Travel with Children - No more early boarding for families on United Airlines

Just in case you needed another reason to avoid United Airlines......:)

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/story/2012-05-22/Parental-alert-United-drops-early-boarding-for-children/55143390/1?csp=Travel




http://pintsizepilot.com

I thought they got rid of that ages ago. I've been flying them for years and never get on early, even alone with three small children.

The video is not working well but my extra bag cost $70 (still cheaper than shipping anything these days abroad so worth it).

What is worse is this business of charging for certain seats. That's a mess for families. What a nightmare! I'll board with the rest but let me sit with my kids for crying out loud!

I thought they got rid of that ages ago. I've been flying them for years and never get on early, even alone with three small children.
You're correct; UA hasn't had preboarding for families (though I did see it in Japan) for years, so this is pretty much another inaccurate, stupid nonstory. CO did allow it though. Perhaps the story is that it's one of the few UA policies that remain for this airline.

What is worse is this business of charging for certain seats. That's a mess for families. What a nightmare! I'll board with the rest but let me sit with my kids for crying out loud!

You know, since you fly UA, that of course they charge more for E+ seats. It's hardy a "mess for families". Most of the seats are regular economy. All you have to do is choose seats together when you make a reservation. I don't understand why you always bring this up, when I know you are aware how it works.

Agree with rugrats (as usual) on both points. This is absolutely nothing new, and shouldn't be considered 'news'.

As to charging for E+, that has absolutely nothing to do with families at all. All passengers not eligible for E+ (which now includes UA Silvers until just before check in) are treated in the same fashion. There is no singling out of families.

Just as on many other carriers, if you want certain seats, you have to pay for them. At least E+ is a tangible difference, unlike on many carriers where there is no extra pitch/room for seats with a fee.

You know, since you fly UA, that of course they charge more for E+ seats. It's hardy a "mess for families". Most of the seats are regular economy. All you have to do is choose seats together when you make a reservation.

Exactly, the E+ seats can be reserved, just like Y or elsewhere. But if you watched the video in the link, you'll see that other airlines are now charging more for windows and aisles (as opposed to sitting in a whole section). That's what makes such a mess for families, since seats in random rows are being plucked out ahead of time. Like they said in the video, you can't ask someone whose paid more to change places to accommodate a family.

To me, this is far more a problem than not having pre-boarding.

The E+ are rows together. No one is paying more for a window or aisle (the extra fee is for the whole section) so families can be accommodated in any area, E+ or otherwise.

Imagine on a small aircraft, with rows of three on each side of one aisle, if people are paying to sit in those windows and aisles... that's most of the plane!

I don't understand why you always bring this up, when I know you are aware how it works.

I've never brought it up. I don't know why you said that (confused??) I've only talked about their lousy bulkhead policy but I'm all for giving FF's priority for exit rows (which have more legroom anyway).

That's what makes such a mess for families, since seats in random rows are being plucked out ahead of time. Like they said in the video, you can't ask someone whose paid more to change places to accommodate a family.

No one should be asking anyone to move to accommodate a family, anyway. The family should be worrying about itself, and if that means paying for seat assignments, then it means paying for seat assignments. There is no "can't" get seats in this whole situation, there's only "won't" in the sense of "won't" pay to do so. This kind of "won't" doesn't beget sympathy on my end. In fact, the something-for-nothing attitude bothers me greatly.

Is it crappy that the airlines are charging for various seats? Yep, but it's crappy for everyone, and families (which I have myself) are no more special or exempt than anyone else and shouldn't be treated as if they are at the expense of someone else.

This kind of "won't" doesn't beget sympathy on my end. In fact, the something-for-nothing attitude bothers me greatly.


Luckily most adults are more accommodating so it almost never ends up being a problem.

Cases like this are almost always due to last minute travel (e.g. grandma passed away) or an aircraft change (very common).

What is worse is this business of charging for certain seats. That's a mess for families. What a nightmare! I'll board with the rest but let me sit with my kids for crying out loud!

There is nothing new about charging for certain seats on many airlines! You have many airlines from which to chose; I think most of us can find one where we can get seats together with our families without having to pay. And if you can't, is it so terrible to pay say $15 each to get a window and aisle seat and a middle for free to sit 3 people together? Hardly a nightmare.

I would like to know what US airline charges for the majority of their window and aisle seats (excluding Spirit, which seems to charge for everything).

As for UA family boarding, it has not been their policy to do this anyway, so that article is much ado about nothing. I will say that I was on a UA LHR-IAD flight yesterday where they allowed families with children under 4 to pre-board (there weren't any). I have seen it happen occasionally in the US as well, but very rarely.

No one should be asking anyone to move to accommodate a family, anyway. The family should be worrying about itself, and if that means paying for seat assignments, then it means paying for seat assignments. There is no "can't" get seats in this whole situation, there's only "won't" in the sense of "won't" pay to do so. This kind of "won't" doesn't beget sympathy on my end. In fact, the something-for-nothing attitude bothers me greatly.

Is it crappy that the airlines are charging for various seats? Yep, but it's crappy for everyone, and families (which I have myself) are no more special or exempt than anyone else and shouldn't be treated as if they are at the expense of someone else.

Agreed.

I just deplaned from a flight which had preferred seating at a charge, or for elites only. That included the first row of Economy, the exit rows, and select aisles.

That type of charge impacts everyone who isn't elite, not just families. But everyone STILL has a choice:
- pay the fee
- choose the non-preferred seats (ie middle and window, or rows further back)
- choose another airline

In recent years it seems that a large, vocal group has made having children into something akin to having a disability. I think that really is a shame as it does impact how people think and react in real life.

When I see parents try and mow down elderly people to get ahead of them for priority boarding (often when families are not included in that classification), it really saddens me. But I do still see airlines which permit family boarding, and we have a thread on that subject with details.

In the end, we ALL have choices, and acting as if families are somehow subject to extra discrimination in regards to seating and boarding isn't a true reflection of what is happening.

Agreed.

I just deplaned from a flight which had preferred seating at a charge, or for elites only. That included the first row of Economy, the exit rows, and select aisles.

That type of charge impacts everyone who isn't elite, not just families. But everyone STILL has a choice:
- pay the fee
- choose the non-preferred seats (ie middle and window, or rows further back)
- choose another airline

In recent years it seems that a large, vocal group has made having children into something akin to having a disability. I think that really is a shame as it does impact how people think and react in real life.

When I see parents try and mow down elderly people to get ahead of them for priority boarding (often when families are not included in that classification), it really saddens me. But I do still see airlines which permit family boarding, and we have a thread on that subject with details.

In the end, we ALL have choices, and acting as if families are somehow subject to extra discrimination in regards to seating and boarding isn't a true reflection of what is happening.

Excellent post! ^

Agreed.
In the end, we ALL have choices, and acting as if families are somehow subject to extra discrimination in regards to seating and boarding isn't a true reflection of what is happening.

Totally agree.

One of those choices is whether to ensure contiguous seating by paying the fee or gambling on it and possibly losing. Either way, it was still a choice.

Even if the family is willing to pay, what if say, all the aisle or even all the window and aisle seats are already sold?? Is it really only a simple fact of paying for these seats?

That was my point. If all that's left are single middle seats down the middle of the plane, how are you supposed to seat a family together?

Even if the family is willing to pay, what if say, all the aisle or even all the window and aisle seats are already sold?? Is it really only a simple fact of paying for these seats?

That was my point. If all that's left are single middle seats down the middle of the plane, how are you supposed to seat a family together?

You aren't. Them's the breaks. You speak as if it's some forgone entitlement that there be seats together, and there isn't.

You aren't. Them's the breaks. You speak as if it's some forgone entitlement that there be seats together, and there isn't.
The thing is, the software managing seat assignments for airlines should be capable of being programmed to ensure that young children are not separated from their parents/guardians, whether that includes additional charges for 'premium' aisle/window seating during the reservation process or not. In the event that someone else's 3-year old is separated from their parents (for whatever reason) and assigned a middle seat next to you, should you be expected to accept responsibilty and liability for their safety in the event of an emergency? I would suggest that the answer to that question is no; however, some arrangement would have be found for situations such as this when they occur on board the aircraft to seat the dependent child with their parent.

Even if the family is willing to pay, what if say, all the aisle or even all the window and aisle seats are already sold?? Is it really only a simple fact of paying for these seats?

That was my point. If all that's left are single middle seats down the middle of the plane, how are you supposed to seat a family together?

You aren't. Them's the breaks. You speak as if it's some forgone entitlement that there be seats together, and there isn't.

^

What about a developmentally delayed adult travelling with someone? What about an elderly person travelling with someone? What about someone terrified to fly travelling with someone?

I have to agree that there is a sense of entitlement amongst some parents which shouts 'me me me' when in reality there are many other people in similar situations.

Again, we all make choices. If the seating map or airline policy doesn't meet your needs, make a different choice. I don't fly BA very often because of their policy, which favours families with small children. (Yet BA is often bashed here by parents, even though they take precedence over the rest of us on BA)

It really is that simple, so long as we stop only looking at ourselves and assuming that our needs take priority.

The thing is, the software managing seat assignments for airlines should be capable of being programmed to ensure that young children are not separated from their parents/guardians, whether that includes additional charges for 'premium' aisle/window seating during the reservation process or not. In the event that someone else's 3-year old is separated from their parents (for whatever reason) and assigned a middle seat next to you, should you be expected to accept responsibilty and liability for their safety in the event of an emergency? I would suggest that the answer to that question is no; however, some arrangement would have be found for situations such as this when they occur on board the aircraft to seat the dependent child with their parent.

That is a different situation, and not the topic of the original article. Seats being moved due to equipment change, or seat assignments disappearing, is different from parents not taking responsibility for ensuring seat assignments which meet their needs at the time of booking.

If you had booked 12A/B/C on AC and paid for those seats, and then they were moved, I would have sympathy for you. If however you booked a flight when the seat map showed only scattered non-preferred seats, and chose NOT to pay for preferred seats 12A/B/C, then I would have no sympathy at all if you came here to whinge about families being treated poorly by the airline. (There was a woman who did just that on the AC forum, and she was certainly told just that by many posters. She had a choice; she chose not to pay, then came and whinged about how poorly AC treated families)

Again, having children doesn't mean that you take precedence over the needs of every other passenger on board, just because you failed to take responsibility for your family at the time of booking. I often ask parents who refuse to pay for seat assignments why they think that strangers will think that their family is worth moving, if the parent didn't think that their family was worth the seating fee.

('You' used in the general sense and not the specific sense at any one poster)

Most of the British airlines won't allow seat selection at booking if they can't seat at least one parent with a child or will move families (as someone else found) and the CAA say on their website that children and parent's shouldn't be seated more than one row apart as a parent naturally heads straight for their child in the case of an emergency

I guess that a family could purchase a window, aisle and then get a middle seat and hope to trade them to sit together but what if all the aisles say, were bought?

I know some airlines block seats for families. We benefitted from this once with Lufthansa (our original flight went mechanical).

They could have a charge for seating families together. That might be a good solution, like a "block booking" fee for any group that wants to be together.

Just sounds like a headache for the ground staff. One thing to pay for for a specific section but individual seats sounds a mess. Think; taking volunteers in overbooking, no shows, etc. Not just inconveniencing families...

A US Senator is asking the US airlines not to charge a premium for getting seated next to their own children. He is also asking the DOT to come up with a rule to achieve much the same, on safety/security grounds:

http://news.yahoo.com/senator-asks-airlines-drop-seat-fee-kids-101349663.html

Does a US airline really want the litigation and/or PR nightmare related to a child being molested on board one of their flights where the parent was unable to get seated next to their own minor child ticketed for travel in the same cabin due to some airline practice?

Either way, I wouldn't want to become a babysitter for some stranger's child, and I welcome: (1) airline practices of allowing families with young children to board before I generally do; and (2) airlines doing what it takes to keep families with minor children seated together.

I've not been hit by more cabin "baggage" items in aisles than I've been hit by late-boarding families' diaper bags/duffel bags and car seats. Not to talk about the difficulty arising consequent to a family trying to deal with managing both the legitimately maximized cabin baggage allowance and the infants/toddlers upon boarding a rather full plane and moving down the aisle.

Never had such (hit with cabin baggage) problems when uniformed military personnel are boarding and yet the likes of United make it a big show of announcing that uniformed military personnel can board even before most of the airline's own 100k miles per year customers.

I guess that a family could purchase a window, aisle and then get a middle seat and hope to trade them to sit together but what if all the aisles say, were bought?


I'm pretty confident that one airplane isn't the ONLY airplane going from point A to point B EVER, so take a different flight that meets your needs. Your comment here implies that you believe that the family who wants that flight (probably for no reason other than the fact that it's cheaper :rolleyes: ) should bowl down the standing of anyone else on that flight because they have a "right" to get on that plane, too. Sure, they have a "right" to buy a ticket for it, but if they go in, eyes wide open, to a completely unsuitable situation (i.e., no appropriate seat blocks available because they've all been paid for already), then it's THEIR DOING. It really is that simple.

When I fly with my kids, I won't take book flight that uses 3-3 or 3-3-3 seating because I have 2 kids, and seating blocks of 3 don't work for us. (I know aircraft changes happen, but not generally on the long-haul international routes I fly.) If I have to pay a little more per person to ensure that we can sit in blocks of 2 or 4 without strangers sitting amongst us and without one parent being separated from the other one + 2 kids, I do it because that's what we need to make the flight successful for our family for flights as long as the ones we take most often.

Again, I don't support seat selection fees at all, for ANYONE. (I don't mind them holding front row for elites, etc. That seems plenty fair.) However, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I'm pretty confident that one airplane isn't the ONLY airplane going from point A to point B EVER, so take a different flight that meets your needs. Your comment here implies that you believe that the family who wants that flight (probably for no reason other than the fact that it's cheaper :rolleyes: ) should bowl down the standing of anyone else on that flight because they have a "right" to get on that plane, too. Sure, they have a "right" to buy a ticket for it, but if they go in, eyes wide open, to a completely unsuitable situation (i.e., no appropriate seat blocks available because they've all been paid for already), then it's THEIR DOING. It really is that simple..

Exactly. Responsible people will consider their options and do what is best for them. Responsible parents will do the same, and not assume that others will move (often from seats for which THEY chose to pay).

Again, what makes parents more important than everyone else on the flight? What about the elderly, the mentally challenged, the disabled, those who require an aisle seat for a physical reason, those who are terrified to fly, etc etc?

Most of us choose flights based on various factors. I happen to choose my flights based in part on the seat map, and in part due to the seating policy. I don't understand why some parents think that their needs are more important than my needs, when I take the time (and often the money) to ensure that my needs are met, but they cannot do the same for their family. I would never ask someone else to move for me, and especially not if I knowingly booked a flight that didn't meet my needs.

As to legislation, I don't agree at all. What is the age cutoff? The woman who complained here about AC had a twelve year old. Is that reasonable? Most airlines permit age 5 and up to fly as a UM. Look at what happened when BA assumed that all males are child molestors. And read the story from a FTer who WAS molested as a UM - by a woman.

In the end, nobody has the right to assume that they are more important than everyone else, and to fail to take responsibility for themselves because they expect others to make way for them.

Seating fees impact everyone, and everyone has a choice as to how they deal with it.

Sometimes these things aren’t the parents’ fault. There may be an equipment change, for example, or a missed connection. But often, families will book the cheapest airfare, where there are no pre-assigned seats, and figure it will work out, regardless of how much it annoys or puts out their fellow passengers. Other times, families will do everything possible to keep from forking over hundreds of dollars extra in seat-reservation fees for seats together. http://www.consumertraveler.com/today/7-way-to-keep-families-together-on-a-plane-without-going-broke/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tripso+%28Consumertraveler.co m%29

I thought they got rid of that ages ago. I've been flying them for years and never get on early, even alone with three small children.

You're correct; UA hasn't had preboarding for families (though I did see it in Japan) for years, so this is pretty much another inaccurate, stupid nonstory. CO did allow it though. Perhaps the story is that it's one of the few UA policies that remain for this airline.

Agree with rugrats (as usual) on both points. This is absolutely nothing new, and shouldn't be considered 'news'.


Just to clarify, pre-merger UA did not have family pre-boarding, but pre-merger CO did. As of March 3, 2012, UA implemented a new boarding procedure where families were allowed to board between groups 5 and 6. This was new for folks familiar with UA, but similar to the old CO policy. As of late May, they again redid the boarding procedures and did away with the family boarding between Premier/Premier Access and General boarding.

So the combined UA did have family pre-boarding for about 2 1/2 months. This is the change.

Also, I'm still wondering which airlines charge for aisle/window seats. Does that refer to US Airways-style seating where the choice window/aisle seats toward the front of the economy cabin cost money? Or are there airlines out there which charge for ALL window/aisle seats? Sounds like it's probably a case of shoddy journalism, where SOME window/aisle seats might incur a fee, but not all.

Sounds like it's probably a case of shoddy journalism, where SOME window/aisle seats might incur a fee, but not all.
I think that it is shoddy jounalism, meant to fan the flames of this age-old argument, and to encourage parents to voice their perceived entitlement.

As to which carriers charge, in North America I only use AC which charges for 'preferred' seats. These are generally the first row of the economy cabin, and exit rows, neither of which are really suitable or desirable for families anyway. Big mean evil AC! ;)

UA charges for E+, but I have absolutely no issue with a carrier charging for seats with more legroom.

Outside the US, bmibaby charges for extra legroom and/or guaranteed seat assignments, as does Vueling, and many other LCCs.

I actually like that they do charge, as I can pay and select the seat I want without having to worry about online checkin or fighting to get those few preferred seats.

Either way, I wouldn't want to become a babysitter for some stranger's child, and I welcome: (1) airline practices of allowing families with young children to board before I generally do; and (2) airlines doing what it takes to keep families with minor children seated together.

I've not been hit by more cabin "baggage" items in aisles than I've been hit by late-boarding families' diaper bags/duffel bags and car seats. Not to talk about the difficulty arising consequent to a family trying to deal with managing both the legitimately maximized cabin baggage allowance and the infants/toddlers upon boarding a rather full plane and moving down the aisle..

^^^^^ This.

To me, this isn't about entitlement but efficiency.

While some parents may exhibit a completely awful "entitled" attitude, the reality to me is that I'd rather parents with small children get on board with their hoards of stuff early on. My child is no longer young, so fortunately this is not an issue for me, but I do remember traveling with strollers & car seats, and it was a pain in the you know where, so I don't begrudge early boarding. I also don't begrudge early boarding of anyone else with special needs. To me, this just makes sense. Get the slow people on so they won't hold up the line later for the rest of us.

I also don't want to babysit someone else's child, and trying to keep them with their family is a reasonable thing. I am surprised at the lack of support for that here.

One time when I booked a flight, there were no two seats together, not even economy plus type of seats, and the other flights would not work for our schedule, nor would first class prices. Fortunately, I know enough to keep checking seat assignments & something opened up the day of the flight, but what if something didn't turn up or I didn't know to keep checking? I would have hoped that a kind soul would swap with us - not expected but graciously appreciated.

Just as a data point, my wife and three kids flew Delta a month ago and they went out of their way both to preboard them and to switch folks around so they could sit together. They could not have been more pleasant.

I'm feel sorry for all you grumpy, old, kid-haters out there... ;)

I'm feel sorry for all you grumpy, old, kid-haters out there... ;)

Or rather people don't 'hate kids', but dislike people who display an entitled attitude and believe that they come before everyone else. :rolleyes:

I have had many times where families preboarded and poached my seats. That is one more reason why I do think that some people try and take advantage of preboarding - to take seats they prefer away from those who already selected those seats, in hopes perhaps that the other passenger will avoid confrontation.

^^^^^ This.

To me, this isn't about entitlement but efficiency.

Exactly my thoughts about this matter -- it's about efficiency and reduced inconvenience to the general passenger population.

To the airline(s), this kind of change is about another way to try to increase the amount of money collected from passengers beyond the money already collected for the ticketed fare.

I'm no fan of seat poachers or cabin baggage bin hogs exceeding the airline-wanted-government-approved cabin baggage allowances, but families with young children are no more the culprit than adult couples or solo adult passengers.

You aren't. Them's the breaks. You speak as if it's some forgone entitlement that there be seats together, and there isn't.

And I bet you'd be the first to complain if you were seated in an aisle seat next to a solo child in a middle seat. :rolleyes:

I guess that a family could purchase a window, aisle and then get a middle seat and hope to trade them to sit together but what if all the aisles say, were bought?

I know some airlines block seats for families. We benefitted from this once with Lufthansa (our original flight went mechanical).

They could have a charge for seating families together. That might be a good solution, like a "block booking" fee for any group that wants to be together.

Just sounds like a headache for the ground staff. One thing to pay for for a specific section but individual seats sounds a mess. Think; taking volunteers in overbooking, no shows, etc. Not just inconveniencing families...


I don't see why there should be a charge for seating families together when there isn't a charge for seating 2 adults together.

I don't see why there should be a charge for seating families together when there isn't a charge for seating 2 adults together.

Except that most families consist of more people but that's a point. Charging for windows and aisles forces couples to purchase at least one of these "premium" seats to be together on planes with one aisle and three seats on each side (which describes a lot of short and medium haul fleets). While most couples can handle sitting apart much better than a toddler and a parent, it's still kind of cheap to force people to do this. Think honeymooners or anniversary celebrators...

Our airline told us at a marketing meeting that 80% of passengers travel in pairs so this would be a huge money-maker, setting entirely aside family situations.

Except that most families consist of more people but that's a point. Charging for windows and aisles forces couples to purchase at least one of these "premium" seats to be together on planes with one aisle and three seats on each side (which describes a lot of short and medium haul fleets). While most couples can handle sitting apart much better than a toddler and a parent, it's still kind of cheap to force people to do this. Think honeymooners or anniversary celebrators...



I believe the topic of this thread is that UA does not allow early boarding for families. It is not about airlines that charge for seat selection. It is not about people on their honeymoons or people celebrating anniversaries.

Since UA does not charge families or anyone else to select seats this discussion is irrelevant. UA does not make you pay to chose an aisle or a window seat. There is no need to pay for seat selection on UA. Just choose flights where there are available seats for you to sit with your child.

With the CO/UA merger, you should have no trouble doing so.

When allowed to pre board with family, we always waited until everyone left the airplane upon arrival before packing up the car seat, etc. and deplaning (with one exception of a very tight connection).

When not allowed to pre board, we always got up upon bell ring at the end of the flight, even if it meant blocking the aisle for an extra 45 seconds, to deplane our own family as fast as possible (unless the FAs asked all to remain seated to allow others with tight connections get off first).

I understand that I may not be typical, but I always made sure our family followed this rule as a matter of principle.

And I bet you'd be the first to complain if you were seated in an aisle seat next to a solo child in a middle seat. :rolleyes:
Not at all, actually. I quite like kids. I've got two little ones of my own, ages 2 and 4. :)

I believe the topic of this thread is that UA does not allow early boarding for families. It is not about airlines that charge for seat selection.

Yes it is. If you look at the start of the thread, the link provided talking about seat selection and how it's inconvenient for families.

I believe the topic of this thread is that UA does not allow early boarding for families. It is not about airlines that charge for seat selection.

Yes it is. If you look at the start of the thread, the link provided talking about seat selection and how it's inconvenient for families.
I think the point is that the article is misleading.

UA does not charge for individual aisle and window seats, so it's irrelevant in the context of UA doing away with family pre-boarding. UA does charge for Economy Plus, but that is a small section of the aircraft and a completely different concept from charging for aisle/window seats.

If you would like to discuss the aisle/window charge and the negative effects on families and other travelers, I agree that a new thread is warranted.

I think the point is that the article is misleading.

UA does not charge for individual aisle and window seats, so it's irrelevant in the context of UA doing away with family pre-boarding. UA does charge for Economy Plus, but that is a small section of the aircraft and a completely different concept from charging for aisle/window seats.

If you would like to discuss the aisle/window charge and the negative effects on families and other travelers, I agree that a new thread is warranted.

+1

I witnessed (again) a situation in UA related to this topic this week, whether family boarding, or paying for seats. Upthread I said that family boarding can lead to seat poaching.

A mother with two children preboarded my UA flight. The GA half-heartedly tried to tell her that she was not permitted to board, but the mother claimed needing extra time.

Mother and children sat in the first row of E+, and boarding continued. Apparently their actual seats were 3 middles near the back, including the last row (which UA often blocks off in case of these situations) Two of the passengers who had seats in row 7 apparently confronted her, but gave up and took middle seats. The woman in 7D did not give up. (7D is arguably the best seat in Economy on a UA Airbii) The FA's tried to convince the mother to be reseated, or to take other seats, but she refused to move out of row 7.

The FA had the passenger from 7D move into the galley (directly in front of my seat) until things were resolved. The woman was very calm and quiet, and said that she was empathetic for a mother and chidren, but that she had paid $150 for E+ access to meet her particular needs. She was severely claustrophic, had booked months in advance, and had paid for a seat which met her needs. To move from 7D to the last row, middle seat, non recline for a 5,5 hour flight was not acceptable, especially as she had paid a signficant amount for E+.

The purser finally asked the pilot to intervene, and his response was 'move the family'. Since that wasn't going to happen, ground staff was called. A manager arrived (the crew later said to me that he didn't work for UA or former CO, and was an airport staff member) The manager didn't understand the situation, thought that the woman from 7D had been assigned a middle seat, and was trying to dislodge the family from their rightful seats. His response was for her to 'take her seat'. The woman tried to explain that she wanted to do exactly that, but he cut her off. Then he announced over the PA that he would buy a drink for someone who would take a 'lesser seat' for this woman, but that they would have to give up their aisle seat for a back row middle seat.

Of course there were no volunteers, and he finally told the woman to deplane, and that she could fly 'in the next few days'. There was no offer of IDB or VDB, no hotel offered, no guarantee of a flight. The woman asked who would reimburse her E+ fee, and she was cut off with a threat that if she didin't deplane now, the police would be called to remove her.

During this conversation, 3 FAs, the purser, and the pilot were all visibly upset, and whispering 'this isn't right' and 'it isn't her fault'. When the threat of police was made, the pilot intervened, and thanked the manager and told him it would be handled. The woman burst into tears, and redfaced walked to the last row middle seat. Several people heckled or booed as they thought that she was the reason for the delay. After takeoff, we were advised that due to the lengthy delay there was no fresh food service on the 5,5 hour flight.

I did offer up my F meal for her (admittedly not a hardship as I wouldn't eat it anyways), and the purser gave the crew instructions to give her anything she needed complimentary, and to take care of her.

None of you will be able to convince me that this was handled well, or that the woman did anything wrong, or was somehow to blame. At OLCI, there were about 1/3 seats free in E, including seats together. I was in the gate area for about 25 minutes before boarding, and did not see the mother speak to the GA. Perhaps she thought that UA is like WN, and didn't realise that she in effect committed theft of service (UA crew often used to ask seat poachers how they would be paying for the E+ seat they poached, and on more than one occassion I had a passenger be threatened that they would have to move or pay on landing)

In the end I wrote to support the crew, but also to try and ensure the woman has her E+ fee refunded. UA has a 'no refunds' policy for E+, and I suspect that the manager filed a report making her out to be the issue, when in this case it was absolutely the mother (and in this case not the airline either) who was at fault.

Apologies for the long post, but I myself was the woman in 7D in past, and have experienced similar situations several times. Perhaps some of the parents who think that they are in the right will understand why sometimes the behaviour of some parents influences how some of us feel about this topic.

The FA's tried to convince the mother to be reseated, or to take other seats, but she refused to move out of row 7.


That's outrageous! UA should have called the Police and had her arrested. Taze her and cuff her if she won't move, and drag her off the plane. Put the kids in foster care.

And no, I'm not being sarcastic.

That poor woman who was forced to deplane or take a cheaper seat! The passengers on the plane should make every effort to contact her and agree to be witnesses if she decides to sue UA and the ground crew. If this happened to me, it would take at least $5 Million before I felt whole again.

when in this case it was absolutely the mother (and in this case not the airline either) who was at fault.

It absolutely was the airline that was at fault. Doesn't the Captain have ultimate authority? He could have simply called Law Enforcement and said "get this woman and her two kids off this plane or I won't take off." That woman is unstable, suspicious, and should NOT have been allowed to fly.

I did chat with the crew about this (again, I was not personally involved, but had so many people in front of and next to me during this dispute that it was impossible to avoid overhearding) I pointed out that for the woman to obtain a refund of E+ may be difficult after the fact. I also looked for the woman at baggage claim but never saw her again. As a non-elite, she may not have had the resources to know what to do in terms of follow up (and at the moment even we 1K's are being ignored or have very lengthy wait times to have our issues addressed)

If all 3 passengers request a refund (apparently at least one more paid), then UA would refund $450. But they lose the revenue, and the mother and children in effect got the seats for free.

When E+ was first introduced, there was a lot of discussion here about seat poaching, and enforcement.

I really wish that someone had at least told the mother than she could stay in those seats, but that a $450 charge would apply.

Why should the airline lose revenue, and the passenger be subjected to such a situation, because someone felt that they were entitled to cause this situation?

I witnessed (again) a situation in UA related to this topic this week, whether family boarding, or paying for seats. Upthread I said that family boarding can lead to seat poaching.

What a horrible story. If I were the woman, I would sue United, the Manager (who ever he was), and the mother, both for humiliating her and for fraud/theft.

Why should the airline lose revenue, and the passenger be subjected to such a situation, because someone felt that they were entitled to cause this situation?

Simply because, in the end, it was the airline's choice. They could have threatened the poacher, but they allowed the easier solution of threatening the woman whose seat was stolen. COdbaUA essentially stole the money from the three passengers and gave it to the poachers. I would be shocked if they got their money refunded, as there is almost no chance that the situation was properly documented (it was in no one's interest to do so).

I did chat with the crew about this (again, I was not personally involved, but had so many people in front of and next to me during this dispute that it was impossible to avoid overhearding) I pointed out that for the woman to obtain a refund of E+ may be difficult after the fact. I also looked for the woman at baggage claim but never saw her again. As a non-elite, she may not have had the resources to know what to do in terms of follow up (and at the moment even we 1K's are being ignored or have very lengthy wait times to have our issues addressed)

If all 3 passengers request a refund (apparently at least one more paid), then UA would refund $450. But they lose the revenue, and the mother and children in effect got the seats for free.

When E+ was first introduced, there was a lot of discussion here about seat poaching, and enforcement.

I really wish that someone had at least told the mother than she could stay in those seats, but that a $450 charge would apply.

Why should the airline lose revenue, and the passenger be subjected to such a situation, because someone felt that they were entitled to cause this situation?

It's too late now, but if you had the woman's contact info, you could have suggested that if UA refused to refund her money, she could (and should) file in small claims court for a refund.

What a horrible story. If I were the woman, I would sue United, the Manager (who ever he was), and the mother, both for humiliating her and for fraud/theft.

The "mother" stole from the airline, not from this poor woman, so that argument is weak.

Damaging one's reputation and duress are not things that you can sue for in small claim's court, and it's not likely you'd get someone to take it on contingency. But one of these day's United's going to push around someone with the time, patience and money to pay for attorneys simply on principle.

I believe that based on stories in the media over the past few years (as well as thanks to internet message boards and blogs), there is a fear of creating a situation where the mother could be in the media spotlight.

'Mother with two babes was offloaded by the evil airline' makes for a far better story and earns more sympathy and hits than 'woman didn't like her seat and made a fuss and the plane was late'. Unfortunately I do believe that this comes into play, and is part of the decision making in these situations.

exbayern - Shame on those gutless UA employees! :mad:

If I had been that poor woman, you would have had to drag me off that flight in handcuffs.

The worst was the 'manager'. His parting shot to the purser was 'Welcome to summer. This is going to happen every day, and I'm not coming to save you. Grow a spine.' I did keep saying 'but it's not her FAULT!' and while several FAs were nodding and muttering the same thing with me, we were ignored. All that the manager wanted to hear was 'disruptive passenger is trying to get a better seat and steal from the poor little family'. Let's face it: several of us have seen and read posts over the years which do try and turn situations like this into airlines being 'anti-family' or discriminatory towards families.

I think that the crew was really trying to balance empathy for the parent with being firm, but in the end everyone seemed scared of the mother. We all know what can happen in these situations; the mother runs to the media, the airline is painted as the big bad airline, there are thousands of links to the story on travel fora, and other parents sit back smugly and say that is just proof of how the airlines treat families unfairly. :rolleyes:

I still think that a 'solution' would have been to charge her $450 for those seats, but if nobody else would give up seats, then they still would have had a negative situation.

In the end, how long does the plane wait at the gate whilst entitled parents delay every single person on board? In this case it was almost an hour. And who is responsible then for missed connections?

The mother wins all around. She got her seats for free, extra legroom, made the other passenger look like the 'bad guy', and most passengers were none the wiser for the real story.

You aren't. Them's the breaks. You speak as if it's some forgone entitlement that there be seats together, and there isn't.

I am dealing with right now. We are military and have been assigned our flight leaving Hawaii. Hawaiian Airlines only assigns 60% of their seats until 24 hours prior (according to them). We do not have a choice to choose our seats, trust me, if I could I would. I am freaking out about it. As a parent, why would I want to have my children not seated with me? My five year old little girl (who is also speech delayed) is not going to sit next to strangers for 6 hours without me next to her. It is weird. Even if I was traveling by myself, that would make me feel uncomfortable having to sit next to a young child that is not mine. We are paying probably a steeper price for our tickets (because they are refundable) yet, I cannot get seats assigned? And yes, I will be that parent that will make the FA ask others to move to make it work. I would be happy if they could just guarantee that one kid sits next to one parent. They won't even do that.

Just food for thought for others who may think that "those" parents didn't pay for seats together, as that is not always the case. It is not asking that much to have at least one parent sit next to one child.

I
Just food for thought for others who may think that "those" parents didn't pay for seats together, as that is not always the case. It is not asking that much to have at least one parent sit next to one child.

YOU may be dealing with it differently, but that poster responded to posts on this thread and in other threads where parents absolutely refuse to pay to ensure that they sit next to their child on carriers which charge for all seat assignments, and act as if the select seats available at a price on other carriers somehow discriminate only against families.

In your situation
- keep checking for seats online
- be aware of when the carrier upgrades their elites (if they do) and check at the 96/72/48 hour etc mark
- check in online at the 24 hour mark
- if you still cannot get two seats together, select decent seats ie aisles far forward to use to trade. Nobody will want a middle in the back, so don't use that to trade for a better seat
- if that still fails (and chances are slim) then arrive early at the airport - ie at least 3 hours early
- ask at the check in counter
- if that fails, ask at the gate

Barring irregular ops and last minute aircraft changes, the chances of following all those steps and still having seats apart are very, very slim.

But there are many parents who don't follow that advice, and just assume that because they have children the world will move for them. The reality is that it won't, and one has to plan ahead and do all one can to ensure that the outcome is positive. (And frankly, some may ask you why you knowingly booked the tickets if you couldn't ensure seats together, if it was such a major concern. I don't book certain flights if I cannot ensure a seat assignment which 'works' for me, and I would hope that others do the same)

Thanks for the tips. I am sure it will work out. It is just stressful worrying about something that really shouldn't even be an issue in the grand scheme of things. To me it just creates the opportunity for more problems. Problems not just for myself but for other passengers as well. It drives me nuts not having any control over it (Unfortunately, we don't book it ourselves...I wish we could and it wouldn't even be an issue).

I am dealing with right now. We are military and have been assigned our flight leaving Hawaii. Hawaiian Airlines only assigns 60% of their seats until 24 hours prior (according to them). We do not have a choice to choose our seats, trust me, if I could I would. I am freaking out about it. As a parent, why would I want to have my children not seated with me? My five year old little girl (who is also speech delayed) is not going to sit next to strangers for 6 hours without me next to her. It is weird. Even if I was traveling by myself, that would make me feel uncomfortable having to sit next to a young child that is not mine. We are paying probably a steeper price for our tickets (because they are refundable) yet, I cannot get seats assigned? And yes, I will be that parent that will make the FA ask others to move to make it work. I would be happy if they could just guarantee that one kid sits next to one parent. They won't even do that.

Just food for thought for others who may think that "those" parents didn't pay for seats together, as that is not always the case. It is not asking that much to have at least one parent sit next to one child.

as someone with kids, if I was traveling alone and had paid $150 beans, I'm not going to give up my seat either even if you are scattered throughout the plane, sorry, just a'int happenin

on the story, what I don't get is I presume that she had a boarding pass she could show, wouldn't that have been easy? if the cops came, what would they do, they would ask whats the issue? I am guessing the crime is not listening to the flight crew right? but she was not violating any flight crew instructions or was she?

the cops probably would have straightened this out a lot better than the crew

I'm not going to give up my seat either even if you are scattered throughout the plane, sorry, just a'int happenin

Say that again, after they offer you an upgrade lol! ^

as someone with kids, if I was traveling alone and had paid $150 beans, I'm not going to give up my seat either even if you are scattered throughout the plane, sorry, just a'int happenin

on the story, what I don't get is I presume that she had a boarding pass she could show, wouldn't that have been easy? if the cops came, what would they do, they would ask whats the issue? I am guessing the crime is not listening to the flight crew right? but she was not violating any flight crew instructions or was she?

the cops probably would have straightened this out a lot better than the crew

There have been many reports on FT and in the media over the past few years of UA crew reacting very strongly and what many see as going overboard in situations of 'security'. In this case, I didn't see a single member of the onboard crew who reacted that way, but we on the UA forum collectively know of at least one UA crew member who has behaved rather irrationally in past. (He once 'reported' me to another crew member for 'looking at him', which was quite difficult to avoid considering that I was in row 1, and he was in the jump seat across from me. :rolleyes: )

The manager who came on board refused to listen to any of the crew. He made up his own mind. I could well see that situation continuing in that fashion, if he called for the police. And I suspect that the goal was to get the 'problem' off the plane as quickly as possible, so as to depart with as little additional delay as possible.

Had one of the more unusual UA crew been on board, things could have ended very differently, meaning that the rightful occupant of the seat could have found herself in trouble with the police.

And again I will point out that I was apparently the only passenger who was on side with her; most people if they did react heckled her, or jeered, or muttered that she was causing us such a delay.

7D is my favorite seat in Premium Economy, but I don't book it anymore because I've been asked to displace myself "for a family" too many times.

Just in case you needed another reason to avoid United Airlines......:)



I'm a Delta guy and this would be a reason for me to switch :) I'm tired of being behind every single family with 'children' cleary not in need of extra time to board...

I'm a Delta guy and this would be a reason for me to switch :) I'm tired of being behind every single family with 'children' cleary not in need of extra time to board...

Last four DL departure at US airport the announcement was parents only with child under two. I have seen family with older children turned away as well as an entourage of 8 following one stroller.

Last four DL departure at US airport the announcement was parents only with child under two. I have seen family with older children turned away as well as an entourage of 8 following one stroller.

Thats why I put children in quotes...they say over the PA "under 2" but it seems like just about every single parent, some with teens, line up and preboard with little or no problem - maybe I'm just having bad luck lately!

7D is my favorite seat in Premium Economy, but I don't book it anymore because I've been asked to displace myself "for a family" too many times.

That is my favourite seat too on a UA Airbii, and I too am often 'requested' to MOOOOVE! :rolleyes: I still take that seat however. A few weeks ago on AC I saw a mother with two school age children do this in row 12 (the first row on AC in Economy, as apparently Canadians can't count ;) ), and since those seats come at a price to non-elites on AC I was shocked that people gave in to her.

Thats why I put children in quotes...they say over the PA "under 2" but it seems like just about every single parent, some with teens, line up and preboard with little or no problem - maybe I'm just having bad luck lately!

There is a thread here about 'big kid' boarding, and it never fails to astound me when parents with older 'kids' push ahead of everyone including the elderly etc. If the youngest 'kid' in the family is wearing heavy makeup and a bra, I don't think that they fall into that category anymore.

LH generally goes around the boarding area and tries to seek out those needing help. Often they select people who didn't even ask or want help, and didn't try and push ahead of people. Once in HK someone from AC actually did that to me; I must have looked pretty awful at the time because he came to seek me out in the boarding area for early boarding for those with special needs. :o

7D is my favorite seat in Premium Economy, but I don't book it anymore because I've been asked to displace myself "for a family" too many times.
I've been "asked," and the answer is no.

Anyway, United is not a "family friendly" airlines.
I travelled with my chid at Continental Airliens. Their services are much better than United.

The 'new' UA IS CO with the UA name. The vast majority of policies and procedures are CO-inspired.

And many people in fact aren't looking for, or don't want, a 'family friendly airline'. But I am genuinely curious as to what you define as family friendly?

Anyway, United is not a "family friendly" airlines.
I travelled with my chid at Continental Airliens. Their services are much better than United.

I think their new policy (if they'd implement it as written) is very "family friendly." It certainly helps our family (married Global Service level, no kids).