Originally Posted by
zombietooth
^If her nut allergy was that important to her, she could have easily taken a seat in Y. But no, she wanted that F-seat and was willing to impose her affliction on her seat mate.
She showed no concern whatsoever for OP's needs.
I believe that UA would assert that she was a representative of the airline first.
She should have moved because an F passenger wanted to eat his 10 nuts in a tiny glass bowl? I guess I'm completely different up front. I complain a lot about service standards, attitudes, etc with UA. But if someone near me has an allergy to a non-essential snack, I simply believe it's proper to cede to their needs- regardless of whether I paid more. The thing lost here is that she had every right to be sitting where she was, regardless of what we may think.