dsd and dss, which meant that any other couple swappign would ensure we could have 4 seats in the layout we needed) if a couple would mind swapping, so that dd2 coudl sit next to her mum.

not a single couple moved. the cabin stewards were - they had never seen a situation where not a single person was wiling to swap (bear in mind this was business class on an Airbus - all seats are spacious, have good storage etc). and due to their refusal, they al got to spend the first 30 minutes of the flight with a screaming dd1 and dd2 (dd2 upset becasue she could not see me, she was jsut a baby. dd1 upset because she could hear her sister was upset, and could do nothing about it). the man next to dd1 (well across the aisle) got really narky with her and told ehr to be quiet (dd1 wearing a t shirt saying "I'm autistic, please be patient with me") - and was told in no uncertain terms by the cabin manager that since he had refused to help her out (by swapping seats with dh and dd2) he could put up or leave the cabin.

honestly, people get so precious about where they sit (as in, "I must be in seat 2C or similar") - why on earth people would not move so that a baby could sit with her mother is beyond me - surely a recipe for disaster if you want a peaceful flight?

Libelulle... Well, the 2-year olds in society must depend on their parents to help them.

Airlines should charge a standard ticket cost, non-negotiable. That would remove the problem at source and cheap 'principalled' parents would have nothing more to complain about.

donthateme "But don't make a moral stand and then expect to get what you want at the expense of other passengers."

It's not at the expense of other passengers. The airlines are quite clear that pre-booking does not guarantee you your pre-booked seat. If those passengers want to pay for a non-guaranteed service how can they complain when it's not...er...guaranteed and they have to move? They are being suckered into paying for something they may not and do not have to receive. Their choice.

IMO this is airlines charging extra for something that is clearly a basic necessity of travel, like RyanAir trying to charge £1 to use the toilet. It's extortion and I think the OP is right to be resentful of paying it. My DP got stuck on a grounded RyanAir flight recently for 4 hours before a 1hr flight, not allowed off the plane. Can he have some food? Only if he's willing to pay £2.99 for a packet of peanuts because of their faulty aircraft. Sometimes we as consumers need to put our foot down in principle and refuse to pay ludicrous marked-up prices. If we all take the attitude (because we're lucky enough to be able to afford the extra) of saying 'oh ffs, that's just how much it is, stop moaning and pay it' then companies will be able to carry on inflicting these stupid charges on us - (credit card booking fees, 'ticket processing' fees, 'priority boarding', got-you-over-a-barrel food prices). Eventually, what was sold to us as a luxury becomes a necessity because those who don't have it are disadvantaged. As consumers we need to move away from these companies that treat their consumers as fish in a barrel. Markets only correct themselves when enough people say 'oh that's ridiculous, I'm not paying that.'

I always book an aisle seat when travelling in economy for the sake of comfort. I will not move, even if parents, who didn't fancy shelling out to guarantee their seats, hoping that some other idiot will move to accommodate them, expect me too.

So instead of risking the passengers on your flight to Menorca being as 'selfish' as me, just pay for the pre booked seats; it?s really not worth the headache.

Airlines should charge a standard ticket cost, non-negotiable

So lying you are actually agreeing with what I am saying then.

Why should people not fly because the airline is adding an OPTIONAL charge on top of their costs, that people with dependant children will HAVE to pay. How does that make the charge optional?????? I think your expectations are too low.

Silverfrog... Those are very specific circumstances that were beyond your control and you had done all you could to accommodate your children anyway - it's different from this thread.

I'm surprised that nobody moved for you, I would have.

I just have one small question about your post.... do you really find that the 'I'm autistic, please be patient' t-shirt for your daughter is necessary? I'm not judging, I have no idea what it's like to have an autistic child, just feel very saddened if it's become necessary. :(

That's awful silverfrog - i think the type of view you encountered does get much worse in Business class. A lot of BC fliers seem to think Business Class = Childless class. If they understood that BC does not guarantee no children maybe they'd have managed their own expectations.

Exactly Quodlibet

LyingWitch 'airlines should charge a standard non-negotiable ticket cost' - yes, exactly, like BA do and like all carriers used to before they clocked on to the fact that the sharp-elbowed or desperate will fork out extra if you make privilege available.

wot she said "Markets only correct themselves when enough people say 'oh that's ridiculous, I'm not paying that.'"

Yes, there need to be clear cut rules. Eg if the airline says 'all children under 5 will be seated next to the accompanying adult. Anyone else who wants a guaranteed place must 'pre book at xxx cost' then I don't see how anyone can argue. If you have a 5 year old who you KNOW will be upset at not sitting with you, the onus is then on you to book. If you refuse to book and end up with a distressed kid then yes, in my book that's not great parenting, and if you expect others to move then you're selfish.

And yes, many of us have zero respect for 'the l
Bosses of budget airlines; they provide generally crappy service and encourage people to contribute massively to global pollution- but there is a choice here- don't use them if you don't want to bump up their profits. Don't use them and then complain about the rules.

That is awful silverfrog and it is relevant to this thread because that is exacly the attitude that being made to pay for everything has bred in people.

No, Fontsnob, I'm not agreeing with you. I'm agreeing with exoticfruits in that part of her post. You're interpreting something different from it.

Leave the quote as it is, without your slant on it, and that's what I agree with. Cost of the seats should be given without a breakdown and all regulations covered.

I think my expectations are just fine. I would ask for help if I needed it but I would have done all I could to not need it in the first place. Some people are exceptionally 'needy'.

Quodlibet, the OP is talking about Monarch which is a hell of a lot cheaper than BA.
Monarch are charging to get you from A to B.
BA would like to think they are offering you a pleasant experience on the way.

HowAboutAHotCupOfShutTheHellUp Presumably when they point out to you your pre-booked seat is not guaranteed you will be happy to check the Ts&Cs, revise your expectations, and move. Or will you be insisting you've paid for something that doesn't exist and get your money back and move? Either way, you would have to move if asked. No guarantee.

Lying how is it needy to expect a 2 year old to sit with you?

Yeah but Monarch used to be able to manage a system where everybody got allocated seats on check-in, like every other airline did in the good old days before they clocked on to the £££ potential of people worrying about where they're going to sit before they fly and being able to do something about it with the internet and the credit card.

Quodlibet... I think it was better then, the carriers themselves were more responsible - and responsive. I don't fly budget airlines, I've done it once with Easyjet (never again) and twice with BMI but without children.

As the fuel costs rise, the budget price is quickly going to come up to meet the general price and the budget airlines will find themselves out of business.

HowAbout, no worries. But for your pains you might end up sitting next to a lone 2 yo. No 2 yo old on earth will behave well sitting alone on a plane, regardless of the fecklessness or otherwise of their parent (who in any case will be sitting 6 rows away). Natural consequences, in all their glory.

This is the crux of it donthateme Yes, there need to be clear cut rules. Eg if the airline says 'all children under 5 will be seated next to the accompanying adult. Anyone else who wants a guaranteed place must 'pre book at xxx cost' then I don't see how anyone can argue. If you have a 5 year old who you KNOW will be upset at not sitting with you, the onus is then on you to book. If you refuse to book and end up with a distressed kid then yes, in my book that's not great parenting, and if you expect others to move then you're selfish.

I would agree in those circumstance if they included within definition of 5 year old exemptions, anyone who needs to rely on another person for emergency assistance (so including disabled, infirm elderly etc.). Sounds a bit closer to 'civilisation'.

lying if you read my earlier posts you will see that I said the same thing about as Quidlibet flights in the good old days. We are in agreement on that even if you are being pedantic about how it was said.

Could you tell me why sitting with a 2 year old is needy?