Originally Posted by
JJeffrey
But there were several instances of this exact same nonsense from GA's happening when PE was first introduced several years ago; I don't see anything here that would lead me to believe it's anything other than a poorly trained GA making up rules that don't exist.
And, DL brought the policy back fairly recently, so possible GA was a contractor or recent hire from DL and conflated the two sets of rules (and then was too proud to admit it once corrected). I am
deeply skeptical that there was any legitimate reason: (1) the GA expressly stated their reasoning, which had nothing to do with any legitimate rationale (and those are rare to begin with); (2) what are the odds that the pax that GA did bump up not only happened to be #3-4 immediately after OP,
but also were seated in PE, thereby aligning with the GA's (incorrect) stated reasoning; (3) as noted above, GAs have been known to make this very mistake in the past, so it's entirely plausible that it's exactly what happened here. To believe this was somehow legit, you'd have to line up a hell of a series of coincidences.