More airline fees for families

[crashbb]

I'm not paying extra.

Let someone else sit next to my 6 year old, they will pay me to switch seats when he starts talking to them and doesn't stop.

Nope. That's why I have noise cancelling headphones - your son can sit there talking to himself.

 

[crazycatlady]

If asked nicely I will move as long as it isn't for a middle seat. If you just plop your kid down I can get hard of hearing real quick. It isn't my job to babysit your kids.

If you want to sit next to your child pay the extra money.

Yes I had kids when I travelled. I just figured it into the cost of the trip and determined if I could afford it.

Amen Sister!

I had a mom plop her young child (5 or 6?) in between me and another stranger (my DH and our teen children were sitting across the aisle from me) and then sat 2 rows back from us. As you said, I then listened to chatter, opened snacks, and generally became a free babysitter for 3 hours. My family paid in advance for our seats. Obviously that family did not. Or, then again, maybe they did.

 

[goofy4tink]

I'm not paying extra.

Let someone else sit next to my 6 year old, they will pay me to switch seats when he starts talking to them and doesn't stop.

See here's the thing...if I pay for my seat, as well as my dd's seat, there is no way I am going to give up my seat so that you can sit next to your child. You don't want to pay for seats? Fine. But realize that I am not going to babysit your child. I am not going to 'be there' for him/her if there is an issue.
I have offered to change seats in the past...and will do so again. But I will change seats only if I get a comparable seat. I will not take a middle seat...especially if I have already paid for a seat. But, I'm not likely to change seats for the parent that has one child, perhaps two, but decided they didn't want to pay for seats, and was willing to take their chances on someone giving up seats for them. I just don't care for that attitude. We all make choices.

 

[Lewisc]

Many consumer advocates feel that this is a bait-and-switch tactic, and some members of Congress are looking into it. It would be one thing if the seats were marked differently based on whether or not they were premium, or even marked as "held for late release", but that's not how it shows up; they show as already filled, particularly on AA, which is apparently the worst offender.

They show as "unavailable". Customers shouldn't have to read the fine print. There probably needs to be a prominent notice which informs customers that the chart only shows seats available for complimentary assignment at this time. Passengers who don't want to pay for seat assignment will be assigned complimentary seats at a later time.

There are two different questions.

Do passengers think they have to pay? Pay now or pay later? That's easy to solve. Better language.

Is it bait and switch because the only way to get seats together is to pay and that fact isn't readily disclosed until you pay. or Airline is intentionally creating a situation where passengers think they have to pay to sit together.

Assume the airline blocks the front half of the plane. Now assumes 1/3 of the remaining seats are held for gate assignment. It won't take a lot of passengers before seats won't be available. Go one step further assume almost every window and almost every aisle seat is preferred. Passengers don't have to pay for assigned seats but as a practical matter they have to pay if they want to sit together. Is it bait and switch to say you don't have to pay for seats if you really have to pay for seats if you want to sit together? Maybe.

Spirit has done a much better job disclosing their fees. It's win win. More people pay for assigned seats when it's clearly disclosed the alternative is being split from your family.

Sounds like some airlines are trying to have it both ways. Promote free seats but create a situation where passengers who want to sit with family need to, or think they need to, pay.

 

[NotUrsula]

They show as "unavailable". Customers shouldn't have to read the fine print. There probably needs to be a prominent notice which informs customers that the chart only shows seats available for complimentary assignment at this time. Passengers who don't want to pay for seat assignment will be assigned complimentary seats at a later time.

There are two different questions.

Do passengers think they have to pay? Pay now or pay later? That's easy to solve. Better language.

Is it bait and switch because the only way to get seats together is to pay and that fact isn't readily disclosed until you pay. or Airline is intentionally creating a situation where passengers think they have to pay to sit together.

Assume the airline blocks the front half of the plane. Now assumes 1/3 of the remaining seats are held for gate assignment. It won't take a lot of passengers before seats won't be available. Go one step further assume almost every window and almost every aisle seat is preferred. Passengers don't have to pay for assigned seats but as a practical matter they have to pay if they want to sit together. Is it bait and switch to say you don't have to pay for seats if you really have to pay for seats if you want to sit together? Maybe.

Spirit has done a much better job disclosing their fees. It's win win. More people pay for assigned seats when it's clearly disclosed the alternative is being split from your family.

Sounds like some airlines are trying to have it both ways. Promote free seats but create a situation where passengers who want to sit with family need to, or think they need to, pay.

I agree, but that is what bait and switch advertising is: using deceptive language to get a customer into a store (in this case a website) and then not having the advertised product available, or available in such small quantities that the ad is meaningless unless it states up front exactly how many of that product are available. AA (to cite the worst example) advertises that passengers are not required to pay to be able to choose seat assignments at purchase, but if the only complimentary seats that they show on the chart are single middles when in fact other open complimentary seat positions are currently not spoken for, then failing to disclose that in so many words pretty much meets the definition of bait-and-switch advertising (at least, if you consider a preselected seat position a "product").

In the AP article, the reporter cites this example:

On a July flight from Dallas to San Francisco on American, a recent search showed only 28 of 144 coach seats available for passengers unwilling to pay extra. Of those, 21 were middle seats. There were five spots where a couple could sit together; groups of three or more were out of luck.

By any measure that is really a limited-quantity offer. To eliminate the bait-and-switch aspect of the advertising, the airline needs to, as you said, spell out the terms up front and list exactly which types of seat positions are available for complimentary selection and when.

 

[darrengs]

Airlines haven't been profitable for several years. Not a matter of milking a monkey for money...

No longer true, they have been profitable for the last couple of years. It does appear that they need to add more fees to make up for the savvy travelers who are packing less, causing them to make less on the baggage fees.

"The nation's largest airlines generated $7.1 billion in profits last year, a drop compared with the $10.5 billion the airlines generated in 2010, according to the latest federal statistics."

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-airline-profits-20120517,0,5344157.story

 

[TandEsMommy]

I have epilepsy, so usually get moved to the front of the plane with my entire travel party; always when I am alone with my kids. I don't ask for it, but I do have them note the reservation and inform the flight attendants so they have an idea what to do if I have a seizure while on board.

That being said, before I started having seizures I refused to pay for advance assignment, even if I was alone with the kids. I don't expect anyone to switch with me, and I still give my kids things to occupy them if we are separated. We all often ended up with middle seats, (and still do when the airline doesnt opt to move us) but within a row of each other.

As a PP stated, people are usually not willing to swap for a middle seat. So my options are to pay extra, or be split up. We save for a year plus to go on vacation, and spending an extra $50+ each way (or even each leg) to sit together takes a decent chunk out of our vacation budget. If they assign us seats next to each other at check-in, great. If they don't and another passenger is willing to switch with us, great. If my kid sits across the aisle or in the row in front of me, or even 10 rows back, that's fine too. My kids have flown enough, and have been taught good manners, so I don't worry about them.

The simple reality is that for many, it is just not in the budget for people to pay the extra fees. We once went to the World with $400 to spend on four people for four days, including food. We watched what we spent and we were just fine. Spending an extra $160 to make sure we could sit together would have killed our vacation.

I don't really have an issue with the airlines charging for a particular seat. They are in business to make money, not cater to people with a specific set of expectations. They choose what is an extra they will charge for, and I choose whether or not to pay it.

I'm willing to take the cheap seat and out that money towards other things. But they should state that additional seats will be opened at check-in, so that the infrequent travelers don't lock themselves into being separated, only to board and find empty seats next to each other all over the plane.

 

[aubriee]

I have offered to change seats in the past...and will do so again. But I will change seats only if I get a comparable seat. I will not take a middle seat...especially if I have already paid for a seat. But, I'm not likely to change seats for the parent that has one child, perhaps two, but decided they didn't want to pay for seats, and was willing to take their chances on someone giving up seats for them. I just don't care for that attitude. We all make choices.

I agree! Before Air Tran was pulled out of Dallas last Nov I used to fly them down to Orlando 4-6 times a year. Due to claustrophobic issues, I don't do middle or window seats and also don't handle seats in the back of the plane very well. Something about looking up that long skinny tube, just gets me. Consequently even on my solo trips, I paid for an aisle seat up close to the front of the plane. Those seats are $13.00 and $15.00 each way and, if purchased, guarantee you Boarding zone 1, so you know you'll have space in the overhead bin. (seats further back are like $6.00) It was worth it to me to pay the $30.00 r/t to guarantee I wouldn't have to check my carry on and to get the seat I need. At 24 hours, if they are not all purchased, those same seats open up for free, but you get Boarding zone 7. I kid you not, every single trip there was some family that was too cheap to pay the seat fees, so they would check in at the 24 hour mark and get maybe one of the seats up front, then the rest of their seats would be scattered middle seats way in the back somewhere. Invariably they would ask me to give up the $15.00 aisle seat in the front that I paid for, for some lousy middle seat in the back. I did it once, but then decided no way. They could have purchased their seats just like I did. If you want me to trade seats then offer me a better seat, or at least one as good as the one I paid for. It got to where every time I was asked, I would ask where the other seat was, then tell them, no that seat didn't work for me, but I was sure that whoever was sitting next to their family member in that back seat would be happy to exchange with them for the seat in the front. Would you believe not a single person ever asked that person in the back if they'd exchange that back seat for a seat in the front. Every single time the response was something like, "we want to sit up here, it wouldn't hurt you to move back there, since you're by yourself". Uh uh, not happening. They should have paid for their seats like I did, if it was important for them to sit together. I would have no problem ignoring a chattering 6 y/o. That's what head phones are for. (not really, I'd deal with him for 2 1/2 hours, but would wonder why the parent was so irresponsible to not purchase the seats they needed, to sit with their child). It's not a stranger's responsiblity to switch seats or to care for your child, just because you are too cheap to buy seats together.

Some people want to go back to free assigned seats (even the seats near the front of the plan), no charge for checked bags, drinks and meals OK maybe not meals. The same people aren't willing to pay 30-50% more for their tickets. Airlines found passengers prefer lower fares and extra charges. The average Spirit passenger now pays over $100 in "extras".

Some of the extra charges may be necessary for some, maybe most, passengers. Families, even couples, may want to pay so they can be assured of seats next to each other. Most people going on a 7-14 day vacation need to check a bag. We have to do our homework. Find out what services we need and include those costs when comparing fares.

I agree! Once my beloved Air Tran left Dallas,I had to start looking at other airlines. I did the research and knowing I was just going to have to include the price of seat fees, baggage fees, and maybe carry on fees into the price of the ticket to get the final price. I had to make a decision on what was important to me. I really prefer the ala carte pricing that alot of airlines now have. Seat location is important to me, so I pay for my seat. Since I can easily do a carry on for eight nights/nine days, free checked luggage is not important to me. Why should I have to pay to subsidize someone else who wants to lug everything but their kitchen sink in two checked bags, when I'm not checking any? I should only have to pay for what I use. I can easily grab a drink after security and bring my own snacks, so couldn't care less if the airlines gives me a small cup of coke and a tiny bag of pretzels. If sitting together is not important to you, then don't pay for a seat. Let the airline give you what's left over, (after everyone who wants to, pays for theirs), but don't then expect those people who did pay to move for you. That's just rude and alot of people are getting tired of that entitled attitude.

I know Spirit gets a bad rap about their fees, but their site makes it very clear what their fees are. As you start your purchase you are taken to the screen that asks if you want to pay for a checked bag or a carry on and in large print it shows the allowed dimensions of those bags. On the very next screen, it asks if you want to sit with your traveling companions and shows a diagram of the plane with the available seats and how much each one costs. There is no way to proceed with your purchase until you click that you either want to pay or not pay for those items. Then you don't pay until the very end, so you can back out of there are any time. Don't act stupid and shocked when you get to the airport and realize you are not able to sit with your traveling party, if you didn't pay to do so.

I purchased tickets with them this past Jan to fly May 5th and 12th and also Sept 1st and 8th. I have also already paid for my carry on for the Sept trip, because I know I'll be doing carry on only. I have not purchased my seat yet, but will before the trip. I'm just not sure if I'm going to pay the $50.00 each way to upgrade to one of those 'Big Front Seats'. I did earlier this month though, so round up paying $160.00 in fees ($100.0 r/t for the big front seats and $60.00 r/t for a carry on). Funny thing is Spirit charges more for a carry on than a checked bag, but I wanted to do carry on, so paid to do so. Again though, I chose what was important to me. There was no way I was giving that $50.00 seat up.

Yet again I arrived early to my gate and sat right next to the gate, like I always do. Yet again, I heard parents raising heck with the gate agents, demanding that they move people around to accommodate them, because they chose not to pay for their seats and just assumed they'd be accommodated. They all acted shocked and said they didn't pay for seats because they didn't dream Spirit would separate them from their kids. There were even a couple of adults (no kids) raising heck for them to move other people around, so they could sit together. The gate agents didn't budge and said Spirit had not separated them, they did when they had the option during the booking process (or later) to pay for seats together and chose not to. I agree 100%!

I checked all the other airlines that fly DFW to MCO or Dallas Love Field to MCO. Even with the $160.00 feeas (to upgrade to the Big Front Seats and carry on fee), Spirit was still alot cheaper than any of the other airlines for that time period. $148.00 (plus seat and carry on fees) for Spirit compared to over $450.00 for all the other airlines (American, Delta, Continental, or Southwest). Yeah, with the upgrade I did to get the 'Big Front Seats' and with the bag fee I paid $308.00 to fly basically in a first class seat (but no first class service), nonstop to Orlando. But why should I have paid over $450.00 with Southwest (no assigned seating, all flights from Dallas to Orlando have layovers, two free checked bags which I wouldn't have used even one, and free soda and pretzels that I didn't need or want?). Sounds like a no brainer to me. I don't care how they break their fees down. If the final price is cheaper and they get me safely from Point A to point B, I don't care if they charge $100.00 bag fees or $30.00 seat fees. It's simple enough to add in any seat fees and bag fees, when you are checking prices to get the final price, then go with the one that's lowest. If you choose not to pay for one of the optional fees, just don't expect to get it for free when you get to the airport. I have seven grandkids and sometimes travel alone with them. Guess what, I pay for the right to sit next to them. It's just part of figuring ticket prices now. My husband and I took our 3 y/o GS to down to WDW this past Feb. We didn't even consider not buying three seats together.

 

[tjmw2727]

Well said - you did your research and you made the decision that works best for your family.

What folks get upset at is families who choose not to pay for the seating and then expect those who did pay to move to accomodate them. They may or may not ealize that the airline will expect a child upward of say 5 maybe 6 to manage on their own. If the child can't then the parent has the responsibility to insure seating not the airline or the other passengers.

I have epilepsy, so usually get moved to the front of the plane with my entire travel party; always when I am alone with my kids. I don't ask for it, but I do have them note the reservation and inform the flight attendants so they have an idea what to do if I have a seizure while on board.

That being said, before I started having seizures I refused to pay for advance assignment, even if I was alone with the kids. I don't expect anyone to switch with me, and I still give my kids things to occupy them if we are separated. We all often end up with middle seats, but within a row of each other.

As a PP stated, people are usually not willing to swap for a middle seat. So my options are to pay extra, or be split up. We save for a year plus to go on vacation, and spending an extra $50+ each way (or even each leg) to sit together takes a decent chunk out of our vacation budget. If they assign us seats next to each other at check-in, great. If they don't and another passenger is willing to switch with us, great. If my kid sits across the aisle or in the row in front of me, or even 10 rows back, that's fine too. My kids have flown enough, and have been taught good manners, so I don't worry about them.

The simple reality is that for many, it is just not in the budget for people to pay the extra fees. We once went to the World with $400 to spend on four people for four days, including food. We watched what we spent and we were just fine. Spending an extra $160 to make sure we could sit together would have killed our vacation.

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

That article is nonsense, written by someone only trying to stir up emotions. Lots of airlines charge for choice seats; they aren't specifically trying to discriminate against families.

Frequent fliers have noise cancelling headphones.

Please note that noise cancelling headphones are not noise blocking. While wearing my noise cancelling headphones, I can hear people talking just fine (unfortunately!).