Bumped from Row 4 at the gate

[Spacetravel]

No physical issue, she just decided that she wanted/was entitled to my seat. Unfortunately, I think it would have caused a prolonged incident if I had made an issue out of it as selfish woman wasn't budging. I like my window seat too (especially to/from NZ), so all in all, I think the cabin crew could have been a little bit more grateful for my willingness to move. Ah well.

The way I've handled this in the past is something to the effect of lets compare boarding passes, or something that encourages them to get out the boarding pass and show me. So far its managed to move even stubborn passengers. I've never had a flight attendant overrule me though. Which as previously mentioned, all air crew directions have to be followed and once they do that its game over.

 

[RichardMEL]

@RichardMEL is that you. Normally when you go off on your dissertations your comments are are thought through. I am surprised that a comment such as "I've been bumped from my forward row Y seat as a status passenger in order for a couple to sit together." set you off. What is "my forward row Y seat as a status passenger" for all you know this could be some PS or NB member in R15 on a narrow body pushed to R23. As an aside talking to some in the office who do not fly apparently NB is higher status than QP members as they have to pay.

You are high enough up the QF food chain to know that if called to the QF service desk it is normally to:

• ask if you are willing to move seats
• the lounge staff have moved your seating, Y to J, or
• let you know there is an issue with the flight (not yet announced) and they are working on it.

So Matt I'm honestly a little confused at the point of your response? Or what you're trying to say Maybe my coffee has not yet kicked in

Trying to not get too long winded as is my usual want I was writing generally as a passenger not as me with a high status(for now, anyway). In my view the same should apply to EVERYONE regardless of status or whatever. The example of people wanting to sit together is not an operational requirement. It's a customer service nicety in my view. Even if I'm a Bronze and I am allocated a seat either by myself or even on check in should I not be asked to move to accommodate another's personal request?

I reckon fair's fair and it should apply through the aircraft from row 1 to the last row - the "right" of the requesters - even if they are a higher status - isn't more than that of the person with the seat allocated - most SPECIALLY if they picked it themselves. Now sure, if you're in 23B and they offer to move you to 11C you'll probably jump at that (and if it was changed on you you wouldn't complain either I reckon) but let's face it it's still a request that isn't required..

And what's to say that what QF sees as a solo pax sitting in 23B isn't actually with others in their group on separate, non linked, bookings?

I guess I see it as a case of "If you would like something but do not need it, it is polite to ask rather than just take" or in the scenario of "people who want to sit together request agent for help" that agent should not just willy nilly decide to move people around but either page and ask or suggest said people request on board.

I'm sure I've missed your point and apologise if so

 

[RichardMEL]

If you ask it implies that the person can say no. I'm not sure that option actually exists.

Well in the case of a request of the type suggested which isn't an operational need or requirement then it should be perfectly OK to say "No thank you. I would prefer to sit in my preassigned seat" and while that may not be liked people who have not organised themselves properly in the first place should be able to be mature enough to suck it up and be split if that is the case in my view.

Again I have seen people move multiple times without issue. I've been asked and moved many times happily. However these are requests, not requirements.

 

[RichardMEL]

I feel like I should add a caveat The way I have written it seems like I think everything is black and white here. I dislike Collingwood so I want to say that OBVIOUSLY it's not so cut and died and there will be exceptions based on common sense. For example - someone with special needs flying with a carer, a kid and parent/guardian(obviously you would not want to randomally dump a child alone in a row or next to a stranger) and that kind of thing. In general I still advocate though in the vast majority of cases that requests to move others so that a party can sit together should be done as requests and ask rather than just do.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I feel like I should add a caveat The way I have written it seems like I think everything is black and white here I dislike Collingwood so I want to say that OBVIOUSLY it's not so cut and died and there will be exceptions based on common sense. For example - someone with special needs flying with a carer, a kid and parent/guardian(obviously you would not want to randomally dump a child alone in a row or next to a stranger) and that kind of thing. In general I still advocate though in the vast majority of cases that requests to move others so that a party can sit together should be done as requests and ask rather than just do.

Those are all operational reasons - pertaining to the operation of the aircraft, or the safety and security of those on board.

The conditions of carriage don't specify commercial reasons for moving someone.

 

[RichardMEL]

Those are all operational reasons - pertaining to the operation of the aircraft, or the safety and security of those on board.

The conditions of carriage don't specify commercial reasons for moving someone.

That's a broad definition of "Operational Reasons" (but as you say none of it is explicitly defined). Perhaps jb747 may wish to comment on his view of what that means in practice (yes, you may have to give some of those seats you own ).

I mean where a kid sits is, in general, not going to impact on aircraft safety or performance (unless it's a Brasilia or something tiny). It IS a safety issue for the passengers but not for the aircraft... same with someone with special needs, wheelchair etc (execption exit rows, but we all know those have special conditions attached anyway which crews check every flight).

So do we consider pax issues like this as commercial or operational?

Again I do recognise QF (or any carrier) can do what they like. I agree seats assignments are not guaranteed etc.. I totally understand all of that. I'm more about the principle. If I'm swapped to another seat so that someone else can occupy that same seat in the same cabin then that has zero implications on aircraft operations and safety(unless AM). That's my point. I do not consider someone wanting to sit with someone else to be an operational requirement, but a request. Simples

 

[MEL_Traveller]

That's a broad definition of "Operational Reasons" (but as you say none of it is explicitly defined). Perhaps jb747 may wish to comment on his view of what that means in practice (yes, you may have to give some of those seats you own ).

I mean where a kid sits is, in general, not going to impact on aircraft safety or performance (unless it's a Brasilia or something tiny). It IS a safety issue for the passengers but not for the aircraft... same with someone with special needs, wheelchair etc (execption exit rows, but we all know those have special conditions attached anyway which crews check every flight).

So do we consider pax issues like this as commercial or operational?

Again I do recognise QF (or any carrier) can do what they like. I agree seats assignments are not guaranteed etc.. I totally understand all of that. I'm more about the principle. If I'm swapped to another seat so that someone else can occupy that same seat in the same cabin then that has zero implications on aircraft operations and safety(unless AM). That's my point. I do not consider someone wanting to sit with someone else to be an operational requirement, but a request. Simples

The aircraft must be operated safely - both on the ground and in-flight.

Sitting a child with an adult is a safety issue because in the event of an emergency a parent may go against the flow of passengers trying to get to an exit while they look for their child. A child or passenger with special needs may need assistance with putting on their sea belt or oxygen mask. An elderly passenger may need to be seated close to the WC to minimise their chances of being impacted if turbulence occurs, or tripping over seats or other passengers.

Moving a non-status passenger to accommodate a status passenger's favourite seat request is a commercial reason as it has no safety or security reason.

 

[Matt_01]

So Matt I'm honestly a little confused at the point of your response? Or what you're trying to say Maybe my coffee has not yet kicked in

After re reading my post and your response to kpro I realise that I missed your sentence "Now kpro doesn't say they weren't asked first, but it is implied by my way of reading." I have also intertwined 2 seperate trains of thought (mine) being your response and my thinking of kpro's statement "I've been bumped from my forward row Y seat as a status passenger" this is quite vague. I wonder how far forward that was, in my mind forward in Y is either the first or second row on any type of aircraft, others may have a different view. Also the term status again vague in my mind status only kicks in when the tangible benefits that are important to you become available. When my parents hit PS they were chuffed and initially of the opinion that this would mean something to QF however the realisation of long call wait times and their ability not to redeem QF seats soon kicked in. It would be a fair suggestion that I have become their default TA over the past few years. Further if I look at my own circumstances I have *G with SQ but in reality this means very little to me. When I travel with SQ it is J so all the priority check in, boarding lounge access is a given and I rarely travel with other *A carriers.

After picking up on your comment (mentioned above) I would agree if Kpro was not asked I would find this surprising. I have always been asked in advance if I am willing to change seats to accommodate couples and other seating requests. I have offered to switch seats when on the aircraft to accommodate who seem to be travelling together but are seperated. I have also been paged to be informed there will an assistance animal (seeing eye dog) in the row I am traveling in and would I like to be moved or willing to provide assistance in a case of an emergency or if required.

On the topic of being bumped from R4 at the gate this has happened to me on a few occasions and had to go to the service desk, my situation had a different outcome and I was reallocated to J, assume these were for operational reasons.

 

[kpro]

It would've been row 4 or 5 on a two class 717 and bumped back a row.

I don't recall being asked, just that I was paged and handed a new boarding pass. It was a while back though, so yes it is possible that I was asked and did confirm that this was okay.