HMO

I'm really missing the stories...

bergamini

Going back to some examples, the FAA requires the airlines to allow families with children < 13 to sit together for free. Does anyone know if this means that they sometimes move people involuntarily? http://familytravel.org/congress-pas...ying-together/

puck021

Here's a quick one. Walk to my seat 10c. Guy is in 10c. I said, hey your in my seat, he says what seat, I point to the seat he's in and say that one 10c. He says no, the aisle is A, I point at the little seat map and he says, yeah thats 10a next to the aisle. Right then a FA walks by. I ask her what seat is this, she said 10C loud enough for him to hear. I pointed at 10a, and smiled and said enjoy the window.

PTravel

First, it's not the FAA, which imposes regulations, but Congress, which passes laws that came up with this one. From what I've read, it means airlines can't impose a charge, e.g. for a seat reservation, so that a parent can sit with a child. I'm not aware of anything that gives parents with children superior rights to seating over those traveling without children, i.e. I doubt if people are going to get displaced, but I may be wrong.

Kamalaasaa

Although he might have been seat poaching, it could have been an honest mistake.

Some of those seat diagrams make it look to me like 10A is the aisle, even though I know that 10A is the window.

flyerCO

However the FAA is the one charged with writing a rule to implement the bill. I don't believe they've done that yet. Congress simply directed FAA to implement a rule.

ATOBTTR

Wondering (although we'll never officially know) if this was a FAM bump based on experience. Friend and I are doing a TATL trip in November (outbound in approx 30 days). Separate reservations. He originally had 3A and I have 4A. Aircraft type: Airbus A330-300.

Today he noticed he was moved to 8J (the only window seat left, now all A/J seats are gone). I'm still in 4A. He reached out to Delta to see what happened. They said "there was an aircraft swap" (which isn't true as the flight was booked, it was an A330-300 and it's still an A330-300).

A little disappointed at the swap as we had back-to-back seats while both getting a window. Now if we want to sit together, we'd have to move to a pair of two in the middle section.

Has anyone else had experience with mysterious bumps if they previously selected 3A on an A330?

flyerCO

Just because there wasn't a change in plane type, doesn't mean there wasnt a plane swap. Could be an assistant seated behind a passenger in 2A that needs medical assistance. 2A is bulkhead and they have to allow assistant to be by the passenger.

This far out I doubt it was a FAM.

ATOBTTR

That seems odd as if it was an assistant for another passenger who is in 2A, they could have taken 2C (aisle directly across) which is both open and probably a better viewing angle. Also, 1G and 2G are both open if the desired set up was back to back.

Also is there still a "hard bulkhead" requirement in a seating configuration that doesn't even have a true bulkhead seat? I get the issue with getting a row with no reclining seat in front for access but how is that true for the current D1 seats?

flyerCO

2A is a bulkhead seat. The hard bulkhead is directly in front of seat. The fact seat it self is attached to the bulkhead doesn't matter, nor that all seats are same. Also law says the airline must give the bulkhead seat the passenger feels best accomdates their disability.

bergamini

Thank you for focusing on the semantics. If you Google the term "FAA imposed regulations" you will find that the FAA does indeed impose a lot of regulations. And since those semantics are important to you, I'm sure you meant to say that Congress passes bills; they aren't laws until signed by the president or a presidential veto is over-ridden (although you didn't).

It pretty clearly says that it "requires airlines to generally ensure that children 13 years of age or under are seated adjacent to an adult or older child traveling with them" and later provisions state within the cabin purchased. I look forward to the smug elite who is convinced that they don't have to move for a family and then become the next Dr. Dao.

MSPeconomist

Congress has instructed the DOT to do this, but there's a deadline that's fairly far in the future for implementing such a regulation.

BTW, IIRC the rule that Congress has specified says that a (ONE) parent or guardian (or perhaps other family member over some age) must sit "near" a child, which could be in front or behind instead of adjacent. There's no rule that entire families sit together or that a child sits near both parents.

bergamini

The two articles I found on Babble and WaPo both said that they had a year from 2016 to write the rule and it was supposed to go into effect this last summer but then I read on CNBC that the rule hasn't been created yet. I don't know the interplay there but assume it's not breaking the law until they publish the rule, but that I don't know. The CNBC article says United will ask people to move to accommodate parents with kids. The horror!

PTravel

I'm a lawyer. The distinction matters. Regulations aren't voted on.

Wow, so much attitude! "Smug elite," hunh? I don't know why you think the legislation means that airlines can continue selling single seats to parents with children and then move around seated pax to accommodate them, but I doubt that's what will happen. Rather, airlines will mark PNRs when parents are traveling with children and keep them together when seats are assigned.

Smug elite because someone who chose a seat doesn't want to give it up to some parent with a young child? Whatever.

bergamini

But it's a wrong distinction. The law was passed last year but the FAA has not yet implemented the rules or regulations surrounding it so it's not active yet.