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 :-)

Fontsnob... Perhaps, but I don't know YOU. How do I know if you'll sue or not. I just know that you are quite prepared to leave your 2-year old in the hands of a stranger. Actually, it tells me a lot.

QoD - where is that flying to? And are you talking about pre-booking before the 24h for online check-in? Only asking cos it's never cost me anything to do online check-in with BA to go longhaul from Australia to UK or vice versa.
Mind you, whenever I have been able to do it 24h prior, I've looked at the seat plan and I've already been given an appropriate allocation with my child so don't have to change it.

Does it say, anywhere in the CAA guidelines, that the airlines must observe every guideline? Are they legally enforcable? Or are they guidelines that outline best practice/what should ideally happen. If they are the latter, then surely it would do no good to brandish a copy of the guidelines at the cabin crew or check-in staff.

Oh how funny that you've taken my opinion to mean that you are a better parent than I am.

And you know what lying i'd rather live in a world that assumes that i wouldn't get sued for helping a little kid so will help them anyway if I had too. I'd rather help and then get sued, because if no one helped any more the world would be a shitty place.

Tbh if a passenger comes armed with a copy of the guidelines I would imagine the cabin crew would politely say, 'yes madam, the airline is complying with them' and wait for you to take your seat. This assumption that airlines are trying to flout guidelines for no apparent reason is utterly bizarre and unfounded.

I've no idea what sort of parent you are, Fontsnob, these are just posts on a chatboard with you arguing over a difference of opinion. I personally don't care what you'd do or not do.

What about the situation where a family have booked last minute, we've done this, only 8 hour notice of an emergency death bed trip to Australia.

If we'd had young children with us back then we wouldn't have been able to pre-book any seats because so close to the flight we couldn't do anything.

If we'd got on board, everyone might assume that we were too cheap to pay for prebooked seats, not realising our situation.

If a family get on board and are arsey about having to sit together, not polite then I can understand why you wouldn't want to move. But if a family get on, get stuck with something unworkable then I don't understand why you wouldn't be prepared to help.
Equally, if you end up with a 2 year old next to you I personally feel you have an obligation to keep an eye on them. I not saying you need to entertain them on the trip, be their best friend or anything, but I do think every responsible adult member of society has a basic responsibility to the children around them. Be that a lost child on a street or a scared 2 year old on a plane.

If I ended up with 2 year old having to sit alone next to me, a stranger, I could not ignore them whilst they cry with fear on take off, maybe wet themselves because they are too frightened to go find the toilet, go hungry because they can't open their airline food.... Its unthinkable. Surely that is not what we are talking about here?

Fontsnob... Perhaps, but I don't know YOU. How do I know if you'll sue or not. I just know that you are quite prepared to leave your 2-year old in the hands of a stranger. Actually, it tells me a lot.

I guess I read this the wrong way then. My apologies.

SDTG They are guidelines but the law is littered with guidelines that while they may not have the legal force of a statute, but non-compliance has other consequences. Non-compliance with guidelines could be treated in a number of ways:

(1) evidential rebuttal
(2) transfer of duty to discharge burden of proof
(3) increase in financial penalties if proved liable

Or in this scenario, prior to court even coming into the equation, practical and immediate consequences on the airline's insurance policies.

donthateme If that child who is not sat next to a member of its travel party (accompanying adult - doesn't have to be parent - not sure why you think it does have to be parent - perhaps have a read of the CAA guidelines?) and is not capable of reaching oxygen in the event of turbulence or decompression then whoever is sitting next to them will have to help them. Now that is fine, so long as that person (the adjacent stranger) is happy to do that and is happy to put that in writing (the infamous worthless guarantee). If they are not happy to do that (and I wouldn't be) then the airline have not discharged its duty and is not complying with the CAA guidelines. The airline has to make the judgement call on what that particular child is capable of. Now where this is a school age child (which is not what the debate has focused on) the airline can say ah but that child can self-oxygenate and the older the child the more likely this is a reasonable assumption. If however they sit a 3 year old next to an adjacent stranger, and that stranger has not taken up the responsibilities of the accompanying adult under the guidelines, then that child is not safe in an emergency is it? And no amount of ranting and raving from any surrounding adults about not moving from their pre-booked non-guaranteed seats is going to change that is it?

Potty... I'd actually move to let the parent sit next to them. I seem to have magical powers of attraction to little kids, destined to become a 'climbing frame', so I'd much rather move. :)

See, the world needs more potty's and less people who think helping will get them sued and that "they paid for the aisle seat so they will bloody well sit in it and screw the lot of ya!"

Sorry again potty but you seem very nice and sensible.

"This assumption that airlines are trying to flout guidelines for no apparent reason is utterly bizarre and unfounded."

They are not trying to flout them. They are trying to charge you for something they have to do anyway. I think that's where you don't understand my argument.

Lying Yes, I'd move too. But I assume there must be some sort of situation where someone gets stuck with an unknown 2 year old or we wouldn't be discussing it!

I'd work on the principle that even if I think the parents are twerps, their 2 year should not suffer unnecessarily. So for the sake of a 2 year old (practically still a baby) feeling safe and happy I would always move.

thumbwitch yes pre booking before the online check in. It seems to be the case now on flights to/from Europe to the ME.

I fly with my DC's 6/7+ times a year. The routes we do are popular expat routes and so frequently have more children than adults on board and lots of Children and mothers flying without DP's (so less option for the 2 and 2).

If you wait until 24hrs before check in there will only be the odd 2 or 1 seats together and if you have been pre allocated seats they often try and move you when you get to the airport. Happens regularly in business class too, having said that I have never had any issue once boarded about sitting with the DC's.

I have only once seen people refuse to move: two men in the bulkhead seats wouldn't move for a woman who wanted to use the basinet and also hasd a toddler. They were quite rude and said the only way they would move was for an upgrade. I was sat immediately beghind them and told the stewardess that I would be happy to swap as I heard the woman say that it would also be useful to be nearer to the toilets.

The stewardess obviously saw this as a way of exacting revenge and moved me and my DC's and put the woman with the screamy baby and the toddler immediately behind the men who were pretty pissed off to be in such close vicinity to noise. Not as pissed off though as when the stewardess clocked my 7mth bump and said very loudly "actually I think I can find you a seat up front"

Can I just make the point that there is an underlying assumption in many posts that where this happens on charter and no-frills flights, people are getting a bargain and therefore should be treated in any way the airline sees fit?

Three things come to mind, and they all impact on the difficulties parents experience in sitting with their children on board as well.

First of all, in many airports, speedy boarders only get the right to board the bus to the plane a bit earlier than anyone else, which is about as useful as a chocolate teapot in assuring seats together on the plane. This is ripping off the speedy boarders, who might not know the arrangements at particular airports when deciding to stump up the charge.

Secondly, sometimes the speedy boarding queue is longer than the 'normal' queue, which again makes a bit of a mockery of the system and misleads passengers to a large extent - in Dublin once I got onto a plane ahead of people in the (longer) Speedy Boarding queue, for example, as the two queues were running concurrently! Again, this makes it hard for parents to accommodate their children's needs, even if they have paid.

Finally, no-frills routes are not always cheap - often there have been machinations behind the scenes to ensure they have effectively kicked national carriers off certain routes, and the prices are well in excess of what the scheduled tickets used to be, yet passengers have no choice at all if they need to travel on a particular route (Stansted to Munich springs to mind as one example). This is the capitalist way, but another way of looking at this is to say that air travel is a form of public transport (unless you have hired a private jet), and there are certain responsibilities that go with being a carrier (or indeed an airport) in relation to this, at least if you are using airports built by compulsory purchases of individuals' land, using public subsidy in many cases.

A way around all this is for the silly and somewhat artificial itemisation of bits and pieces essential to the journey to end, such as seating arrangements, credit card costs and so on. Passengers should be able to pay one price for a ticket, to include allocated seating and the costs of making the purchase, in the same way that compensation for delayed flights now has to be included according to EU law. I wonder if there is also a case for including baggage allowances once again, given that cabins are crammed with ridiculous amounts of hand luggage in the present system, that increases screening and scanning queues, waiting times and costs, and also runs the risk of falling out of overhead lockers in turbulent periods (I have seen this happen as well).

I think it's probably time to start asking for the service we want, rather than making do with the rather depressing service we are told we ought to be lucky to have. And I think we should remember that many, many people are making a lot of profit out of us in relation to flights, and our tickets could cover a lot more service than we are getting.

Potty... I'd guess that that is mostly down to the attitude of the parent. If it's a polite request, I think many people would accommodate it. A self-entitled person stamping their feet would probably get a different reaction.

I can't imagine that anybody would really want to be sitting next to somebody else's child really.

Wrecka- you are saying that if a child was sitting apart from its parents you would expect a written guarantee from whoever is near the child that they would assist it. You are assuming that the airline is somehow not complying with it's duties. I am pointing out that this is not the case. It's nothing to do with payment, prebooking, surcharges etc etc . Once the airline is satisfied everyone is seated in accordance with its obligations, no one needs to move, end of! If a parent kicks off because they want to be with their child, cabin crew may well ask if someone minds moving but that will be to shut up the parent, NOT as you erroneously claim, to meet some legal requirement.

Nice Karma there TheQueen :)

donthateme If a parent kicks off because they want to be with their child, cabin crew may well ask if someone minds moving but that will be to shut up the parent, NOT as you erroneously claim, to meet some legal requirement.

Do you really believe this is reasonable in the case of a very small child?

Ah you're making more sense now wrecks - as you say just now- It is a judgement call made by the AIRLINE. They fill the plane, they are satisfied with where everyone is seated. If a parent or accompanying adult then kicks off' because they aren't happy, then that is an entirely separate issue. It's not about whether the airline is complying with guidelines- it's about a disgruntled passenger. Entirely different issue.

So donthateme do you think it's reasonable in the case of a v small child?

TheQueen, that did make me smile!
(I have, oddly enough, just been posting to QOD on another thread so have changed what I call you!)

Fontsnob- whether it is reasonable or not is an entirely individual issue dependent on personal needs. My point was about the legality of the situation which is what wrecka has been talking about

I have often had to travel with my 2 small children.

And I never pay for the pre-booked seats, out of princiciple. I hate the piss being taken thus by airlines.

Good luck to whoever sits next to my car sick 4 year old!

But seriously. Without making any kind of fuss, or insisting on rights, I have always managed to be seated with them.

Usually at boarding they put us together, or else the stewardesses sort it on the plane. It has never been an inconvenience to anyone either, most people would rather sit next to another adult than a toddler. Actually, once a person didn't want to move. so DC sat 2 rows away from me. We were all fine.