thinking I should have been seated next to my three-year-old on this flight?

[nappyrat]

Cheap (orange) airline. Normally v good when travelling with kids - speedy boarding, say they'll sit you with kid/s etc.

Flew out recently & they said a 'technical error' had mistakenly sat me in a different row(!!) to my 3 year old. They fixed it on board (after much grumbling by several passengers about not moving from seats they've paid extra to book to sit together (fair enough!)). But fixed, fairly stress free.

Return flight today, I was sat across the aisle from DS. Their handling agent told me that this is considered 'sat together'?! Erm...really?! Anyway, handling agent refused to seat us together. Cue quite a bit of 'discussing' with them why this was not on IMO. No budging. Decided to leave it & ask the flight crew when we boarded. Who eventually sorted it - v kind older couple agreed to move seats.

Before I let loose with said orange airline's customer services, AIBU to think that sorting across the aisle from a 3 yr old is not appropriate?! DS was wailing, I had to bend across aisle to comfort, there were good chunks of time during boarding when I couldn't see DS because ppl stood in between us in aisle. Just bloody stressful quite frankly. And not what I'd expect from this - or to be bloody honest - any - airline.

Opinions please mumsnet!

We must presume that anyone who has taken the trouble to pay to book a seat does it because it's important to them.
(I wouldn't btw but then I don't care where I sit)
OP does not trump other people

No one who says that these seats should be allocated free of charge has yet addressed the fact that if this happens base rates will go up for everyone.

If you want these options included in the price of your ticket it might be more appropriate not to use a budget airline.

As said above - times have changed and people expect to be able to book a ticket at a cheap price without taking up any options.

But you only need to pay extra for seats of you not check in early. Why do you need to pay for them later? Clearly there are seats together because you can pay for them. You're being penalised for not checking in early enough basically.

I'm booking cinema tickets today and I booked some to see a certain teen pop star last month.
I expect the people I booked for to be all sitting together in both cases, I don't see what the difference is with planes. If you book for 5 then you should have 5 seats together, if you make a late booking then it should point out that there are only say, 3 individual seats left and if you want them that's how it is.
It absolutely is a way of airlines getting extra money out of us and we are silly to just comply.

Mystified as to Mumsnets view point on seats together for small children. In every other area of life someone who separates us from our child has a duty of care to look after that child, which airlines do not at all want to take on! I expect airlines to consider the age of the child and sit under 8s at least with the adult travelling with them for care purposes. You can't send them on their own without taking measures so the airline shouldn't be able to put them on their own without taking measures (which they don't do).

Yes NickyFury, check in early is the lesson I got from my experience. At the risk of outing myself as an idiot I was surprised check in opened so early and thought I was organised to check in online a few days before. Which is what I would have done before.

Likedylaninthemovies... Yes really 🙄 It might not be particularly far away but I'd like to see you during takeoff leaning across the aisle to comfort an upset child. How ridiculous to say it's unrestricted access haha... What would you expect the parent to do during a turbulent flight where the seatbelt sign was on for extended periods of time? 🙄

MrsDC7 - exactly!! DS started to cry when I sat him in the seat, I went to pick him up for a cuddle & was unable to do so because of ppl stuck in aisle boarding. Ridiculous to suggest you can placate a 3 yr old when you're across aisle from them!

So if the budget airlines moved to automatic allocation of seats together, presumably in the areas of the plane that don't command a premium fee, and they lose the income that is attached to booking guaranteed seats next to one another, where should they be looking to make up their loss - because they will try to.

You should have paid extra. Very unfair that the other group was split when they paid extra IMO.

Butterfly - yes, agree!! Completely unfair others had to move. V kind of them. The issue is that it's the airline's bad that they did! Because they'd failed to make sure a 3 yr old (3 yr old!!) was seated next to its parent!

I imagine a lot of children would be upset. I too would not have expected together to be across an aisle. And I agree it's not sensible unless you have multiple children.
I expect a fair few children would not keep their seatbelts on sat alone.

You have to pay to be sat together, which I never do and we have always been together, but I agree OP that really it's common sense that a child of 3 would be sat with their parent. I don't know why they just don't put £5 on the tickets and then let everyone book their seats would save all the drama. I never get why adults are so precious about sitting together for 2 hours and me and DH would happily move to accommodate a family with young kids

Why should people without young children pay extra for the ticket?

The "effectively responsible" for someone else's child makes me chuckle.

No, I won't be - I will have my noise cancelling headphones in and a book.

Of course in an emergency situation it would be different but posters are never referring to that.

Your kid needs entertaining? The loo? A drink? Knock yourself out providing them.

Nappyrat I totally understand where you're coming from. We shouldn't have to pay extra to be sitting next to a small child. If the child was older then maybe, but not aged 3... That's ridiculous xx

Maybe the wording should be changed ... In the eyes of the airlines the op was sitting next to her child but if the op wanted to sit 'adjacent' to her child she should have paid to prebook the seats

The issue is that it's the airline's bad that they did!

No it's not. The airline is following the CAA guidelines to the letter. It's not their fault you don't know them (ignorance is not an excuse).

If I couldn't sit next to my DH and DD on a flight I quite simply wouldn't fly. To ensure I do sit with them I pay whatever the airline asks me to pay to guarantee that - on some airlines it's been no more than a fiver, on another it was £46 per seat. I paid up without a complaint because it is my decision, my choice and my DD is my responsibility - no one else's.

If I had paid and then been reallocated seats apart, or if airline staff insisted I moved away from my DH or DD I would not fly. They would have to unload me and my bags and miss their take off slot. It is that important to me that we are together.

I don't understand any parent that is willing to 'risk it' - but then I don't have to, I'm not them.

The law says; "an operator must establish procedures to ensure that passengers are seated where in the event of an emergency evacuation they must best assist and not hinder evacuation from the aeroplane."

I would have thought a three year old in an aisle seat could be a hinderance.

napp but they didn't fail! You failed to read the small print.
Across the aisle, in front, behind is next to!
Just because you don't class it as next to isn't the airline's fault.

I wouldn't move either.
I have an invisible disability and would always pay to be next to dh.
I'd be really pissed off to be called grumpy or nasty just because i wouldn't move for a parent who didn't pay
( doesn't help that i don't look ill in any way and am also a very nervous flier too )

I'm struggling to see where the airline failed

He was directly across from you! Literally within touching distance. My 3 year old could cope with that. Hell, my 18 month old could cope with that

I love this, and thought it fitting

exLtEveDallas yes me too. I would not fly if i wasn't next to my dh.
I wouldn't be taking care of someones child either.
Be too busy with my heavy metal/ police crime dramA amd trying to block out that i'm flying

jak maybe people should read the small print before signing/buying things?
Always shocks me when people posts on here saying " but who actually reads all the small print...."
Me. Everytime. That way i know what it is i'm getting.

As Jacques has said above anyone trying the "effectively responsible" line with me would be in for an unpleasant surprise. If I'm on a plane the chances are that I'm there for some respite from my spawn so there's no way I'll take responsibility for anyone else's.

I think anyone who says you should pay extra has fallen for the airlines ploy for extra revenue by making people who buy tickets together pay extra to actually sit together. Of course you want to travel with whoever you booked tickets with, it should be included in the price.
Airlines ask for children's ages when booking, it's completely unreasonable to sit a 3 year old across the aisle from its mother and its also unreasonable to expect the mother to pay extra for them to sit together.
If airlines want to make extra money charging people who booked together extra to sit together it's bad enough, but separating children from parents unless they pay extra is almost extortion.