Seating scramble - exit poachers
 

Came off 1115 this eve, YYZ - ORD. Pretty good flight, and a surprisingly clean aircraft compared to what I normally see. But wanted to relate a story.

Plane was swapped from a 319 to 320. I was booked in seat 9D. I accidentally sat down in 9C, honest mistake. 10 ABC (exit row) was full with a group of 3. A guy goes back to 10, looks around, and then decides to sit in 9A (I'm pretty sure he had BP for 10C, but he didn't mind).

A few minutes later, the FA goes to check the boarding pass of 10A, as the pax with the actual boarding pass for 10A can't get to his seat. I don't know exactly what the FA's said to those in row 10, but I overhear them saying they would need to move to row 9 ABC (I'm assuming their assigned seats - this is when I realize I am in the wrong seat, and I start gathering my stuff to move). As I am starting this, the FA just tells the guy who is suppose to be in 10A to sit in an empty seat, he picks 9D (I remained in 9C).

My take on this all - the group sitting in 10 were poaching exit row seats, not cool. Shouldn't the FA have moved the group in 10? I certainly didn't have a problem moving to my original, assigned 9D. But if it was me who had exit row seats, I would be a bit annoyed that I got moved due to poachers, and would have insisted (as is my right) that I get my exit row seats.

Two weeks ago, twice I had FAs allow passengers to move to the exit row when they asked...argh! I know, I only purchased my seat, but a perk of being a 1P or higher is that on a lightly loaded flight with few 1P and above, you often get extra room.

Should we perhaps start a Master Seat-Poaching thread? All these individual reports are getting unwieldy... why not gripe together? :)

I think these FA's may be in need of some re-education.

What does this do to UA's E+ strategy, for example?

Hmmm, well, it seems that UA's employees are d*mned if they do and d*mned if they don't.

Quite often, they are derided and attacked on this forum for enforcing rules. (Or sometimes, just for existing.) :eek:

I have not seen FAs "attacked" in this forum for removing seat poachers.

Part of the difficulty of enforcement, even if FA are willing and able, is that 3 FA isn't enough to watch over 120 people streaming in, at least not standing at the front door. For Ted flights 1/3 to 1/2 are in E+, so that's a lot of BP if each are checked individually. It seems that FA can spot people coming up from E-, but are unable to see if people simply sit down in a confident manner as they walk down the aisle.

Perhaps if pax are told that they should have BP ready to be checked, and before door is closed when FA do the count, they can announce for all BP to be readied so they can check them :P I would dread this if I am a FA, but it's the only way to truly root 'em out.

I have liked the few FAs I have heard make the added announcement that E+ is reserved for elites, those who paid for it, etc. and if you are supposed to be in E-, we will be around before takeoff to charge your credit card for E+ access.

I have actually seen poachers scurrying back to their E- seats!

I think the FA's job is made more difficult by the lack of distinguishing features of E+... I agree that it shouldn't be a distinct COS, because it really isn't, but the net effect is that the dividing line is blurred for the rest. I've seen a lot of poachers in action, and while some of them certainly know better, others just don't realize that E+ is a different animal.

Yes but most of them can count to at least 30 (or whatever row they are assigned to) and most of them know their letters up to K (UA's widest aircraft). No one (at least those capable of traveling alone) can be so stupid as to see Row 30 on their BP and think that they are sitting closer to the front than the back of the aircraft.

It's much easier than this. The GA should just print out a seating chart with what's assigned vs unassigned and give the map to the FA.

I like this too, but I think the FAs should include elite status in the announcement (maybe they did when you heard it). In the announcements I've heard, the FAs have said that E+ is reserved solely for those who purchased E+. If such inaccurate language spreads through the grapevine to GAs and ICC agents, we could have elites randomly being denied E+ seating, as during rebooking in IRROPS (even when E+ is available), just like we currently see Q-UP pax being denie F seating (even when F seats are available).

Great idea, I hope a UA lurker will pick up on this. There is a seating chart printed for F and C. Hopefully there is an option in the software for Y. I will ask some GAs if this is possible.

Ah very good idea, and fast too. If UA would pick up this idea, we wouldn't be able to whine about poachers anymore.

Wouldn't the map be thrown off by people who switch seats / move around within E+ and E-? The FA wouldn't know who the poachers were (without checking everyone's BPs) if people move around at/near the end of the boarding process.

I've seen it both ways. A few times on light flights, the FAs have said that people are welcome to move about, but those in E- must pay to move up to E+. I don't know how thye would have enforced that or made them pay, but that was the announcement.

I've also had an FA give away my exit seat before I got on board. On a flight from IND to IAD we were on another light flight, and the FA told the first guy on that he could sit where he liked. He, of course, picked my exit roat seat on a small, cramped RJ. I was only a couple of people behind him, so I kicked him out. :D

Another option may be an annoucment like this

"Due to United Security Regulations and for your own comfort, we ask that everyone remain in their assigned seats. Tasers have been installed in the head rest of each and every seat. Tasers will be automatically activated for any empty seat once the door is closed and cabin is pressurized" :)

I haven't run into this but I have moved seats before usually after the door has been closed or is closing. Most of the time on flights that haven't been full either. I've asked to move to especially when I'm in a row of 3 and the the row across only has one person in it.

I rode in E+ for the first time today (made 2P recently) and even got an exit row seat. The GAs were pushing E+ ($14, LAX-SFO) hard pre-departure. When I got on board, I sat down in 16a. About 5 minutes later (still boarding) a guy walks up from E- and takes 16c. I thought about saying something, but I hadn't mentally prepped for this interaction. I could have (should have?) gotten up and talked to the FA, but I just wasn't in the mood for a potential scene. Plus, the FAs hadn't made any announcements related to E+, so I wasn't sure how they'd react.

On the one hand, it wasn't a big deal. The flight was relatively empty and it's not like I needed the whole row. On the other hand, I know the woman in 16d paid for her E+ seat. Plus, in the long run (as has been discussed here before) this is a revenue issue for UA. If people can just poach, why bother to pay?

My point is not just to rant--I really wish there was an easier way to alert the FAs. Maybe some sort of subtle signal or "code" to clue them in ... perhaps ringing the call button twice in a row? :D Seriously, however, the idea listed above about using seat maps is a good one; that combined with inviting people to switch seats only after the door has closed (when the FAs can more easily monitor things) might help.

It's my policy to thank all FA who enforce seating and guard against poaching. Positive reinforcement can be useful in training.

I really don't think this is true. United's employees are in a bind because the rules are applied inconsistently, to the extent that many customers aren't sure what the rules are. UA's employees represent the company, and they are far too frequently cited on here for not adhering to United's policy, for failing to make the correct call, and for offering poor customer service. We pay for a service - we're entitled to have an opinion about what is offered.

On my last 6 intl. flights within three weeks, every single time, the E+ mantra has been repeated by the pursers. Including the announcement that pax moving to E+ would be removed from those seats.
On my last ZRH-IAD, the E- was completely packed while E+ showed many empty spots. An FA told me that many pax complained about the crammed seating but they still weren't willing to fork up the $89 asked for a E+ seat.

It is great that the courtesy-mass-herding forward of families, innocent looking school classes, scouts, and armies of backpackers which was all that common on the Oz flights finally comes to an end.
Sounds fair :p.

That doesn't seem like a big deal--if they had asked a CSR working the gate, they would have done it for them as well if an exit row was unassigned. That being said, I was once on a Ted flight where someone poached the empty exit row middle seat next to me, and I wasn't too happy about it myself.

Regarding the OP, my guess about what probably happened is that the group of 3 passengers probably couldn't get seated together when they checked in, so they picked a row of seats and figured they would make the trade when the found out if anyone was actually sitting there. They probably didn't realize that at least one of those seats was likely reserved in advance by someone who would not be happy about a trade into E-.

I have never heard FAs say they will be around to charge credit cards, and I don't think they could do it in any event (can they?). I have heard them say that if pax sitting in E- wish to sit in E+ in the future, they can pay for it prior to boarding, sending the message clearly enough.

And that lack of distinguishing features of E+ (except that it is the more desirable forward part of the cabin and the seats are farther apart) could be so easily remedied. Put a doily identifying it as "reserved for E+" on the back of every E+ seat, making clear that these are not "open" seats for the taking. (It seems to me that I saw those on a few planes 2 or 3 years ago, but I haven't seen them since. The decals on the overhead bins noting E+ seating are pretty useless, since they are so easy to overlook.) I think such a simple measure would be very helpful, and I don't know why UA doesn't adopt it.

The OP mentioned that part of the problem arose because there was a 320 for 319 swap, which means what was a choice E+ exit row seat assignment becomes without warning a not choice first row of E- seat. I have had that happen to me, and fortunately been able to move forward a row so I could sit in the exit row as I had expected to based on my original seat and aircraft assignment. Not sure how this is to be avoided (ask GA in advance of boarding whether it is still a 319 as scheduled, but sometimes they don't know).

The intl. E+ cabins' headrests are clearly labeled with "reserved for Economy Plus" cloth. And still some FAs and pax manage to miss it :rolleyes:.

Too expensive to deploy some doilies like that on domestic flights, on which I expect seat poaching is more common? Some FAs and pax might still manage to miss it, but I do think it would help and be well worth the price of those doilies. (Again, forget the decals on the overhead bins, they are pretty useless.)

BTW, is it always "seat poaching" when one moves into a seat other than that which shows on their ticket? I ask because I realize I may be a "seat poacher" in the eyes of some, if "seat poaching" includes moving onself from E+ to E- in order to stretch out across an empty 3-seat row in the back, especially on a red-eye, when one is so fortunate to have such an opportunity. If it is, then I confess to having "sinned" in this way, but I am not repentant. (Need I worry about my mortal soul for doing this, or would this count as only a venal sin?)

There is not much more irritating than a poacher sitting in the middle seat in E+ and saying something to you as they sit down with their row 40 seating assignment stub with no MP number and saying,"Man I hope you dont mind...it's really packed back there!" Uuugh!

Thanks to FT, I've pulled the "I paid to have that seat blocked" line. It worked!

Quite likely. The vast majority of all the E+ poaching I have observed on intl. flights was committed by FAs :( doing random favours to 'people who would be crammed back there'.
Sometimes it took a lot of protest from us to prevent them from filling middle seats in E+ with their minions.

But I understand UA management now taught them much better that this is not the way to do it :cool:.

Certainly that was my recent experience on lhr-sfo-mel return. Lots of announcements during boarding about E- not moving to E+ and ability to upgrade before boarding next time. I didn't notice any poachers (and managed to keep my empty row of 4 on the SFO-SYD leg :)

I'll assume that you are male and that the would be poacher is a drop dead gorgeous young woman, is it a little less irritating then? If you are in A and your wife is in C when this knockout says, "Man I hope you don't mind...." is the dynamic different then? Might you come away from such an experience saying, "Poaching is not always bad."? Now, if person sitting in E+ is female and the would be poach a very handsome, well-dressed fellow, would it be the same? And with husband in C, woman in A, what dynamic when poacher asks for B?

Moving to an empty middle seat is always bad manners unless invited by both people. I would never even consider asking. If there was something wrong with my original seat I would let the FAs handle the situation.

If I'm single AND in the mood to find someone then it is less irritating else every bit as irritating.

And, for making up rules and trying to pass them off as company policy. Who do they think they're fooling?

Yup, if I worked for UA, I'd not be lifted up by many of the postings. Alas....

I don't think they can take credit cards. I remember once, at least, the FA's saying something to the extent of, E+ is for paying pax, and you are welcome to pay to upgrade on your next UA flight. On another, they didn't mention the next UA flight, so it might have been early enough that they were willing to take a pax out to the GA to have it charged there

They used to have them on at least some domestic mainline flights (never seen them on UX). Don't know about 737's either, but I'm sure I've seen them on at least some of the Airbus fleet, as well as 757's. Though I haven't seen them recently. Is it possible they used to have them, and then took them out? Or have them on a few aircraft, but not on others?

Whatever you want to call that, I don't think that would be a problem, at least according to most on this board. The problem with poaching as we talk about it here is the fact that people are taking seats that they are not entitled to because they haven't earned it/paid for it. I don't think there is a pax in the world who would think they would be able to move to a C/F seat if they were booked in E-, or even E+ - its the same basic principal. You can only sit in the cabin you paid for/are entitled to. Certainly, someone moving from E+ to E- (though I haven't heard too many stories of this) would be ok. By buying a seat on that flight, anyone is entitled to E-. With no one in the row, its also not like someone would be complaining that you are overtaking "their" space.

The original A/C was scheduled to be a 319, and got upped to a 320. There was in fact an extra exit row. Whatever happened - the three who sat down in row 10 clearly didn't have row 10 BP's - the guy who had 10A sat in an empty 9D, and the guy who had 10C sat in an empty 9A. Both didn't seem to mind. Those that were poaching row 10 got on the aircraft pretty early (maybe the GA's weren't checking group #'s - I'm not sure), certainly earlier than the two that were supposed to be in row 10. They didn't appear to be frequent flyers, and maybe even didn't realize that someone had to be seated in that exit row (in case of emerg.).

It's on the actual aircraft when I have problems with people poaching - next time, I should tell the FA's that they shouldn't be seated in E+ at all if they aren't entitled (it was pretty late in boarding at that point - maybe the FA's were just trying to make sure the flight left the gate on time). At $14 (I think), per seat, that's $42 in UA lost revenue. If 3 short haul E+ seats get poached everyday of the year (clearly, based on the FT boards, an understatement), then that would be $15,330 in lost revenue to UA in a year. That's based on the cheapest possible UA upgrades, if we're talking about the $89 IAD-ZRH upgrades, 3 seats = almost $97,500/year.

Are you a drop dead gorgeous young woman? If you are, then I think you might get those invitations to sit in the middle seat, though that is not the one that was assigned to you. If you are not, then it isn't so surprising that you don't get them.:D

I've experienced a couple of exit row shenanigans this week and was thinking about this very topic.

On Wednesday, I was flying SJC-DEN exit row window seat with the aisle and middle both empty. After the door closes, a woman in the middle seat in the E- row behind actually pushed her way out of the row (forcing the aisle sitter to get up) and attempted to poach the empty aisle exit seat. A FA just happened to come by at the moment and scolded her back to her original seat. I could hear her grumbling behind me afterwards.

I've seen many opportunistic seat swappers before and usually I don't mind as long as there's an empty seat left between us, but this woman was the boldest attempt I've ever seen. I was glad the FA came along when she did to thwart her.

The second experience was Friday flying SLC-DEN. I was originally confirmed exit row window but there was an equipment change and I was bumped back one row into E-. Fortunately when I checked in the exit aisle seat was still open so I was able to grab that. A teenager sat down in seat A (this was on a 737 that has the one missing window seat so seat A is the premium spot). She guiltily admitted that she was surprised to have gotten assigned that seat since she wasn't even a M+ member.

When a couple came on board filling both middle seats in the row, the teenager, to everyone's surprise voluntarily offered to swap seats with the largish husband scrunched in the middle seat across the aisle. I have to admit that I've never seen anyone do that before. But I was also a bit annoyed since that was supposed to have been my original seat.

Turns out the couple were non-revving standby fliers whose son is a new pilot for UX so they were enjoying his newly obtained employment benefits. Not sure how that works but I didn't think that non-revs were allowed E+ seating.