|
There is an easy fix here. Children should be seated with parents regardless of fare class and should be seated in the rear of the plane (unless elite). This is a win win. They get their own section and we get to not have to deal with them. |
Originally Posted by Collierkr
(Post 30140868)
The solution to this problem is very simple. Buy the fare and pay fees necessary to ensure all in your party sit together. |
Another solution is to prohibit children from flying if they're too young to sit away from their family. Then BE prices could still be offered to adults. <joking somewhat, as this would never be considered acceptable>
|
Originally Posted by AUSINSIGHT
(Post 30141866)
This is a win win. They get their own section and we get to not have to deal with them. |
I need to ask - how was this other passenger forced into a middle seat? They were asked/shamed into it, or an employee somehow forced them to move? I would be beyond livid if this happened to me and would flat out refuse to move - either I keep my seat, or I should receive IDB.
I am really sick and tired of these entitled soccer-mom types showing up (not just at airports) without any preparation, research or forethought and demanding everyone else yield to their personal needs and those of their annoying "little precious" children. Both United and Expedia make it very clear that a customer is NOT receiving a seat assignment with a Basic Economy fare, among other things. It's right there in a clear, unambiguous print, and only takes seconds to read and comprehend. No different than a BE customer demanding to put their bag in the overhead. The rules are clear. The purpose of the fare is to scavenge bottom of the bucket customers from Spirit and Frontier who already need to pay extra for any of these features when they fly on those airlines, and these fares are extremely easy to avoid. Sorry, I have no sympathy here except for the customer who was forced to move into a middle, and for that, should receive compensation. |
Originally Posted by pedrofs
(Post 30141839)
I'm hearing that BE has been a failure, and AA has already modified the rules, UA to probably follow.
The entire point of the exercise was to create a product that nobody wanted to buy. Delta saw a sneaky way to raise fares. United copied them, but took it a step further, and then AA copied United. The overhead bin access might get rolled back, but that was the one positive of the system -- a noticeable reduction in the number of bags in the overhead on some fights. I believe United's stats were that BE represented about 30% of their customers. That is a colossal win for them. Take out, say, 20% of passengers on paid first class or flexible tickets, that leaves you with about half of your customers left who would otherwise have bought the lowest available fare, but who went one level up to avoid BE. In what other context could any business offer such similar products at two different price points and get 50% to opt for the higher one? As much as I hate it, BE is here to stay.
Originally Posted by pedrofs
(Post 30141839)
The baggage charge program has created a nightmare for GA's and FA's with frequent demands at the gate that require gate checks, and onboard delays while people try to place oversize bags in the OH, while FA's try to jam them in, sometimes with no success. Airlines thought they would probably save money with fewer ramp people required with fewer pit bags, but now some flights need several ramp folks to get gate check bags down the jetway stairs and into the pit.
Originally Posted by pedrofs
(Post 30141839)
After tales like heard in this topic, I assume the Big 3 will quietly drop the program, or keep modifying it (i.e. families travelling with children) so it becomes meaningless.
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
The purpose of the fare is to scavenge bottom of the bucket customers from Spirit and Frontier who already need to pay extra for any of these features when they fly on those airlines, and these fares are extremely easy to avoid.
BE is a fare increase, plain and simple. |
Originally Posted by AUSINSIGHT
(Post 30141866)
There is an easy fix here. Children should be seated with parents regardless of fare class and should be seated in the rear of the plane (unless elite). This is a win win. They get their own section and we get to not have to deal with them. Much as it pains me to give a comparison to RyanAir (and no I don’t for one moment think UA is FR quality) Ryanair had similar issues and fixed it as follows - With any families with children, the adults have to pay the seat selection fee, mandatory no questions asked, no fee paid by the adults no check in. The children (no seat fee required) would then be assured of being seated next to a parent/guardian (though not necessarily having the entire family seated together). That’s something that with a bit of effort from UA”s IT geeks (and given the app I mean that on a good way) can be accomplished. Though in this particular case I have no sympathy with the OP. It was his sister in law and her children (the OP’s nephews/nieces) and he did diddly squat in volunteering to change his seats to help out and stuffed another passnger. |
Originally Posted by usbusinesstraveller
(Post 30142060)
With any families with children, the adults have to pay the seat selection fee, mandatory no questions asked, no fee paid by the adults no check in. The children (no seat fee required) would then be assured of being seated next to a parent/guardian (though not necessarily having the entire family seated together).
|
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
I need to ask - how was this other passenger forced into a middle seat? They were asked/shamed into it, or an employee somehow forced them to move?
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
I would be beyond livid if this happened to me and would flat out refuse to move - either I keep my seat, or I should receive IDB.
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
I am really sick and tired of these entitled soccer-mom types showing up (not just at airports) without any preparation, research or forethought and demanding everyone else yield to their personal needs and those of their annoying "little precious" children.
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
Both United and Expedia make it very clear that a customer is NOT receiving a seat assignment with a Basic Economy fare, among other things. It's right there in a clear, unambiguous print, and only takes seconds to read and comprehend. No different than a BE customer demanding to put their bag in the overhead. The rules are clear.
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
Sorry, I have no sympathy here except for the customer who was forced to move into a middle, and for that, should receive compensation.
|
Originally Posted by cbn42
(Post 30142239)
If you "flat out refuse to move", you will probably be removed by law enforcement.
|
Originally Posted by omaralt
(Post 30138698)
am i the only one here who thinks UA is in the wrong? i mean, yes we all know what a BE entails, but most people dont. when they buy a ticket on a legacy carrier they assume they can select seats; or at the minimum be able to be seated together. United is at fault here. they should automatically not allow you to buy BE seats when traveling with minors, or at least force you to pay for seat selection. otherwise they are saying it's acceptable for a 2 year old to be seated alone?? in what world does that make sense? can you imagine the lawsuit if something happened to that child during the flight? common sense needs to prevail here; UA (and all other airlines) need to ensure that a minor does not sit alone; whether it means forcing you into a higher fare or allowing free seat selection
No, you arent alone. UA knows you are traveliing with a 2 and 4 yr old. So should force you to pay for seats during hte booking process. It is a small IT change to add this. Ie if age less than 14, then go to paid seat selection- you can buy the ticket until you do. And yes the OP is very odd indeed for not offering to swich seats with a his niece. |
Originally Posted by amanx
(Post 30142929)
No, you arent alone. UA knows you are traveliing with a 2 and 4 yr old. So should force you to pay for seats during hte booking process. It is a small IT change to add this. Ie if age less than 14, then go to paid seat selection- you can buy the ticket until you do.
And yes the OP is very odd indeed for not offering to swich seats with a his niece. Better to clearly draw a boundary here. UA is a for-profit commercial air carrier which offers a variety of products to its customer base. Parents are the legal guardians of their minor children and should choose from UA's product offerings according to their needs. |
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 30142044)
I need to ask - how was this other passenger forced into a middle seat? They were asked/shamed into it, or an employee somehow forced them to move? I would be beyond livid if this happened to me and would flat out refuse to move - either I keep my seat, or I should receive IDB.
. OP's SIL - Child 1 - Other Passenger X - Child 2 - X And between OP's SIL and the flight staff, they said that Other Passenger had to take the child's seat, and leave that row entirely to a family who doesn't plan ahead because it was "the right thing to do". |
Probably. And the problem could have otherwise been solved with the OP trading his BP for Other Passenger's and taken Child 2's seat himself.
|
Originally Posted by jsloan
(Post 30142057)
It's misdirection. BE has been a smashing success, although (apparently) somewhat less so than their original rosy predictions.
The entire point of the exercise was to create a product that nobody wanted to buy. Delta saw a sneaky way to raise fares. United copied them, but took it a step further, and then AA copied United. The overhead bin access might get rolled back, but that was the one positive of the system -- a noticeable reduction in the number of bags in the overhead on some fights. I believe United's stats were that BE represented about 30% of their customers. That is a colossal win for them. Take out, say, 20% of passengers on paid first class or flexible tickets, that leaves you with about half of your customers left who would otherwise have bought the lowest available fare, but who went one level up to avoid BE. In what other context could any business offer such similar products at two different price points and get 50% to opt for the higher one? As much as I hate it, BE is here to stay. Source? I have serious doubts that any airline executive thought that charging for bags would save them money. AFAIK, it was done purely as a way to increase revenue and was assumed to be more-or-less cost neutral. There's a reason that the ULCCs are so profitable. No matter how any of us may feel individually, collectively, this is the product that sells. More marketing spin. BE never had anything to do with the ULCCs except for airline executives saying "hey, that's smart; let's do that." UA couldn't have been more clear during their rollout; for heaven's sake, they offered Y-BN fares initially. BE is a fare increase, plain and simple. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:55 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.