Back at my computer after the holiday and thought I'd share an interesting experience with fellow FT'ers.

I was on a United Express flight over the holiday and there was couple with a lap held child in front of me. The FA advised them they needed to move to the other side of the A/C and an even numbered row for the infant oxygen mask. So they moved. To row 8 - the emergency exit row. The FA maybe didn't notice and we proceeded to depart. Upon preparing for arrival, the FA came back and told this couple they'd have to move again due to the exit row. Well this certainly ticked off the female half of the couple. They moved.

Then came time to turn off all PEDs. Including the infant's DVD player. The female half again protested. Her logic was that it was keeping the child quiet and it was only 10 minutes until landing anyways. For the remaining 10 minutes I witnessed the male half doing everything he could to get the female half to calm down, quiet down, and go with the flow.

However, she did make a good point during her "discussion" which was why did the FA allow the A/C to depart with a lap held child in the emergency exit row? At the time, I was a bit ticked and though about sending Skywest a letter, but since then I've had a plenty of holiday cheer and let it slide.

I'm curious to hear what other FT'ers think.

Definitely a breach of the law, but it's a responsibility of both the FA and the parents ("...occupied by other concerns..."). Of course, the FA would be held accountable for that if reported. It likely didn't register with her that they had moved to an exit row.

I suspect the FA's routine was to deal with the pax in the exit row first (i.e. get their verbal acknowledgment), and then she noticed the lap sitter. It probably didn't register with the FA until after takeoff that the lap sitter was in the exit row. Once airborne, law or not, there is no safety issue with a lap sitter in the exit row until descent.

I would not complain to Skywest or UA. I suspect the FA will adjust her routine to deal with lap sitters before exit row sitters.

Don't lap sitters have to get BPs? If so, Skywest/UA should not have assigned the original seats.

A better question would be why would there be an infant mask in an exit row (or for that matter why would there not be an infant mask in every row?)

What about the pre-departure walk-through? I can't believe that the FA would miss something so important! I would probably report it to Skywest, and see what they say...

I really don't know if the exit row has 2 or 3?

RJ's only have a 3rd mask on the right (gally/lav) side of the plane..... AFAIK, that just how Embraer, and Canadair make 'em.

Back in my day, I had to make do with crayons!

Yes, they need BP's (The child's seat assignment = 'INF').

However, having done a few RJ flights this year with our infant, there is nothing that prevents you from choosing a seat on the 'wrong' side, even when it's noted all over your reservation that you have a lap child. I did it the first time (not knowing that it was a one-side only thing until, as above, we were so advised) and had to move.

would be nice if (ha) .bomb was 'smart' enough to prevent it...but it is pretty far down the list (as it probably should be, given the other stuff they could fix) of .bomb bug-fixes/enhancements.

It sounds like the FA was really trying. This is ultimately the GA/checkin agents fault. They are supposed to check for these kinds of things.

My 2 year old still does! Well, she get's books too.....