that airlines charge you extra to sit together!?!?

[Dollygirl2008]

I mean, after a totally shitty year, I have scraped the money together to take my DC away for a weeks holiday to Menorca- possible the last foreign holiday we will have for a long time. And now, the sodding, well reputable tour operator want more money for us to sit together!?!? I mean, do pepper early do this!? Are they really going to split us up (DC is 7)??

Interested in others views or experience, thanks

I didn't fly for years because I have a phobia, claustrophobia, and the feeling of being enclosed was unbearable. I have had hypnotism and can fly now, with the help of pills, but I have to sit in a specific place and have DH with me. I have constant anxiety throughout the flight but it is manageable now.

So I wouldn't swap seats and neither would I be able to look after anyone else's child. If you choose not to pay then you have to accept that your DCs may well be alone and upset with no one to comfort or help them.

There are people who want to sit at the front / at the back / by a window / by the emergency exit (legroom) / over the wing / not over the wing / not at the back / not at the front etc. For those people, if they insist on their wishes and if it is worth it to them, then the airline is being reasonable to charge them for the pleasure.
If a customer with a small child wishes to sit with the child, ie minimum 2 seats together, common sense dictates that the airline should facilitate this as far as possible, and this should not be charged extra. OP INBU to expect to be catered for in this way, the airline WBU to charge or to make things awkward.
My practical experience tells me that the airline ground staff are common sense people and will give you seats together if they can. If they cannot, you're unlucky, but there is no need to expect the worst.
Bon voyage, OP!

We travel quite a few times a year and always pay to sit together (on Thomson for example it is £18 per adult and £9 per child for your return journey). To us it is just part of the holiday cost and something I do to make travelling with 2 small children less stressfull - just like we get meet and greet parking instead of geting a transfer bus from the car park or taking a private taxi to the hotel rather than the coach.

It is a service they offer which you either choose to pay for, or your don't. Please don't whinge though if you are not seated together (with Daily mail sad faces) and expect people who have paid to sit together to move to accommodate you.

i've also never been on a flight where parents and children have been separated. we flew to america last year with virgin, dh was flying through work so was in business class, me, mil and 2 dc's flew on the same plane in economy. dd is 14 so the booking was 3 adults and 1 child. i didn't pay extra to pre book seats, but logged in online as soon as check in opened, our allocated seats were all together in a row of 4.

i chatted with one of the flight attendants about seat allocation and she said that in her experience, airlines will do their best to seat group bookings together, if there was an emergency, its much safer to have children with a parent.

i do pay the extra and pre book seats when we go via ryanair so i can put dh in one with extra legroom, and the dc's with me.

What happens with those who sit their children in economy while they fly Business Class? Surely that is even more of a risk in an emergency?

I'm really surprised that happens cleaty! It's how they sit in Home Alone but I assumed that was because it was cheaper not to have all the child actors in the plane scenes If I could get away with it I'd put my kids on another plane though

It's a perfectly valid business model though.
Do you want to go back to only having flights that include luggage, meals, seat allocation, etc., for a higher price? Some people like the idea of the base fare, plus only those extras that you personally want. If I don't want to take luggage, then I can get the cheaper fare. If I don't care where I sit, then I can get the cheaper fare. I know that if I do want those things, I can choose them and pay for them, but it doesn't mean everyone has to. Better to think of it as a base fare where you pick and choose what extras you want, and not an all-inclusive fare the way that standard non-budget airlines used to work. Otherwise they'll end up back with standard, more expensive fares, and you too will have to pay £20 more for every flight because someone else thinks luggage should be included as standard. Or that they should have drinks included, or meals, or whatever other option you are OK living without.

It might be unexpected the first time you do it, but after that, you know what budget airlines are like, you know that they offer the cheapest no-frills nothing-included price on the website, and you plan what you want to add to that.

missbishi it was a joke. Get off your high horse!

Again. midnightscribbler pull you knickers out you arse

You're assuming that I'm wearing any?

I have never paid extra - I refuse on principle.

I have flown with DC a few times on different budget airlines - Ryanair was one, Eurowings another, can't remember the third.

Each time, we have had the option of pre-booking seats for a fee when we bought the tickets, but when we have gone on to check in online a couple of days before the flight, then we have always had the chance to choose seats for free at that point, or to just accept the ones that the airline had allocated us - these have always been together in any case (however once the airline allocated us seats in a row where children aren't allowed to sit because of the emergency exits, so cabin crew had to get someone else to swap with us. Which they did quite willingly, without all the angst that seems to always be referenced in these sort of threads)

We only fly shorthaul, and my children are used to flying, so they probably wouldn't bat an eyelid to be separated from us anyway. I'd prefer to be able to see them, just in case, but I'd expect them to be self reliant enough to sit in a seat for an hour or two without me being right next to them, and to take themselves to the toilet if they needed to and buy/request a drink if they wanted one - my DC are 8 and 5.

Nope. It does not "make sense" at all. Fitting in all groups, plus any special requests, is a very tricky problem that may leave you with a lot of individual seats that nobody wants

Surely it's a tricky problem, whoever does the allocating. It makes no difference if it's done by customer pre-booking, or by staff at check-in. There are always going to be individual seats. Actually, I would have thought that it would be better to have check-in staff allocate the seats, as there are less likely to be individual seats, because the staff can fill them as they go (ie ensure a family of 4 is sat with 3 on one side and one across the aisle, rather than 2 groups of 2 leaving 2 individual seats, if that makes sense!)

To me, it's a con. It's simply a money making exercise. I can understand paying extra for a meal (which costs the airline money to provide) or paying extra for hold luggage (which requires handling and fuel), but not to pay for a particular seat, which costs the airline nothing extra.

And to those who complain that parents who don't pay to sit together are tight, selfish etc, if you are taking advantage of low airfares, then it's the risk you take too, that you might have to sit next to a whining 6 year old. You can't have it both ways.

And to those who complain that parents who don't pay to sit together are tight, selfish etc, if you are taking advantage of low airfares, then it's the risk you take too, that you might have to sit next to a whining 6 year old. You can't have it both ways.

Most of the comments regarding parents being tight and selfish are in regards to parents who expect other people, who have paid for the seat they wanted, to move so they can sit right next to their children even though they didn't pay.

Sitting next to a child can happen regardless of of parents have pre booked or not.

Previous threads about this have been much funnier that this one. I remember one poster saying that if she couldn't sit next to her child she "would make the adult who refused to swap with her sign an affidavit that he would look after her child".

Carrying luggage and providing refreshments cost the airline money. Passengers choosing where to sit doesn't.

Assuming that we're talking about budget airlines where you check in online and at that point, you can take the seats given to you 'randomly' or you can choose yourself, there is no difference to the process that costs money. Therefore there is no reason to charge other than because they can, because people fear being seated separately.

When I've checked in, I can see the seats available and there are often plenty of seats together. I never pay and sometimes we get offered the seats together, sometimes they are separate. The cynic in me thinks that they deliberatly give you the separate ones to 'encourage' you to pick those together.

I think it would be better not giving people a choice and not charging, but filling the seats in a sensible fashion. It is letting people choose that leads to the odd separate seats here and there due to single travellers picking a window seat or a couple picking a pair of aisle seats, probably hoping that the remaining middle seat will remain empty and there will be a bit more room.

But now I am talking myself into paying more, because if they don't charge for seats, they will just charge everyone more, so now think I will let everyone pay extra to sit with family or to have their 'favourite' seats and I'll just pay less and sit where I am told to. But I still think it's a con and unfair on families to charge to sit together.

(ie ensure a family of 4 is sat with 3 on one side and one across the aisle, rather than 2 group

But that only works if all planes have the same configuration, have extra legroom seats in the same place, have emergency exits in the same place etc.

Actually the best way to do it would be to give a discount to people who don't have seating preferences.

Everyone pays X per seat and gets allocated seating.
Those who don't care where they sit (but do want to be seated together) get a discount of Y.
Those who don't care where they sit AND who they sit by get a discount of Y and Z.

'Entitled' Parents wouldn't have a leg to stand on then if they took the discount. Airlines would make more money this way as well. I don't know why they don't do it.

You get this on trains too. I book a table seat then a family want me to move so they can sit together because they "need" to.

No, they don't. They may need double seats, so each child us with an adult, depending on the age of the child, and they need to start looking sharpish - but don't tell people who booked the table that they must move.

*Actually the best way to do it would be to give a discount to people who don't have seating preferences.

Everyone pays X per seat and gets allocated seating.
Those who don't care where they sit (but do want to be seated together) get a discount of Y.
Those who don't care where they sit AND who they sit by get a discount of Y and Z*

^I agree.

Most of the time when I am travelling I couldn't care less about where I sit and I like being able to get he cheapest flight possible because of that.

However I do want the option to choose when with with children.

In practical terms, that's what they are doing, isn't it, LtEve? Except that everyone gets offered the discounted fare, but has to pay a premium if they want more than the basic service of a seat somewhere on the plane.

If dh wants to fly home midweek, and has to pay for it himself, he'll book a flight but won't pay for allocated seating, priority boarding or baggage - all he wants is to be on the plane, and he doesn't need or want the extras - so he pays the lowest fare. When we travel together as a family, we will pay the extra to book seats together and have hold baggage.

However, I do think that airlines and travel companies should be crystal clear about this - the OP said that it wasn't until after she had paid for the holiday that she was told she'd have to pay extra to guarantee allocated seating - if this had been made clear to her at the point of booking, she'd have had the option either to adjust her budget to accomodate the extra cost, or to look for a holiday with a different operator who would allocate seating within her budget.

It is not fair if the airline/travel company obscures the fact that you have to pay extra for allocated seating until you have paid and have no choice but to pay the premium for allocated seating or risk being seated apart.

However, I also think that, if you choose not to pay extra for allocated seating, and know that this means you may not be seated with your children, you shouldn't then kick off and expect other people to accomodate you - especially if they have paid the premium for allocated seating - especially by blackmailing them with the threat of having to deal with their child's needs all flight.

When I was four or five, I was flying with my sister and parents. We were allocated seats in pairs, with one parent for each child. No problem. But when we reached our seats, we were told the airline had mistakenly given us that row - I couldn't sit in it, as it was the one with the emergency exit. No other pair on the plane would swap with us, so the cabin crew were forced to move us to the only free seats in first class! That was a nice trip

It is SDTG, but if the airlines made it clearer (and announced it as a discount rather than an extra) hopefully you wouldn't get the "But I'm a mummy and I HAVE to sit by my child. It's the LAW" from those who refuse to pay extra because they will have purposely taken the discount.

(And your final paragraph a million times YES [grin[)

As far as i am aware - may be wrong - thomas cook don't do this. We are going on a family holiday soon and they have managed to sit me, DP, baby, SIL..... And their 4 massively overexcited kids...... together for no extra charge.

Bastards, I was hoping to be right at the other end of the plane

Sorry Scared. Our summer holiday to Egypt is with Thomas Cook and I've paid an extra £72.00 for selected seating (and chosen it already)

Although it was part of a 3 for 1 deal so we got extra baggage and an in flight meal for that as well.

Crikey - I'm amazed at the views this thread has thrown up!!! It's incredibly interesting to read and is clearly an issue for some!!!!

As for your comment, exLtEveDallas , I find it rather offensive actually. My year has been one made from hell and I'm surprised I'm still upright and beating, but we have no choice when children are involved. My DC has been lucky enough to enjoy foreign holidays up until now, but unfortunately life has changed and this really is a "up yours" to those that have hurt us, and feels like something we need to do for a bit of closure. And yes, this will be the last one for probably many years. I have saved and saved for this, so although I could afford paying for the seats, my question was really "do you think I have to". I would not wish my DC to be sat somewhere else - as far as I'm concerned, this is part of the holiday and time we should enjoy together, not sat at opposite ends of the plane. If this means paying additional £ for seating, then so be it. I am a responsible parent who will have back up funds for dire emergencies. I am not neglectful - simply trying to save money where I can and protect my daughter from changes afoot.

Well you can be offended of course, but you are choosing to be offended. And that's not my problem.

If you have set aside a fund for emergencies, then you obviously aren't one of the people I'm talking about.

This type of thread appears 4 or 5 times every.single.year. On every thread someone pops up and says that they cannot afford to pay for allocated seating. That they couldn't afford to pay for the holiday and then pay to be seated together.

You haven't said you can't afford to pay for it. So why do you think my comment was aimed at you specifically? I