Another seat saving hassle and why I hate flying WN
#361
Join Date: Aug 2012
Programs: UA
Posts: 60
Well I'm done offering opinions since they already been expressed multiple times in multiple ways, its definitely a polarizing thread in many directions!
A sort of similar issues occurs at a lot of General Admission concerts I've been to in recent years. And a regional difference exists, on the West Coast, coats or blankets or tarps spread out in prime front of house location are generally respected to save spots for late arrivals while that doesn't happen in the East.
And for a good laugh regarding seat saving watch this. It is not sped up!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgQ-IyK4RAs
A sort of similar issues occurs at a lot of General Admission concerts I've been to in recent years. And a regional difference exists, on the West Coast, coats or blankets or tarps spread out in prime front of house location are generally respected to save spots for late arrivals while that doesn't happen in the East.
And for a good laugh regarding seat saving watch this. It is not sped up!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgQ-IyK4RAs
And ironically, the name of the song playing in that video? "Gonna fly now"
#362
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 104
The letter is irrelevant.
- It was written as a response to a individual customer's experience, it's not publicly published policy
- It was written in 2011 and references website language that no longer exists regarding "claimed" seats
- It itself includes the statement "Truthfully, we don’t have a policy either way--for or against--saving seats."
"I certainly understand the frustration you experienced on your trip, particularly given your purchase of EarlyBird. Because Southwest Airlines maintains an open-seating policy, Customers may sit in any open or unclaimed seat. Rather than guaranteeing a particular seat onboard, our EarlyBird product is designed to automatically assign Customers the best available boarding position beginning 36 hours prior to their flight's scheduled departure time. It is not uncommon for our Customers to save a seat (or seats) for a friend, family member, or associate in a later boarding group so they can enjoy each other’s company. We don’t have a policy regarding saving seats, and it is acceptable for a Customer to "claim" a seat for someone as long as the boarding process is not delayed and other Customers aren't inconvenienced. Our open-seating policy comes with good points and challenges, and I am sorry you were disappointed with the handling of this particular situation".
#363
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
This may not clarify a 'seat saving' policy, but it sure does add clarity to SWA's definition of 'open-seating'. In light of that, I would hardly say that 'clarifies nothing'. Many here have been stating that 'open-seating' implies they can take any unoccupied seat, regardless of whether it has been claimed by a friend or relative. This is clearly not the case...
"Because Southwest Airlines maintains an open-seating policy, general-boarding Customers may sit in any open or unclaimed seat."
"Because Southwest Airlines maintains an open-seating policy, general-boarding Customers may sit in any open or unclaimed seat."
#364
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 104
As I mentioned earlier, that letter is from 2011, before things like Upgraded Boarding were introduced. As a letter to an individual customer and not publicly published policy, the only relevant part is the reference to the Southwest website, and the language regarding an "open or unclaimed seat" has since been removed. All references to the Open Boarding policy on the Southwest website now refer to any (still ambiguous) "available seat".
Your quick dismissal of CS responses is somewhat disconcerting. You realize that for the most part, CS replies are 'canned responses' that were previously reviewed and approved, right? It isn't as though CS agents write responses 'off the cuff'.
#365
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Similar verbiage was reported by a recent TripAdvisor post. The reported response from the CS agent:
"I certainly understand the frustration you experienced on your trip, particularly given your purchase of EarlyBird. Because Southwest Airlines maintains an open-seating policy, Customers may sit in any open or unclaimed seat. Rather than guaranteeing a particular seat onboard, our EarlyBird product is designed to automatically assign Customers the best available boarding position beginning 36 hours prior to their flight's scheduled departure time. It is not uncommon for our Customers to save a seat (or seats) for a friend, family member, or associate in a later boarding group so they can enjoy each other’s company. We don’t have a policy regarding saving seats, and it is acceptable for a Customer to "claim" a seat for someone as long as the boarding process is not delayed and other Customers aren't inconvenienced. Our open-seating policy comes with good points and challenges, and I am sorry you were disappointed with the handling of this particular situation".
"I certainly understand the frustration you experienced on your trip, particularly given your purchase of EarlyBird. Because Southwest Airlines maintains an open-seating policy, Customers may sit in any open or unclaimed seat. Rather than guaranteeing a particular seat onboard, our EarlyBird product is designed to automatically assign Customers the best available boarding position beginning 36 hours prior to their flight's scheduled departure time. It is not uncommon for our Customers to save a seat (or seats) for a friend, family member, or associate in a later boarding group so they can enjoy each other’s company. We don’t have a policy regarding saving seats, and it is acceptable for a Customer to "claim" a seat for someone as long as the boarding process is not delayed and other Customers aren't inconvenienced. Our open-seating policy comes with good points and challenges, and I am sorry you were disappointed with the handling of this particular situation".
Even that letter is ambiguous; "...it is acceptable for a Customer to "claim" a seat for someone as long as the boarding process is not delayed and other Customers aren't inconvenienced."
Um… the saving of a specific seat I desire inconveniences me. Therefore, you cannot save that seat.
The very issue here is a direct result of that ambiguity, and Southwest's desire to have it both ways.
#366
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
And as I mentioned earlier, there are reports of CS responses still using the 'unclaimed seat' verbiage, even after the introduction of EBCI.
Your quick dismissal of CS responses is somewhat disconcerting. You realize that for the most part, CS replies are 'canned responses' that were previously reviewed and approved, right? It isn't as though CS agents write responses 'off the cuff'.
Your quick dismissal of CS responses is somewhat disconcerting. You realize that for the most part, CS replies are 'canned responses' that were previously reviewed and approved, right? It isn't as though CS agents write responses 'off the cuff'.
It seems this entire issue could be easily and definitively addressed if the CS responses you reference were published on the website as official policy.
I wonder why they don't just do that?
#367
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 104
Because in the grand scheme of things, seat saving is not that big of a deal. For many here, I imagine the echo chamber of FT has warped some perspectives...
#368
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Your phrasing seems to be suggesting that the customer service response letters are in conflict with published verbiage on the website. They aren't. If anything, they add clarity to the ambiguous language on the website...which is exactly what I suggested several posts back.
"...it is acceptable for a Customer to "claim" a seat for someone as long as the boarding process is not delayed and other Customers aren't inconvenienced."
It is acceptable to save a seat, except when it isn't acceptable.
In addition, they specifically say they have no policy for or against seat saving.
In what possible way can this be viewed as adding clarity?
#369
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,286
Originally Posted by ursine1
It seems this entire issue could be easily and definitively addressed if the CS responses you reference were published on the website as official policy.
I wonder why they don't just do that?
I wonder why they don't just do that?
They don't because they want to monetize their boarding procedure (and have, to great financial success) while avoiding responsibility for any issues it creates.
As I've stated anecdotally before, the #1 negative reason I encounter when discussing Southwest with a non-Southwest flyer is their boarding policy.
I'd suggest you look outside the "echo chamber of FT" to see what others think of the open boarding / seat saving policy. For many people, it's certainly a big deal.
Here's the result of a quick Google search:
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES’ SEAT-SAVING NON-POLICY
Selfish Southwest Airlines seat-saving passengers suck
How do I ask for a seat on Southwest that someone is saving for a friend at the back of the line?
Southwest, You Either Have Open Seating or You Don't!
There should be no saving seats on Southwest Airlines
#370
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,975
WN has done well for me in my portfolio, but the open seating policy is just one of a long list of reasons why I'll fly them only as a last resort.
It does seem to me, though, that the best solution would be to modify the check-in software. As I understand it -- and someone can correct me if I'm mistaken -- every passenger has to check in individually, even if two or more are in the same PNR. Why not fix it so that those on a single PNR are checked in together and guaranteed consecutive boarding numbers?
It does seem to me, though, that the best solution would be to modify the check-in software. As I understand it -- and someone can correct me if I'm mistaken -- every passenger has to check in individually, even if two or more are in the same PNR. Why not fix it so that those on a single PNR are checked in together and guaranteed consecutive boarding numbers?
#371
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Inland Empire, semi-regularly going between LAX/ONT/SNA and IND/STL
Programs: Rapid Rewards, SkyMiles, AAdvantage
Posts: 668
I fail to see how the latter is qualitatively any different from the other possibilities.
#372
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,042
One Early Boarding fee = One Early Boarding seat. Seat savers know that's the basic concept but choose to game the system to save a few bucks. They have to know there's a chance someone will plonk down in that empty seat they are trying to save.
#373
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Inland Empire, semi-regularly going between LAX/ONT/SNA and IND/STL
Programs: Rapid Rewards, SkyMiles, AAdvantage
Posts: 668
#374
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,621
So, to attempt to summarize still further:
1) "Open seating" is prominently used on their website and in marketing materials; "seat saving" is not.
2) Some people think one EBCI/person, while others think one EBCI/group
3) Just about everyone has no problem with a passenger saving one "non-premium" middle seat; more than that people start to.
4) People here suspect that WN encourages this ambiguity because they think it leads to more ancillary fee revenue.
Certainly WN could come out with a statement regarding 2) above. It sounds like the GAs are promoting the group idea (with seat saving) to sell more EBCI, leading to 4).
1) "Open seating" is prominently used on their website and in marketing materials; "seat saving" is not.
2) Some people think one EBCI/person, while others think one EBCI/group
3) Just about everyone has no problem with a passenger saving one "non-premium" middle seat; more than that people start to.
4) People here suspect that WN encourages this ambiguity because they think it leads to more ancillary fee revenue.
Certainly WN could come out with a statement regarding 2) above. It sounds like the GAs are promoting the group idea (with seat saving) to sell more EBCI, leading to 4).
#375
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,621
SANdyFlyer, at least now you are down to just accusing me of barking. The reality is that the person making most of the noise was the man behind me yelling to not take an open seat.
And when I asked the FA a direct question and did not get a direct response, I asked again and said that is a yes or no question. I am sorry you find that demeaning to the FA; had she answered my question in some way ( like "no, you can't take that seat, it is saved for someone else") I would not have had to ask the followup.
BTW, at congressional hearings, often when someone does not answer a question, often there is a follow-up with the statement "that is a yes or no question". It is not demeaning; rather, it is an attempt to ascertain the truth or the facts.
We will have to agree to disagree on what appropriate behavior is. For me, when someone asks me a direct question, I give them a direct answer.
And when I asked the FA a direct question and did not get a direct response, I asked again and said that is a yes or no question. I am sorry you find that demeaning to the FA; had she answered my question in some way ( like "no, you can't take that seat, it is saved for someone else") I would not have had to ask the followup.
BTW, at congressional hearings, often when someone does not answer a question, often there is a follow-up with the statement "that is a yes or no question". It is not demeaning; rather, it is an attempt to ascertain the truth or the facts.
We will have to agree to disagree on what appropriate behavior is. For me, when someone asks me a direct question, I give them a direct answer.