Bad First Class Pax
 

Was on LAX to ORD today and they pre boarded a severly handicapped child with parents. GA comes back out and calls for a Pax, I am 4 or so back for the FC boarding and over hear the GA asking this guy if he would move from 6B to 5D so family can all sit in same row with dad sitting in 6B, daughter in 6C and mom in 6D. Guy was using very low voice, but end result was Pax in 6B would not move. :mad::confused:

An aisle for a window? I would likely not switch.

Ooh, really, you wouldn't switch? I hate flipping the two when I've pre-selected, but in this case, I wouldn't think twice. Especially on a short flight.

For a handicapped child to sit with her dad :confused:

I would have switched here, I have a lot of understanding for people with disabilites.

I don't consider LAX-ORD a short flight. It is the longest flight that this 1K has taken this year (outside of one trip to Rome).

there was 4 of them, so they could switch the daughter with the handicapped child and he'd be able to sit with his mom/dad.

I guess it depends on how the situation was broached, but I would be extremely unhappy to have to sit in a window seat for a flight as long as ORD-LAX. I actually don't book flights if I can't get an aisle seat. In this case, it sounds like the dad wanted to sit across the aisle from his daughter, not next to her. The mom was already sitting next to the daughter. I'm not saying I would stand firm, but I would not go to a window seat quietly and actually might ask the agent to just book me on another flight or carrier if there was a medical need for the dad to sit across from the daughter.

From reading this it looks like there were 3 people the mom, dad, and child.

Hm, I read it as "Guy" is in 6B, "dad" wants 6B ostensibly to sit next to handicapped child (6A) while mom and daughter are in 6C/D. But I guess maybe the OP meant the dad just wanted to sit across the aisle from the child??:confused:

In that case I'd be even less inclined, across the aisle is just about as close ad right behind. Its not moving so someone can be "next to" their child and there's already a parent "next to" the kid.

So wait... they had 5D, 6DC... so they are all sitting contiguously.... if anything, this would be better since pop won't lean back into mom on the flight.

If I were the gentleman in 6B, I would say no thank you as well :)

I would have switched without any hesitation. LAX-ORD is not a long flight at all. Less than 4 hours? It's a milk run. Sitting in F for a short flight - window seat and all - is not much of a sacrifice for me. ESPECIALLY when you're talking about a disabled child for goodness sake.

I'm more than a little surprised and saddened to hear so many people unwilling to make such a small gesture... I'm not even sure that the word sacrifice would even be appropriate.

Let me say, however, that I absolutely defend STRONGLY anyone's right not to switch seats if he/she doesn't want to. There is no obligation to at all.

That being said... where's the love? I'm sure there will be some posters say, how come this family didn't plan better? We don't know that they didn't try. Again, while nobody has an obligation to switch, I am dismayed at how reluctant some sound to switch to a window seat for a mid-con flight. It really does approach a level of self entitlement that isn't great.

perhaps you can help me connect the dots here, there no obligation but if you don't you're have a level of "self entitlement that isn't great".

You know you really don't have any obligation to send me $100 right now, but if you don't your greedy and somehow feel all self entitled to your money, not good.

I could understand if there was no parent next to the kid, but being across the aisle you're not going to be much help.

I guess all I can say is that you also don't know why 6B didn't switch or even why anyone in this thread would hesitate to switch. To you, a window on a mid-con is not a big deal. To me, it makes the difference as to whether I will fly or not. I should not need to explain why it makes such a difference, nor should Mr. 6B. I wouldn't automatically assume this is simply an "entitlement" issue.

^^

It's not entirely clear to me how having a parent across the aisle would have been better than having the parent in front (to prevent a pax from leaning into the mother's space). If anything, I could better understand the request from 5D to 5C to switch or to kindly not lean back entirely into their daughter. Note I said that I could "better understand"... not that 5C would have to oblige.

My entitlement comment is not about the pax in 6B. You're right I don't know the reason there so I cannot comment and won't. I will assume and give that pax the benefit of the doubt that there was a very valid reason he could not switch. Perhaps he was travelling with someone in 6A.

My comment is directed at other posters who seem to hesitate or not switch for a, as the OP stated, SEVERELY HANDICAPPED child's parents, for seemingly no other reason than a small amount of additional personal comfort during a 3.5 hour to 4 hour flight. If you have a medical or other such reason for HAVING to be in an aisle seat, then obviously this categorization is not accurate. However, if your reason is simply for the slight increased level of personal comfort, then I stand by my accusation of entitlement.

Again, please note that I would completely defend the fact that you should have no obligation to switch seats. That is entirely your perogative. Just as it is mine to feel that your actions are that of a selfish person if in fact the only motivation is for a small amount of additional personal comfort... ESPECIALLY IN THE CASE OF A DISABLED CHILD.

Also, for nearly all of my associates and colleagues that are truly frequent flyers... most on FT, I would imagine... LAX-HKG, SFO-NRT, MIA-GRU and the like are long hauls. LAX-ORD is a milk run.