UA President Defends Charging Fees for Families to Sit Together: “That’s What We Do”
Jeff Edwards August 29, 2018
UA President Defends Charging Fees for Families to Sit Together: “That’s What We Do”
This week, in a wide-ranging interview, United Airlines President Scott Kirby told Skift that charging a fee to allow parents to sit with their children is justified. The airline executive noted that nearly all types of consumer businesses charge extra for what is arguably a “better product,” saying “I don’t know why airlines are unique.”
United Airlines President Scott Kirby stopped short of endorsing airline policies that can sometimes result in parents being forced to sit apart from children during flights, but in a recent interview, he suggested that whether consumers are flying on a commercial airline or attending a public performance, the free-market system is built on just this sort of tradeoff. Kirby indicated that families who want to sit together will continue to have plenty of opportunities to do so – as long as they are willing to pay a little extra.
When prompted about United Airlines fare structures that “make it tough for families to sit next to each other without paying extra fees,” in an interview with Skift published just this week, the airline executive responded with a less than empathetic sounding analogy.
“Look, when you go to a concert, do you think you should pay the same price to sit in the nosebleed seats or to sit up front?” Kirby asked in response. “I don’t know why airlines are unique. Every other business that has something like that charges more for a better product. It’s a better product. You know it’s a better seat. I don’t know why airlines would be unique by offering lower prices for a lesser product. That’s what we do.”
Lawmakers briefly debated an amendment to the most recent FAA re-authorization that would have prohibited carriers from charging a fee to allow parents and small children traveling together to be seated near each other. In the end, the amendment failed and airlines operating in the U.S. are still free to charge a premium for parents to guarantee that they are seated with their children.
Kirby told the magazine that the “segmentation” of the airline’s fare structure (and the restrictions that can sometimes accompany the different product offerings) are necessary in order to compete with budget airlines. Spirit, for example, is able to consistently offer rockbottom base fares, but charges extra fees for everything from carry-on bags to choosing a seat. Kirby, however, outright dismissed the idea of a legacy carrier operating a separate budget airline of its very own.
“It is a bad idea,” he explained. “It’s one of the great advantages hotels have. They can actually have multiple brands that are separate and distinct. Our brands — our segmentation — is all on the same airplane, which makes it much more challenging. But the airline within an airline, it just doesn’t work. You wind up with a cost structure at those airlines that is not consistent with the low cost carriers that you’re trying to compete with. That kills it.”
[Photo: Shutterstock]
You’re Reading
My mother taught me if you can afford to fly, you can afford to pay without complaining. If it’s a bargain you’re hunting, you’ll get what you paid for.
So many great comments! Loved the ones from the parents saying they were just fine with the policy - more nappy time for them!! lol As a parent and grandparent, please....PLEASE...place everyone on the same PNR together on the plane. If I am flying, it is to get AWAY from the responsibility of children and I do not want to be the one trying to get off a plane during an emergency while frantic parents are trying to find their children! Lets just try to agree that A) children belong with their parents, B) it is expensive to fly, so paying for a family to fly somewhere should not cost more if they accept that they will be seated together, but are not able to choose the seats themselves. And for those that say that if you have children, you have to expect it is going to cost you - right you are! So, we were never able to afford to take our children on a vacation if it included flights. And that was back in the days without all these fees and rules. When I take my grandchildren to the theater, we all get to sit together for no extra charge - imagine that! So, yes, I look at it as extortion when you charge more for something that you know a customer is going to HAVE to have -not only because it makes sense, but for safety reasons.
Only in America. FYI - the rest of the world is looking at you right now just shaking our heads. For goodness sake people, of COURSE small children should sit with their parents/guardians. And of COURSE they shouldn't have to pay for it. Give me a break. Were you always this uncivilised, or is it just since you elected that buffoon president?
Unlike most "professional" fliers, here, I take only about 25-30 flites/year. Fortunately, Jet Blue covers 3/4 of them. (SFO - FLL, LA, NY - FLL-BOS and even to Latin American destinations. Cheap fares include more leg room, reserved seats, and better service than UA. Try to avoid UA even if it does cost more when we can't take Jet Blue. Years ago, used to take Southwest. They now are as expensive as AA/ UA, Delta. And now we need airline that does cross country routes.
And, shame on flyertalk for publishing this issue with an inflammatory . You're only exacerbating the Hysteria. The underlying issue is whether the airlines allow people to sit together without additional cost. I would have expected more from a business site.