LondonCanuck

Starship73

It’s an interesting state of affairs when the passengers have more information about seat allocations than the crew though, isn’t it? So as has already been pointed out, those of us that know which seats are blocked up to the point of boarding can then sit in them while ‘defending’ the second seat that is printed on our boarding pass. Regardless of whether BA wants to hide the workings of TS, the reality is that the information is effectively publicly available and is already in the hands of many frequent flyers.

nallison

Not really, as it's not an actual seat allocation, and in the end crew have discretion over seating arrangements, which is clearly how the airline want it at this time.

Personally I wouldn't want to prevent someone who for example, has been plonked in a middle seat at the back, from taking up an empty exit row seat if its available. Seems rather selfish and even spiteful to me. Then there are passengers who for example might have a tight connection and would benefit from being further forward, I'd prefer to help give someone else a better day. And hopefully one day I'll benefit similarly.

chistery

I never seem to get any benefits of TS on my flights. The empty seats always seem to be in other rows.

simons1

Seriously - you think on a 35 minute turnaround the crew have time for that little game?

orbitmic

Just thought I would mention a follow up. Just flew LAX-LHR on UD of hi J 744 with partner (she and I are both GGL/CCR). Three empty seats on UD including one next to each of us (we both like windows in CW so had 64A and K) which had been blocked throughout (seats next to us blocked in row 1 of NCE-LHR a few days ago, again, we could not even pick the blocked seats ourselves) and a third one, an aisle as well, 61J.

After boarding, a crew member came up with a passenger who had clearly asked if she could be reseated in UD. SCCM was on stairway and asked by the crew member if it would be ok for her to offer the passenger the seat next to me. SCCM looked at her ipad and said "it's fine to move her but I have two Gold Guest list passengers in 64A and 64K so please put her in 61J instead". *

I did not have a chance to ask the SCCM if she knew the seats had been blocked (I remember CIHY mentioned that crew do not get that information) or had just assumed it based on status, but either way, the comment was clear and explicit. Just thought that this was an interesting data point (and her prioritising keeping the seats next to us empty was much appreciated, and spoilt us by enabling us to have dinner together whilst then returning to our windows for a more cocooned sleeping experience. I fully realise that the empty seat is not a guarantee, but this was much appreciated and golden ticket will follow.

* The passenger did not like 61J after all so went back down! (taking the spare blanket and headsets that were on 64B on the way but that is another matter! )

Ancient Observer

IMHO, the SLF should have plonked themslves down next to you. I would have done.
You didn't pay for 2 seats, and the 2nd is not a benefit from BA's published benefits.

orbitmic

And I'm sure that many will agree with you. On the other hand, it seems that the SCCM's position is that the person in 61K had not paid for two seats either and that since there were three empty seats of similar nature (61J, 64B, 64J) to choose from and one customer who wanted to move to an upper deck seat, she decided to give her the seat next to the lower BAEC status passenger rather than the higher BAEC status. After all, free seats are not a published right for anyone but something that mostly everyone enjoys and she chose to reseat the passenger in a way that mirrors the allocation made by theoretical seating.

In any case, I already gave my arguments and don't plan to repeat them but merely wanted to provide a new factual data point which does not correspond to any of the ones reported thus far.