Southwest Early Bird Checkin

[Tricia1972]

So nice to see the Food mods visit us here!

Does that mean that you are talking about this thread behind the scenes?

LOL, it sure looks like it doesn't it? I don't know how Jody found her way over here, but I followed over here from the Families board (where I spend quite a bit of time lurking)

 

[ironz]

thanks! I wish there were more posters as of the recent EB option (seeing as how the thread's been going on well before EB started)

I will report back here Friday and let everyone know what BP I get with OLCI. Wish me luck!!

Part of why that thread dates back a while is because FlyerTalk is *really* good about keeping threads consolidated.
There won't be umpteen threads about the same subject, like there are here, which is so refreshing, I might add. But I suspect our moderators have more to deal with and couldn't be moving and consolidating threads all day.

(though it would be nice if people would do a search once in a while, or at least look at the first several pages of threads sometimes to see if their topic is already being discussed.....but that is a whole other deal! )

 

[clanmcculloch]

It's surprising me how many people on numerous discussions state that they'd be willing to pay for assigned seating on other airlines but they won't pay EB on Southwest. How many discussions have there been of pretty much all other airlines consolidating or changing or cancelling flights and people lose their seats? I don't trust the other airlines to keep my flight as it was when I booked it so why would I expect them to honour my seat assignment?

My ONLY gripe with this new SW EBCI is that they implemented it on flights that were already partially booked. I already had my tickets but like everybody else, I wasn't notified. I have now booked EBCI for my return flight in December. For my outbound flight, I'll be online at T-24. I actually love the fact that I won't need to worry about checking in while at WDW.

Do people who are terrified of not sitting next to their children have no experience with SWA? People who know SWA know that families with kids 4 and under go through family boarding. People who know SWA know that even those with higher C boarding passes can typically find 2 seats together. I can't imagine a person who checks in at T-24 NOT getting at least a high C even with this EBCI going on except maybe over the holidays in which case this should have been a concern even before EBCI (seriously; even before EBCI, with T-24 checkin over the holidays I would assume that this would have been a possibility).

Here's an example of those that really irk me. On my last return trip from MCO, among the last few to board was a mother with her daughter who must have been around 14 years old. She was yelling at the FAs that she had to make somebody move because her daughter suffers from seizures and she had a letter from her doctor stating that she needed to be next to her so it HAD to happen. I had no sympathy for this woman (though I was moritified on behalf of her daughter). Why the heck didn't she do what the rest of us did and check in early? Why did her need outweigh everybody elses? This wasn't a continuation of a flight that landed late or any other extenuating circumstances. They were ending their WDW vacation the same as the rest of us (she was very vocal about what was going on). My 11 year old is autistic and I need to make sure one of us is next to her. I don't expect the world to bend over backwards to make sure this happens for us; I'll take care of that.

 

[KSBelle]

I'm "LUVing" this thread!!!!!

 

[Avonlady1001]

Families with young children (age four and under) may still board between the "A" and "B" boarding groups if they do not already hold "A" boarding passes. Nevertheless, we understand that you are unhappy with this new offering, and we are sorry that you are disappointed. As our Leaders will be monitoring the Customer feedback we receive, we have noted your concerns in our monthly summary for distribution to our Senior Leadership.

[/I]

Thank you for posting this! You've made me feel a lot better about the whole thing. My DH & I are traveling w/ DD4 & DS 11mths...We've paid for a seat for DS & will be using his carseat (which according to SW policy, should be in a window seat.) Listening to everyone rant & rave about entitlements & how you can't count on sitting w/ your kids has had me worried. I just can't imaging putting DS 11mths on his own...or DD4 for that matter. I don't need 4 seats together...but I do need at least 2 & 2 (DH w/ DS & me w/ DD).

For those saying if we don't like it, we shouldn't fly SWA??? Well, if this had been in effect when I booked my flight back in APRIL, I would've chosen Jetblue & avoided this stress. They changed the rules w/ no warning & that doesn't sit well with me.

I have flown SWA many times in the past, with my family, and have never had a problem getting seats together. I am worried they will either increase the # of A's to include most of the plane (if enough people complain about paying the fee & getting B's...) or move family boarding further back.

As for the entitlement...yes, I do think that I am more entitled to sit next to my BABY, who cannot talk, walk or do much of ANYTHING for himself... than 2 20-something friends going on vaca...sorry, but I do. I'm hoping the people who are going on about entitlement are not talking about VERY small children, but it seems to me they are talking about children in general. (I would have little problem sitting my 8 year old a few rows from me...but NOT my little ones.)

That said, since I have non-refundable tickets, we're stuck w/ these flights & we'll have to wait and see. SWA has lost a loyal customer though...it's Jetblue for me from now on.

 

[ironz]

Seriously, they are not going to push family boarding back. More likely, if this whole deal becomes an issue, they will limit the number of people who can pay for EBCI.

Though there is a chance parents and some "middle aged" kids may get separated, NO ONE will expect you to be seated away from an infant.

The reason I believe that they won't push family boarding back is that people do need to be able to sit with their kids 4 and under. If they pushed it back to the end, then they would have a bunch of small groups who really need to be together, as in your case with an infant, and would have to waste valuable time at the gate rearranging people. They aren't going to do that. Part of the whole SW 'LUV' is turning the planes around very quickly.

You're saying they're going to "lose a customer" and you haven't even had a problem yet.

 

[Avonlady1001]

They're losing me as a customer because of the way this was rolled out for one, and also because it's not worth the stress of it all to me. I know life isn't fair, but it just doesn't seem right to change the rules on people who've had their flights booked for months. When airlines add their fees, they usually add them on flights booked from x date forward...not on existing bookings. It would bother me less if SWA had done that...

I don't want to feel like this again, this anxiety & uneasiness...so I most likely won't be using them again. Now, if it's just me & DH flying (in a million years when we can vaca w/out kids ) and SWA has lower fares than the others, then maybe (never say never, I guess) cause it won't matter where we sit, but not w/ my kids. I'll pay a little more on another airline and guarantee my seats. I'd pay the $10 happily to SW if they assigned us a seat, or guaranteed something...but the way it is right now, I won't be flying my family on them.

We'll see what kind of changes they make in the future...I'm pretty sure it won't stay exactly like this.

Also, my anger in my response, I think is more directed to the other thread about this going on (maybe on the Family Board??)...I just read back a bunch of pages here & there are less of those heated responses on this thread. For that, I apologize.

And I hope you're right...that they won't separate the parents from their young children...but they're not exactly instilling my confidence in them right now. And listening to everyone's "what if's" isn't helping me any, either. I should stop reading...but I just can't tear myself away.

I'm sure this flight will go smoothly...I keep telling myself that. I am most definitely not the only one in this situation, that gives me some comfort. A lot of the parents w/ small children are experiencing the same feelings I am, I'm sure.

 

[bavaria]

Though there is a chance parents and some "middle aged" kids may get separated, NO ONE will expect you to be seated away from an infant.

And yet a large number of the 'angry' posts seem to think that the evil poopyheads are forcing parents to sit away from their very young children.

Perhaps it needs to be stated again and again, or people just need to read the facts and stop reacting with emotion for a moment.

 

[bicker]

They're losing me as a customer because of the way this was rolled out for one, and also because it's not worth the stress of it all to me.

However it is really important to draw a clear distinction between these two reasons. "How this was rolled out" affects about five months of eternity. After that five months is over, there is no real impact of how they rolled this out. I am not a Southwest Airlines fan, but if anyone thinks that this is substantially different from what every other major domestic carrier might do in a similar circumstance, then you haven't been reading this forum. This is way the industry operates. Sometimes they provide lots of advance notice of changes; sometimes they do not. They only time they generally do is when the law requires it, and even then, sometimes some of them glaze over that fact. This is a reflection of how our maniacal focus on the base fare has driven this industry, led of course by Southwest, but Southwest doesn't deserve any special blame for having brought about these kinds of service failings. Everyone bears equal blame (if there is any blame), all the airlines, and all the passengers. We did it together, and we are all just as much as fault (if there is any fault).

The stress? Gosh I can really resonate with that. This change absolutely makes cattle car boarding a lot more stressful. It's like painting mice into a corner. It isn't the first step, though. The whole A, B and C boarding pass structure painted off one corner, affecting people who preferred to arrive later and just rely on their ability to get into queue at boarding time to get a good seat. The whole issuing of boarding passes electronically, and having to call in at midnight to get an A boarding pass, painted off another corner, forcing people to jump through some more hoops to try to do the best for themselves. Moving family boarding to after the A boarding passes. And now paying for boarding priority, just more corners being painted off. Airline travel is stressful enough, I feel, even with assigned seating. I absolutely agree that this change substantially escalates the stress of boarding on Southwest Airlines.

 

[bookwormde]

I find both of the extreme “sides” of the argument to be equally reprehensible.

For those who feel “entitled” for some reason to have a specific seat which is not specified in the contract of carriage or other regulation well tough luck I view them as just being ignorant, now those who request and appreciate being afforded this consideration every reasonable effort should be made to accommodate them.

For the “I am not moving no matter what people”, it is just a shame that they lack any empathy and civility and are just “sad” people. They forget that for some people flying is not familiar or easy, and a familiar companion close by is very helpful (this applies not only to children but to some adults). Also from a safety point of view if you are sitting next to someone who may need assistance during an emergency you are expected to assist or the seating arrangements need to be changed.

The good news for those who worry is that there are still lots of us who will still adjust our seating if it helps another and SW’s crews are also very adept and effective at creating seating arrangements that are both safe and comfortable for all concerned. The change in boarding order will not change this.

bookwormde

 

[Mkrop]

I find both of the extreme “sides” of the argument to be equally reprehensible.

For those who feel “entitled” for some reason to have a specific seat which is not specified in the contract of carriage or other regulation well tough luck I view them as just being ignorant, now those who request and appreciate being afforded this consideration every reasonable effort should be made to accommodate them.

For the “I am not moving no matter what people”, it is just a shame that they lack any empathy and civility and are just “sad” people. They forget that for some people flying is not familiar or easy, and a familiar companion close by is very helpful (this applies not only to children but to some adults). Also from a safety point of view if you are sitting next to someone who may need assistance during an emergency you are expected to assist or the seating arrangements need to be changed.

The good news for those who worry is that there are still lots of us who will still adjust our seating if it helps another and SW’s crews are also very adept and effective at creating seating arrangements that are both safe and comfortable for all concerned. The change in boarding order will not change this.

bookwormde

Very good post

 

[bicker]

While I agree with you that an extreme position is bad, I think you're projecting an extreme position where one was not expressed. The folks who said that they wouldn't move said, specifically, that they wouldn't move out of a seat that they paid extra for into a seat that they wouldn't have paid extra for. If you paid extra for a mini-van for your family of four, to enjoy the extra space it afforded you, would you trade cars with your neighbor, a family of eight, because they had a sub-compact?

One other note concerning a distortion: While people are surely going to provide assistance to those nearby who need assistance in a critical emergency (I don't know where you got the idea that people wouldn't), the expectation you seem to be alluding to is actually very different from what you've tried to make it sound like: Passenger are implored to attend to their own needs first. That's all the airlines direct people to do. Then, after their own needs are attended to, if they choose to (and again, there is no reason to think that people will not wish to) they may seek to assist others. That's what that direction says.

 

[goofy4tink]

Can I just say one thing here??? Everyone, every single person, flying SW knows how boarding works. They all know that families are allowed to board inbetween A and B groups. But, now we have the EBCI...which will change things somewhat. We have no idea how just yet. BUT..if those of you, with families that need to board inbetween A and B, are that concerned with the possibility of not getting seated together, you have the option of paying the addtl $10 pp...just in case.
I'm getting tired of the whole 'I have to sit with my child no matter what' and 'no way am I giving up my seat' arguments. And yes, I fully realize that I'm one of those who have gone on the record as not giving up my seat. And I still feel that way. If seating is important to you, then you need to do what is necessary to be seated together. If that means paying an addtl amount, even after the initial booking, then so be it.

SW is going to have to do something to increase revenues. And that means we will most likely see a baggage fee down the road. Maybe not in the next 6 months but I'll bet that as soon as JB starts charging for that first bag, SW will offer one bag free, but charge for the second. And I, for one, am happy with that. Why? Simply because that way, it is up to each passenger to decide what is important to them....more bags, a better seat, a better flight time. All those things can change you fare. I fly JB frequently because I love that I can get a bag checked free of charge, and that the seating is a bit more spacious than other airlines, and that if I want to, I can book an even more spacious seat and pay a bit more. But, it's my choice.
SW still boards the way they do because they feel it works at this time....will they change? Who knows. I can see them charging more for A bp's down the road. In fact, I almost wonder if they are paving the way for this now, with the EBCI. I can see where they could charge an extra $15 per ticket to ensure an A BP. Of course, there would be a finite number of those seats. But heck, all airlines do that now.....just look at JB. They list '5 seats left at this price' all the time.

Here's hoping this doesn't turn into an argument as to who is more entitled to sit where they want to. If that happens, the thread is done. And I have to say that there is a lot of good info being given here. I would hate to lose that.

 

[bavaria]

One of the reasons why I stopped posting here is that it is almost impossible to have a rational, reasonable debate because there are so many people who get overly emotional, or don't read the facts, or resort to name calling and other juvenile behaviour.

Unfortunately this thread has deteriorated to this point, which is no surprise. There have been many parents over the years who have vehemently stated that they will NOT pay seat fees (and now boarding fees) yet they WILL demand that other people who did pay those fees move. They have said that they don't care that anyone may have a personal situation which precludes them from moving, and that they don't care that they did choose to pay extra for their seat.

Now we see the same comments with SW EB. Yet that group which feels the need to defend such behaviour then turns around and tries to mock the reasonable comments.

There may have been one or two people who said that they would not move out of a paid seat under any circumstance, but the vast majority over the years have tried to explain why they (or their child, or their parent, etc) cannot always move, and why they do choose to pay more for their seat.

Now those same reasoned posts are being accused of such vile behaviour as not helping other during an emergency. That came up here and on the 'other' thread. I can assure you having been in many emergency situations over the years that nobody knows how they may react, and often it is the children behaving better than the parents because children are taught to follow direction in school. Often it is the strangers doing better than a spouse to calm someone down.

I think that is very sad but very predicatable that yet again what could have been a reasonsed, compelling debate with factual information has been derailed into finger pointing and name calling and hyperbole by those who themselves have stated that they will behave badly.

Fortunately in real life people are not as entitled and judgemental as so many are here, or appear to be. Again, nobody knows what burdens someone else may be carrying, and to only care about yourself and your situation is selfish. So is assuming that your needs and your sitatuation take precedence over all others.

For those who feel that they need a certain seating arrangement, it makes sense to pay for a seat. For those who feel that they must ask others to move, politely requesting instead of demanding goes a lot further and usually has better results. And there may well be times when people say that they are unable to move, and they are certainly within their rights to do so.

My apologies to our esteemed moderator, but she knows well my feelings on this subject and why I chose to leave this website. Hopefully the discussion can continue in a reasonable fashion without the hyperbole and extremes shown by some posters, so that readers can try and learn. For those who just want the facts, again I strongly suggest moving to www.flyertalk.com for factual information about early boarding.

 

[Tara]

And yet a large number of the 'angry' posts seem to think that the evil poopyheads are forcing parents to sit away from their very young children.

I have to admit that "evil poopyheads" is extremely low on my list of "things I expect bavaria to say"!

or people just need to read the facts and stop reacting with emotion for a moment.

Wouldn't that be refreshing?

 

[safetymom]

Once again I totally stand behind you and your feelings. One of the things I learned very early when I started traveling was to not sweat the small stuff. If you do your homework and know the rules and how to handle your family your travel will be much easier and with no drama.

 

[bicker]

One of the reasons why I stopped posting here is that it is almost impossible to have a rational, reasonable debate because there are so many people who get overly emotional, or don't read the facts, or resort to name calling and other juvenile behaviour.

To be fair, not everyone wants to engage these types of issues from a rational, reasonable perspective. Let me draw a parallel to a situation where I find myself on the other side of the fence: My wife and I watch a lot of science fiction type shows. However, we don't really care for the hardcore science-techie stuff. Now, that criterion, "fiction grounded in reality," is a fundamental criterion many science fiction fans have, differentiated between "good" science fiction and "bad" science fiction. Strictly speaking, they're "correct" -- the stuff my wife and I like is "bad" according to their rational, reasonable criteria. However, what my wife and I care about is how much we enjoy what we are watching, and specifically not how believable it is with regard to fair standards. In that scenario (the context of what we like), we value our emotional (perhaps "overly" emotional) conclusion.

Of course, you know me. I fully respect the right of others to judge things, for themselves, based on their own criteria, as long as they don't seek to judge those things, for others, based on those criteria. More importantly, I don't claim that what I like is "right" and what I don't like is "wrong". That transform, from "like" to "right" and from "don't like" to "wrong" is where things get -- icky. It is a demonstration of overt disrespect for people who are just as reasonable but have different values. But I find I can just overlook it. I think your contributions here are very valuable, and I hope you can see your way to overlook these things as well, and stay with us.

 

[twinklebug]

Bicker, you just lost me.... are you saying SW might offer transporters to board people willing to pay $25 more?

 

[bicker]

Maybe, either that or perhaps we're seeing the dawn of transportation in stasis. Folks suspended like that can't whine about when they board.

 

[bavaria]

To be fair, not everyone wants to engage these types of issues from a rational, reasonable perspective.

There is a very great distance between someone saying 'please understand that there may be times when I (or someone else) is unable to give up my seat for which I paid' to claiming that that same person will refuse to help others during an emergency.

I cannot see how my contributions can be helpful in such an environment, when so many seem to resort to such extremes to make a point.