MEMLawGuy

IMO, sometimes "poaching" and sitting before asking is the easiest and most convenient way to do it for all involved regardless of whether the request to swap is ultimately agreed to or not. Take this example:

The "poacher" is assigned seat 5B on the 737-9. Said poacher wants to sit in 2B to sit next to [insert whatever person here]. If the poacher boards first and no one is in 2B yet, the easiest thing to do is sit there and not store your luggage, wait for 2B to arrive and then make the request. If you take the approach of sitting in 5B and then waiting for 2B to arrive, 5B is forced to swim upstream and delay others from boarding. And if forced to wait until everyone is done boarding, it's likely 2B has stored everything and then has to move things.

So I don't think it's terribly wrong to go ahead and take the seat as long as you're attentively ready and waiting for the rightful occupant to get there and move quickly to your other seat if they don't want to swap. I only hold this opinion if the seats are reasonably similar to any other reasonable person. If you have an inner ear imbalance that means you must sit in row 2 instead of row 5 (or vice versa), then that's pretty unforeseeable and doesn't make the requester (poacher) any worse of a person.

People need to just chill out.

Tizzette

However you do it, when you ask to switch seats, you are choosing to bother another passenger to benefit yourself. Asking is OK if you have a need (separated from your young child, for example), but almost all the posters here who like to play musical chairs just want to sit by their wife/friend/colleague.

Occupationalhazard

It's also much more likely to get a "hard no" out of the person whose seat was poached.

You might have the [insert whatever person here] mention it to 2B when they board. @:-)

I think you are MUCH more likely to get a hard no, as I said above. I am a fairly agreeable person, but poaching my seat is, in my view, a huge faux pas. Really, I'm not interested in having my seat "pre-warmed" by someone else's butt.

I hold the opinion that the "rightful" occupant is fully entitled to decline to switch for any reason, or for no reason.

I have switched, aisle for aisle, with someone who had a lower leg cast and the seat I was occupying would clearly have been more comfortable for her in terms of being able to stretch her leg out. IIRC it was 1C for 1B. No problem of course--and I didn't find her in my seat upon boarding. I have also switched for couples, but typically, I tell them to wait until boarding is over, because I don't want to be arsed if there is some other issue with the seat I am moving to (e.g. yet another couple or parent-child or whatever.)

Of course it doesn't. OTOH, if the rightful holder of the seat declines, that doesn't make them a "bad person" either.

That certainly include people who, having asked for a switch and been politely declined, and then act like toddlers throwing tantrums.

O/H

yohanson

I would like to add that I have nicely complained to Delta that GAs have given me a terrible F seat in the Bulkhead when 2B/2C, etc. was available when I was number one on the upgrade list (like I usually am) to someone below me more than once. Delta will probably never get that figured out so when a poacher offers me my prefered seat, I will take it. Delta does something's very wrong and I doubt it will ever be rectified. If a pax wants to help me out and themselves at the same time, I'm all for it!

jamesteroh

Why not just ask the Gate Agent if they will clear you into 2b or c (I rarely see row 2 available at the gate). I prefer aisle seats or if none are available the window bulkhead since I get up almost every hour and don't like to disturb my seatmate. If it's a flight over an hour and I know I"ll be getting up I go to the gate around t-60 and ask the gate agent if I can have an aisle when they clear the upgrade list.

GatorBlues

Contrary to the straw man on which you focused by reciting a litany of reasons you might view a trade to be less than an even swap, I had already acknowledged in my prior posts that it's up to the person assigned the seat to decide what is or isn't equal. So no, there are not factors I'm not considering. Rather, I addressed the view expressed by at least one poster that any swap request should be rejected out of hand, even one that the seat holder knows is equal or an improvement (based on the seat holder's own subjective criteria).

Your next straw man is your contention that I suggested that saying sorry, but no thanks is rude. To the contrary, that's a good response when you believe the proposed swap would result in a less desirable seat. Nor did I ever say you owe anyone a detailed explanation.

Again, if a seat holder knows that the proposed swap is an equal one -- based on the seat holder's own subjective opinions about the seats -- and the seat holder rejects the swap anyway, I'm confident that I'm not the only one who would think less of that person. (That is, if the person would actually admit, other than anonymously on the internet, that he/she simply won't trade under any circumstances, even if being offered a seat that the person would have preferred if he/she had been able to choose from scratch pre-boarding.)

Maybe it's not a cultural norm for people to do a small favor for a stranger when it has no adverse effect on them. Maybe I'm just lucky enough to be surrounded by nicer people, and that has warped my view.

Sorry, but I remain baffled, and now by two things instead of just one, i.e., (1) as before, some people's stubborn refusal to even consider if a requested favor would actually create an imposition before deciding whether to grant or refuse it, and now, (2) some people's refusal (or inability) to address the actual points another has made in a discussion. Let me know when you finish off those windmills, Don Quixote.

GatorBlues

Ah, another Don Quixote.

I never said that I, or anyone else other than the seat holder, should get to decide what's equal, better, or worse. I said just the opposite, in fact, and more than once.

I also never suggested it is appropriate for someone making the request to sit in your seat first and ask later. It isn't, as I recently reiterated in another post.

Proudelitist

I disagree...there is no need for the poacher to swim upstream IF they wait for boarding to finish or almost finish. If the stream of pax trickles to nothing, THAT is the moment to get up and ask.

If the poacher takes the seat before the rightful owner arrives, then they can cause a back up as pax pile up behind the rightful owner as the conversation/dispute ensues. I have seen this live. I have had people behind me start complaining about the back up when I had to stand in the aisle to boot out a poacher (an NRSA employee poacher no less, different story for a different time).

So no, there is still plenty wrong with pre-emptively taking a seat and there is a reasonable solution to the very flimsy argument for not wanting to swim upstream or cause a back up: wait and ask.

MSPeconomist

I hope you reported the NRSA poacher. NRSAs aren't even supposed to request that a revenue customer change seats with them.

yohanson

I've never been at the gate at the time those upgrades happen. In fact, I can't remember the last time I was at the gate at T-60. Maybe PRG-JFK but I was in J for that flight.

theddo

You don't get to decide what an "equal" seat is, and it is rare for me to be offered a swap to a seat that wasn't available to me when I reserved my seat so all offers of swaps are seats I've already chosen not to take.

That is the starting point of any swap request.

You are asking for a favour, and you shall do so hat in hand. I am not there to service you. My response is few words more than "yes" or "no". But most of the time I don't really care where in the plane I sit since I fly less than 1hrs flights 90% of the time.

pvn

these kinds of responses are absolutely baffling. There are exactly ZERO people in this thread who think you're obligated to swap. There are ZERO people in this thread who are pushing further if you say no. There are ZERO people who think you are there to service them.

GatorBlues

Hear, hear. It's truly amazing that no matter how many times I post that it is the seat holder's right to decide what is or is not an equal swap, I keep getting responses stating that it's not my place to tell them what is equal. Is it the result of reading comprehension issues? Or, are they the "always no" flyers who are psychologically deflecting rather than accept that my view -- that the "always no" approach reflects poorly on their character -- just might be valid criticism? Or, are they just trolling?

Regardless of the explanation for their continued insistence on arguing with points no one is making, I have long since beaten the horse to death. I think it's time for me to move on from this discussion. I hereby pass the torch to you. Good luck! You'll need it. Apparently, those red herrings are awfully slippery and resilient creatures.

ATOBTTR

I think it's "internet tough guy" syndrome for many of them. It's much easier to be big and bad on an anonymous, faceless internet board. Something tells me they're far less combative in real life than what they try to push on here. Either that, or while I've both accepted and rejected and had reseat swap requests accepted and rejected, I've just been lucky enough to never encounter such combative and obnoxious people personally.

sethb

It's a cultural norm (in my culture, anyway) to do small favors for a stranger when there's no adverse effect on me AND the stranger hasn't started by being rude to me.