A child seated away from parents on booking

[Quickstatus]

did a double take

Yes - play the game "who blinks first".
We had a not dissimilar case (see post #24) where the cabin crew "blinked" first when they realised that the double trouble preschool twins MstrQS1 and MstrQS2 and parents were seated separately.

 

[CaptJCool]

Happened to us on a QF codeshare with AA

ROLL into Miami and voila the twins are parked 3 rows ahead in a 2 seater. Amen to that.
we were glad they enjoyed the trip without mum and dads Company. And no one batted an eyelid

 

[Duffa]

---

Flying Perth Melbourne in J on points with Mrs D a few years back.
Revenue fare for son who joined us at last minute from Uni, in economy.
At the cabin door we parted ways.
40 something FA asked us if we were family and said she would invite him up to business class cabin.

 

[RooFlyer]

They are literally there to make money on anything and everything extra they can, that's their business model.

I understand what you are saying, and what LCCs are about, but "having a (particular) business model" doesn't justify a particular practice.

Surely a 'business model' cannot act to place minors alone next to strangers on aircraft? There must be/should be an 'over-ride' - "Check age of pax A. Is anyone +18 checking in with Pax A? If no, manually ensure together ..."

 

[kyle]

I understand what you are saying, and what LCCs are about, but "having a (particular) business model" doesn't justify a particular practice.

Surely a 'business model' cannot act to place minors alone next to strangers on aircraft? There must be/should be an 'over-ride' - "Check age of pax A. Is anyone +18 checking in with Pax A? If no, manually ensure together ..."

Then what happens if the family doesn't pay for seat selection and only random single seats are left? Or are you saying families with child who don't pay will always trump groups who've paid?

 

[Rich]

Then what happens if the family doesn't pay for seat selection and only random single seats are left? Or are you saying families with child who don't pay will always trump groups who've paid?

Anyone with genuine special needs should trump people who have paid.
It's not that hard for airlines. QF tell you when selecting seats for a minor that they have to be next to an adult, so presumably if you didn't pre-select they would ensure that policy is applied.
As for JQ and the like, there is no reason why they cannot do any or all of the following:
- block seat selection when the flight reaches a certain capacity (QF seem to do it)
- block seats for each booking as they are made in case people don't select seats
- leave a few blocked rows at the back of the plane that aren't allocated until the flight reaches capacity
There is the risk of a late booking or two that the above might not work for, but airlines should be able to accommodate those with minimal disruption to others.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Then what happens if the family doesn't pay for seat selection and only random single seats are left? Or are you saying families with child who don't pay will always trump groups who've paid?

I know Qantas keeps some seats free until boarding, I guess for this reason? And some airlines are even known to move a solo child away if they are seated next to a solo adult male passenger. So in some circumstances a paid seat will get overridden… and the contract of carriage states seats can be changed, even after boarding, for safety reasons.

I’m not advocating the entire family or extended travelling party needs to be sat together. Just one adult and one child(ren). Unless there are compelling reasons otherwise such as special needs.

 

[RooFlyer]

Then what happens if the family doesn't pay for seat selection and only random single seats are left? Or are you saying families with child who don't pay will always trump groups who've paid?

Yes, I appreciate that dilemma and I’m certainly in favour of people who prepare and pay should get what they have prepared for. But what I’m saying is the airline systems should, where they can, anticipate the need and adjust seating accordingly.

Like M_T, i’m not talking 'families', I'm talking about minors [edit: say, under 16 or maybe 15?] who might otherwise be seated by themselves next to a stranger. No matter how they do it, that should not occur.

 

[Lynda2475]

Simple solution is to make paid seat selection mandatory on any booking with a minor so that 1 adult and 1 minor on the booking have to plan ahead and not expect other organised people who did pay for seat selection to move to accomodate them.

IMO if you cant afford another $5-20 to pick a seat you cant afford to fly (these are likely the same tight cough that dont buy travel insurance and then expect a go fund me page to get them home when things go wrong). It is unreasonable to expect full service options on a LCC, just like it is unreasonable to expect a better seat than the system allocated you if you failed to pay for seat selection.

 

[RooFlyer]

It is unreasonable to expect full service options on a LCC,

Child safety (which is what we are discussing) is not a "full service option"; I dare say its not even a 'service' but a 'right'. I bet every LCC will say somewhere "your safety is our first consideration".

Whether or not the parent has paid for seating, or doesn't know which way is up, if the airline accepts the child to fly, it needs to be cognisant of its particular safety needs.

No-one's seat is unchangeable. We can all get punted for various 'operational' reasons. I wouldn't like it happening to me, but I see no issue in a FA moving a 'paying' or 'organised' pax to put a minor next to one of the adults in their party if somehow the minor has been split off. (Again, note, not having the family sit together). It should have been sorted beforehand, but if not, that's what's got to happen. Its a much better reason for shifting me than just so some CL knob can have the seat I've selected.

 

[Lynda2475]

A responsible parent who truely cared about the safety of their child would pay for seat selection upfront to ensure they are next to their child and not selfishly expect others to move accomodate them. This lack of personal responsiblity and entitlement is astounding.

If you choose a LCC you get what you dont pay for.

 

[Rich]

A responsible parent who truely cared about the safety of their child would pay for seat selection upfront to ensure they are next to their child and not selfishly expect others to move accomodate them. This lack of personal responsiblity and entitlement is astounding.

When I wrote earlier that people have been sucked into paying for seats, this is what I was talking about. It was less than 10 years ago that you wouldn't have thought about paying for seat selection domestically in Australia because apart from Tiger it wasn't an option. It was a given that you would be seated with the rest of your group almost always and certainly a minor would never be separated from a parent.
I can accept with paying for seats the "almost always" is thrown into jeopardy, but seating you with your child is or should be an obligation of the airline. Like RooFlyer said, it is about child safety.

 

[RooFlyer]

Plenty of not-so-responsible parents out there, unfortunately. Or probably more accurately, not-so-thinking parents in the chaos that inevitably accompanies much of family flying. But if the parent is unthinking, we don't just say "tough luck kiddie - sit next to this stranger"

This lack of personal responsiblity and entitlement is astounding.

Quite.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Child safety (which is what we are discussing) is not a "full service option"; I dare say its not even a 'service' but a 'right'. I bet every LCC will say somewhere "your safety is our first consideration".

Whether or not the parent has paid for seating, or doesn't know which way is up, if the airline accepts the child to fly, it needs to be cognisant of its particular safety needs.

No-one's seat is unchangeable. We can all get punted for various 'operational' reasons. I wouldn't like it happening to me, but I see no issue in a FA moving a 'paying' or 'organised' pax to put a minor next to one of the adults in their party if somehow the minor has been split off. (Again, note, not having the family sit together). It should have been sorted beforehand, but if not, that's what's got to happen. Its a much better reason for shifting me than just so some CL knob can have the seat I've selected.

Safety of the child is just one element.

The other element is that in the event of an emergency evacuation you don't want the parent going against the flow of passengers to the exit and looking for their child.

For the safety of everybody on board one parent should be seated with a child.

 

[Lynda2475]

For the safety of everybody on board one parent should be seated with a child.

And this is entirely possible if you select your seats at booking, as a responsible parent would do to ensure not separated from their child.

On a LCC will this cost extra, but that is the LCC model. If you want seat selection included in the ticket price then fly a full service carrier and bu a ticket type that includes it.

 

[CaptJCool]

Looks self explanatory
And we will make sure young children are seated with a parent

https://www.jetstar.com/au/en/flights/family-travel

no unaccompanied Minors under 12 on LCC
unlike QF https://www.qantas.com/au/en/travel-info/children/unaccompanied.html supporting the child custody transfer between separated interstate parents.

 

[Rich]

Plenty of not-so-responsible parents out there, unfortunately. Or probably more accurately, not-so-thinking parents in the chaos that inevitably accompanies much of family flying. But if the parent is unthinking, we don't just say "tough luck kiddie - sit next to this stranger"



Quite.

I have to say, apart from a $10 exit row on Virgin MEL to CBR (more comfortable than the QF J seat back) and another time to use up some flight credits on Economy X, I have never paid for seat selection (with or without kids). Not because I am no-so-thinking or according to @Lynda2475 I am selfish (give me a break), but because it seemed reasonable that when I bought x number of tickets for a flight, they would be together. (I am not unrealistic as obviously it is not 100% guaranteed, but I have never thought it was worth paying $7 or similar to per seat to reduce that risk or to "sit up front".)
Anyway, @CaptJCool seems to have settled it, by asking Jess. After Jess's response, I still see no reason to pay for seats when travelling with my last child under 12 or others. Perhaps travelling on my own for more than 90 minutes to avoid a middle seat, but that's about it. Not selfish, but both on principal and not wasting my money, even if it is only $7.
If others want to pay, good for them, but if you get moved because a parent needs to sit with their child, don't blame them, blame the airline for not planning better. And ask for your $7 back.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

And this is entirely possible if you select your seats at booking, as a responsible parent would do to ensure not separated from their child.

On a LCC will this cost extra, but that is the LCC model. If you want seat selection included in the ticket price then fly a full service carrier and bu a ticket type that includes it.

Ultimately the airline is responsible for the safety of those on board. If a passenger chooses not to pay for seats, the airline will just have to fix it.

 

[GrahamBRI]

Ultimately the airline is responsible for the safety of those on board. If a passenger chooses not to pay for seats, the airline will just have to fix it.

Acknowledged (it will need fixing by the airline) and also noting that safety is multi-layered. Firstly, parents need to take primary accountability for the safety of their children. We choose which airline to fly on and we choose what we will pay for to ensure the health and wellbeing of ourselves and our children. While it is fine for us to hold others to account, the first step in safety is for us to manage the situations we place ourselves in. If we choose to save costs and rely on others to take full responsibility for the outcome, it is a little harsh when things don't work out as expected, for us to just blame others when we had some ability to improve the situation. I would be very surprised to see the final outcome of any airlines response to minor being seated by themselves, to not result in a safe outcome, but I am just sure that the health and wellbeing of those of us that choose to take this path will on occasion be unnecessarily impacted.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Acknowledged (it will need fixing by the airline) and also noting that safety is multi-layered. Firstly, parents need to take primary accountability for the safety of their children. We choose which airline to fly on and we choose what we will pay for to ensure the health and wellbeing of ourselves and our children. While it is fine for us to hold others to account, the first step in safety is for us to manage the situations we place ourselves in. If we choose to save costs and rely on others to take full responsibility for the outcome, it is a little harsh when things don't work out as expected, for us to just blame others when we had some ability to improve the situation. I would be very surprised to see the final outcome of any airlines response to minor being seated by themselves, to not result in a safe outcome, but I am just sure that the health and wellbeing of those of us that choose to take this path will on occasion be unnecessarily impacted.

That doesn’t address the issue of a parent going against the flow during an evacuation while they’re searching for their child.

The airline owes me - as the non parent - that safety measure. So regardless of whether the parent cares, I care (about me).

The second issue of course is that regardless of how the parent behaves, don’t the rest of us owe it to the child to take their interests into account?