To not pay to choose seats but expect to sit together?

[Peachpicklepie]

I'll be flying with easyjet on a short flight (just over an hour) soon. It will be me, my toddler (2 years 4 months) and my baby (four months). Baby will be on my lap. According to the website they will sit children near an accompanying adult - surely in the case of a two year old this means next to?! I really don't want to spend another £20 on choosing seats if it's unnecessary.

And where is the safeguarding responsibility of the parent?

Your child Your responsibility

if you want them beside you pay the money
if your happy that your two year old could be placed next to any random then don’t pre book but don’t expect others to move to accommodate

If only approx half pay for their seats (as usual) then there are a lot other non payers who can be swapped with.

In the days before airlines introduced a separate charge for seat selection, the majority of passengers got seated together at check-in, and there may be one or two couples or families per flight that drew the short straw and ended up split. It was accepted as bad luck for getting to check-in queue last. People didn't make as much fuss about it and there certainly wasn't a concept of thinking of people as tight-fisted or selfish if they were the unlucky ones, as it was only to do with the time they had managed to arrive at the check-in queue.

So people were generally kinder about it, and if a young family was going to be split then you'd find someone nearby would just volunteer to move without all the nastiness.

Then airlines realised that people's insecurities about being split apart could be a wonderful money-spinner, and we ended up where we are now.

It's surprising that with the power of social media there hasn't been a collective motion of everyone just refusing to pay for seat reservations.

You're right you absolutely should sit next to your children no question and yes you shouldn't have to pay for it... however, if others have paid for their seats, as is now generally required, you now might be forcing someone who has paid for something to be bumped off their seats by not paying. I just factor that extra price into the entire cost these days tbh

There is a lot more historically to this than that, it simply wasn't a case of airlines saying "oh, there's a money spinner.......it's a necessary revenue earner these days, and some of that is down to human nature..

Once upon a time, early in the days of widespread internet booking, you'd get:

Airline A advertising flights from A to B for 200 STG (all in).

Airline B comes along and advertising flights from A to B for 160 STG
but then charges 20 STG for seat choice, 20 STG for checked bags and ? for food...

Like moths to a flame in search of cheaper flights many people would tend towards airline B....

( and so the airline where I worked, which was an A, ended up copying B to stay in business on many routes.

and re-iterate, yet again....if people want to yell "it's not fair" and campaign for banning of charges for seat choices fill your boots, but given margins the airlines will up charges to compensate for the lost revenue...

"Then airlines realised that people's insecurities about being split apart could be a wonderful money-spinner, and we ended up where we are now. "

I don't think that's totally it. It was more that they recognised that some people valued low cost flights above all else and genuinely weren't bothered if they sat together or not.

I'm in that category now that DS was older, but when he was young we paid ever since the time we booked an upmarket package holiday without realising that seats together weren't included and it had to be done at time of booking and I found it stressful not knowing we would be sat together until we got there.

Having paid when DS was young, I'm not terribly inclined to be moving for other families who want to save their money but have the same benefit. However it's hypothetical as I've never been asked. I certainly wouldn't be moving to a middle or window seat as I go to
the loo quite a lot.

I wouldn’t bother, someone else who hasn’t paid and doesn’t care where they sit will swap with you if necessary.

It seems less and less people are falling for these extra charges - everyone gets on the plane, finds their seats then spends 10 mins swapping seats with each other.

On my first air flight away, after my husband had unexpectedly passed away in 2019, I booked my seat, so I got an ailse seat. I always book seats as I need fast access to the toilet.

All was well going out. Coming back was a different matter. I wasn't even told at check-in that they had moved my seat.

I was livid when I got on the plane to find two people had been allocated seats where I was in one, so they could sit together. They hadn't booked seats

I'd been shoved in a window seat near the back..

I didn't take that lying down. I told the flight attendant who came over to me and tried to get snotty that I wasn't going to sit where there had put me.

That I had booked my ticket and seat. If they wanted me to sit somewhere else, they could find me an ailse seat near a toilet. I also told him he didn't want the details as to why.

Needless to sat being appropriate, assertive, and firm, they did some moving around, and I got an ailse seat near the toilet.

I sent the airline company a strongly worded email when I got back. I got a seat refund and compensation.

As I told them, I wasn't a 2nd class citizen just cos I was solo travelling
.

Sorry for the loss of your husband.

Your story is an example of why it would be easier all round if airlines abandoned this policy and just let everyone select their seats without charging extra. That way, everyone except the last people to check in on a fully booked flight would have some say in where they were sitting, there would be fewer issues on board, and in the unlikely event that the cabin crew needed to ask someone to move, that person wouldn't have paid extra to have the seat of their choice.

Also @keffie12, if you have a medical reason for needing to be in an aisle seat near a toilet, perhaps at your next GP appointment you could ask them to write you a short letter saying you have a medical reason for needing to be in an aisle seat near the toilet and you could keep it with your passport in case the same thing happens again.

Easyjet will not fly with minors on their own but the system can allocate you all randomly across the plane though. We witnessed this twice in May, both times they would not take off until someone offered to swap and offered drinks etc for the people who swapped.

I always pay to reserve seats as I dont need that hassle.

Why are these threads always full of parents who are positively gleeful at the prospect that they can force another person to look after their child for them?

It's totally grim.

Again, the airlines have caused this problem by forcing people to pay to choose their seats, and in some cases, deliberately separating people from their travelling companions if they don't.

For all of you saying, "It's only £20!", it's not. It's per person, which is a lot if you are travelling as a family.

This is indirect discrimination against families with children, old or otherwise vulnerable passengers, and people with disabilities and medical conditions.

Because it’s funny. And obviously they don’t have to look after someone else’s child. They don’t have to interact with the child. But if they don’t move they will have to sit next to said child without a parent looking after them. It’s not an issue as the airline can’t seat a toddler away from the parent.

Again, the airlines have caused this problem by forcing people to pay to choose their seats,

Objectively it's not fair to keep trying to pin some form of blame for this on the airlines, and the airlines only.

Those with long memories will recall that for a while in UK/Europe there was a considerable overlap of how seating was done, with some airlines not charging for seat choice (or not giving one)..and others charging (or having free seating) but having a lower basic ticket price.

Experience ( and the marketers/analysts at airlines would bore to death on this) showed people's choice of who to fly with was very much driven by cost....frankly lots of people don't care about seat choice, meals etc, but did want a cheap ticket.

If 25-30 years back more members of the general public had been prepared to pay for full service/all inclusive at the initial sticker price then maybe that choice may still be more widespread....but they wouldn't, so it isn't.

It’s not funny for the passenger having to deal with someone’s snot nosed brat.

Hell is other people’s children, as they say.

Pay for your seats, no one is owed a free lunch.

Having children is not a human right. Nor is going on holiday @MargotBamborough

And I am a 'nice' parent. I am far too concerned with my own child's wellbeing to ever risk a two-year-old sitting next to a complete stranger, who could, let's face it, be anyone. That's the very least of what parents owe to their children.

Assuming that whoever they're sitting with is a Nice Person is not adequate safeguarding and a dereliction of duty as a parent.

As I told them, I wasn't a 2nd class citizen just cos I was solo travelling.

Absolutely agree. Your CF passengers were already in your seat when you arrived, but I not-infrequently fly solo too and find people more often make a beeline for me in this situation than they do when I'm with family. I'm fairly certain it's because people know women are conditioned to 'be nice'. 'It's nice to be nice' is the nauseating phrase oft-trotted out, even when that means be nice to everyone else other than ourselves. (I know now why my teachers told me never to use the word 'nice').

I've agreed when the person wanting to change was two rows behind and had an aisle seat (I need the aisle seat). But they try all sorts, including non-reclining seats directly in front of the loo on one occasion.

My default answer nowadays is a resolute 'no'. I'm not a parcel to be shunted around for others' convenience.

I'm not talking about human rights, I'm talking about a policy which is purely profit driven causing indirect discrimination against certain categories of people, which is what this does.

The more people who refuse to pay it and then cause havoc when they're on the plane, the better. Maybe then the airlines will eventually concede that it's a shitty policy which isn't worth the aggro it causes.

Nobody said anything about free. Everyone has already paid their air fare.

I hate the current approach. Flight attendants put so much pressure on people to move just because they decide that for eg my teens will be just fine sat next to a total stranger. They won't, they won't wear lanyards either to make conversations on this easier for me. Juggling my children not wanting to disclose a diagnosis with saying "sorry no" to a really pushy flight attendant is tricky. I do wish they'd do positive include (put your hand up if you'd be prepared to swap and then get some perk) rather than the full on pressure because someone didn't want to pay extra to sit with aunt doris

The seat charge isn't a simplistic case of the nasty airlines adding a fee on to make more money on a flight.

Quite often the airfare (as itemised on the booking) alone won't cover the cost of carriage of the passenger and the airline only comes out with any profit due to ancillary revenue.

It's all down to economics: Airline's aren't charities, they don't have a captive market (unlike say the privatised utilities in the UK), their margins are tight and they are often competing on parallel routes with competitors so every penny on the basic fare is important from a customer sentiment POV..

I get many want seat charges banned, feel free to so campaign but also be aware that if airlines want to survive the base fare for everybody will increase by (probably) several pounds at least per sector...so I suspect many passengers will not want seat choice charges dropped.

Once again for the people at the back...

Not. All. Flights. Are. For. Holidays.

🙄

This is exactly why the gleeful "haha I can force you to sit next to my child!" is not funny.