Should Airline Employees Get to Fly First Class for ‘Free’?
Sarah Steegar March 23, 2016
Woman reading newspaper on airplane. Female traveler reading seated in passanger cabin. Sun shining trough airplane window.
It’s hard to even know where to start with this one. Ben Schlappig over at the One Mile at a Time blog asked a fiery question this week: should airline employees be able to fly first class for free? Besides my feeling that the perks granted to employees by their employer are not the business of clients and those outside the company, I can hardly imagine a question better designed to pit those groups against each other. While it is nice to note that Mr. Schlepping says he ultimately has no problem with employees traveling in first class (FC), we need to talk about his “concerns” and those of many commenters.
While I have attempted to clear up many non-revenue space available (NRSA) travel myths before, I see a stubborn one hanging around. Let me be clear: employees are not taking your premium seats (not customer facing/front line employees anyway, a point I’ll come back to).
NRSAs do not bump paying passengers, period.* What you could see, occasionally, is a seat that was granted as an upgrade but the passenger doesn’t show. It is then up to the agent if they pull someone from coach or just board the non-rev. This is a practical decision based mostly on getting the flight out on time, not inconveniencing you and not to “put friends” up front.
Take notice of times when Premium seats go empty. Those are flights with no, or not enough, NRSAs who want to sit there (as some have to pay a premium) yet the airline still does not put non-qualifying passengers in them. This is one illustration of the face we are simply not in competition.
Let’s talk about “diluting the product,” which seems to be Mr. Schlepping’s main concern, as it is for many commenters. I have a couple of issues with this.
The claim that “empty seats” in BC/FC would better justify the investment of airlines? Um, nope. Empty seats are never a good investment. 🤔
— Sarah Steegar (@FATravelWriter) March 19, 2016
He talks about his preference for empty seats in the cabin. It’s nicer. It’s more exclusive. It “make[s] the investment more justifiable.” No, it does not. Empty seats are never a good investment for an airline. Not for a “more exclusive cabin” (already achieved by fewer seats), certainly not for employees. Regularly empty seats means your cabin disappears. The “investment” action is that those seats will be removed and the space allocated to where it can be sold – which is why “true” first class is already a rarity.
This is because although he likes unoccupied seats around them, it’s not what he pays for. Just like every other passenger, one ticket pays for one seat – a bigger one, but not the ones around him. The way to get empty seats is to fly private.
Also, if we’re going to go down that path, I use “pay” liberally. In the U.S., few first class passengers paid full fare to be there. An educated guess says that Mr. Schlapping himself is placed there due to qualifying via mileage reward or his particular profession. For those that do pay full fare, perhaps his upgrade is a “perk” he shouldn’t deserve or one that dilutes a paying customer’s exclusivity.
One commenter on my Facebook page pointed out that opponents of NRSA premium travel are holding first class “to a higher standard than [other luxury products] where of course staff enjoy discounts on premium products.” Does allowing employees of luxury brands access to the product also detract from your experience by diluting the exclusivity?
Some commenters said they would like those seats to go to otherwise non-qualifying passengers over employees. People express concern that allowing employees up front dilutes the product but don’t see a problem with their idea of upgrading passengers who otherwise didn’t qualify. The justification doesn’t work.
How about the argument that a full cabin itself dilutes the service? That’s an issue of staffing – an issue we fight all the time. Again, empty seats aren’t the solution. When the cabin is light, a crew member is reallocated to the back, if not cut altogether. Happens all the time.
Lastly, we have alleged bad-NRSA-behavior threaded through most of those arguments. People claim this isn’t a class issue, but there seem to be many under the impression that we, as a whole category of workers, are incapable of acceptable behavior. Basically, some people want to remove the only perk most of an industry’s employees have because “this one time I had…” stories. Meanwhile, keep a couple things in mind:
1. Bad passenger behavior has zero relation to how much one paid for the ticket. I know because I live this.
If those pax think that inappropriate behaviour on planes is down to NRSA travelers, they are on a whole ‘nother freaking planet.
— Sarah Steegar (@FATravelWriter) March 19, 2016
2. Overall, bad travel behavior is not primarily the result of employees. There will always be random examples of someone not following all the rules, but if NRSAs misbehave on a flight, we risk losing our travel privileges. That’s a lot more than most passengers risk by misbehaving. Airlines take non-rev behavior seriously. These are ways to bring it to their attention and entire departments dedicated to monitoring travel and disciplining pass abuse, misbehavior and infractions.
On a final note, I come back to my “front line” employees remark above. I say this because you’re right: some non-revs can be seat competition. Certain management levels, of course, have travel privileges that are different from ours, which can, in fact, bump you out of those first class seats whenever they want. I mention this because it is a significant but totally overlooked distinction in the debate. So I wonder: for the passengers who feel airline employees dilute the product, don’t deserve the privilege, and can’t be trusted to behave appropriately … does that hold for all non-revs, or just the type who are only eligible for the leftover seats?
* Do not confuse NRSA with deadheaders, who are on duty and are sometimes, depending on the airline and situation, a different matter. They are not necessarily in uniform.
[Photo: Getty Images]
I have no problem with non-revs sitting in First. If that other Y seat could be given to a paying customer then more business for the airline and more service for me in the future. Obviously with the disclaimer that priority be given to paying customers which is what happens (from what I've seen) anyway.
@aristotled Oh please a lawsuit? First off, you'd be entitled to IDB and/or reroute. Secondly for operational purposes an airline can and will bump revenue passengers which accounts for most if, not all situations whereby an airline employee (usually classified as 'must-ride' would be taking a seat). Its listed within the contract of carriage; don't you think that everytime that happened that a lawsuit would be filed if it really had any basis? That's why there are clear regulations governing IDB. But more to the point that Sarah made, it was (at least the way I read it) there is a hierarchy within NRSA priority whereby employees listed for seats can basically be bumped out of those seats by someone with higher boarding priority. @jonsg In theory upgrading passengers into empty seats to drive extra business works in bringing customer loyalty factor....until said customer who know starts booking on airline in question notices that either 1) he never has to pay the premium for First/Business because he will just get upgraded, or 2) begins to wonder why other passengers are getting upgraded instead of him which will then result in passenger thinking airline doesn't value his business and will jump to another carrier. And the one thing that EVERYONE seems to forget regarding PRSA/NRSA/jumpseaters etc....in a way they really are paying passengers whether its the employee paying travel fees or the cost to the airline associated with an occupied seat. Sure you can make the argument that non-revs shouldn't get priority over paying passengers, but I don't get why there is so much angst against nonrevs. Perhaps if the people arguing against were nonrevs stuck in a middle seat 90% of the time they would feel a little differently.
Quick question, Sarah: Are NRSAs given the same non-seat perks of flying F/J as "paying" (including upgraded) customers? I remember overhearing a FA tell a non-rev sitting behind me in business that she wouldn't be getting a meal (flight wasn't catered for "extras") to which the non-rev quickly replied, "Oh, of course, I know." It made me wonder what the standard treatment is w/r/t access to those non-seat amenities: food, drink, amenity kits, etc. Although I don't agree with Ben's perspective (especially since he is gaming the system and doesn't pay for any of those upgrades, so it's not like he really has ground to stand on), the idea of "diluting the experience" could indeed be the case if FAs get used to mostly serving the relatives of coworkers instead of the businessperson who spent several thousand dollars on the ticket.
Interesting. I am a top tier flier. I think you completely misunderstood what Ben was saying. Which leads me to believe that you are, in fact, biased. He was not saying what you accused him of saying at all. But one thing you said really alarms me... The thought that you wrote: "Certain management levels, of course, have travel privileges that are different from ours, which can, in fact, bump you out of those first class seats whenever they want." is absolutely absurd! If I get bumped as a top of the elite status because of a mere employee, no matter what his status, there will be a lawsuit! That will NOT happen, EVER! And furthermore, mere employees of airlines are not to be considered even CLOSE to the airline's clients. They are employees and serve the employers clients. You need to get over yourself pronto. Your take is skewed to an anti client bent and you need to be corrected. NOW! If your employer has not disciplined you yet, then they very well SHOULD... NOW! Your take is unacceptable!
Should restaurant employees get free meals? Should I get my taxes done for free because my wife works at an accounting firm? If the employer offers the benefit than great. If the seat isn't sold for revenue than the airline should be able to do with it as they see fit. Upgrades are not a right.