Qantas to charge passengers extra for exit row seats

[Alanslegal]

An invite into SYD/MEL F lounge. Have I misjudged the number of people willing to pay for exit row seats?

That's a targetted offer knowing I'm only a measley SG

Just two days ago I booked a set of flights on SQ and prepaid exit row seats on their 380 upper deck and gladly paid the $USD50. The conversion came out to $64.xx so I saved a bit over $15.xx over QF's $80.00 per segment.

I know most of my family & friends who go travelling, even if its once per ten years always, want the most comfortable seats and ofter refer to those ones at the front ie bulkhead, and also exit rows. Now even these irregular fliers can opt to pay $80 to sit there, and they are more than willing to pay for that bit of comfort - so thus forming my opinion that people are willing to pay esp if its long haul.

 

[Commuter]

I am sure Qantas has thought about that idea already. Plus it would be the next logical step along with charging for checked luggage. Why stop at just charging for exit rows?

They need to keep some product differentiation from JQ.

 

[serfty]

More information posted by whughes3 on FT:

Qantas Agents - Pre-Purchase of Exit Row Seating

Interesting, it seems while CL do not have to pay, by omission they appear to also be subject to the 7 day limit.

A/K seats with restricted leg room will not be sold. Sales only for WHY seating.

 

[adrian]

Regardless of whether you are for are against this new policy, this particular rules seems very mean:

"QF has the sole discretion, at check-in or boarding, to determine whether a passenger meets the requirements to sit in a exit row seat. If the passanger does not meet the requirements, they will be assigned a regular Economy seat. The additional amount paid or points redeemed for an exit row seat will be forfeited and will not be refunded."

 

[mannej]

Regardless of whether you are for are against this new policy, this particular rules seems very mean:

"QF has the sole discretion, at check-in or boarding, to determine whether a passenger meets the requirements to sit in a exit row seat. If the passanger does not meet the requirements, they will be assigned a regular Economy seat. The additional amount paid or points redeemed for an exit row seat will be forfeited and will not be refunded."

Why is it mean? QF clearly state who is eligible to sit in an exit row. If the op decides to purchase an exit row, but is not eligible due to the conditions listed, isn't it their fault?

 

[dajop]

Regardless of whether you are for are against this new policy, this particular rules seems very mean:

"QF has the sole discretion, at check-in or boarding, to determine whether a passenger meets the requirements to sit in a exit row seat. If the passanger does not meet the requirements, they will be assigned a regular Economy seat. The additional amount paid or points redeemed for an exit row seat will be forfeited and will not be refunded."

I guess it's designed to encourage a little "self policing" as long as QF outline the requirements for sitting in exit row (eg fit and able to assist in emergency). That really should make the passenger think twice about forking up the cash if they do not meet the criteria. I do note that if on DJ, your circumstances change after purchase (medical etc) you can rind and advise to get a refund.

As observed by ozmark earlier, and now in the document serfty attached I think this is particularly repugnant:

What happens to an Exit Row seat booking, if my passengers’ Frequent Flyer
upgrade is successful?
If a passenger has requested an upgrade using Frequent Flyer points and also paid for an Exit Row seat, the Exit Row seat will be forfeited if the upgrade is successful. The passenger will not get a refund of the amount paid for the Exit Row seat.​

Behind the scenes people who have paid for exit row now will go to the top of the upgrade queue, and none of us will be any the wiser.

 

[oz_mark]

I do note that if on DJ, your circumstances change after purchase (medical etc) you can rind and advise to get a refund.

I believe JQ and QF 'may' refund if you ring up beforehand with changed circumstances. They don't refund if you lob up at check-in not meeting the requirements.

 

[dajop]

Here in lies the issue to me. QF have not removed any benefit which they have committed to providing to Platinum members. All they have done is cease to provide a facility which was above and beyond that which was agreed to be offered

I disagree, whilst they have not made any written public committment to provide this benefit, they evidence is clear that over many years they have provided it as a benefit. Irrelevant whether it is written down or not (and I am sure there is internal communication and training to Premium desk staff that means there has been a committment to provide the service platinums).

Sure it's not something that makes you "sign on" in the first place, but once you discover it, it does become part of the package and part of your expectations. It's the little things over and above what is written down that make people feel valued as customers (and not just talking airlines), once those things start slowly disappearing then it detracts from the loyalty equation, and people may start moving their business elsewhere.

 

[JohnK]

They need to keep some product differentiation from JQ.

Agree. Cloth seats as opposed to leather seats and different coloured uniforms for the check-in staff and cabin crew.

Behind the scenes people who have paid for exit row now will go to the top of the upgrade queue, and none of us will be any the wiser.

Could be a worthwhile gamble by some to purchase an un-upgradeable airfare, prepay for exit row and hope for an op-up. Technically more privileges removed from status frequent flyers although this is not a published privilege.

 

[Evan]

Agree. Cloth seats as opposed to leather seats and different coloured uniforms for the check-in staff and cabin crew.


Could be a worthwhile gamble by some to purchase an un-upgradeable airfare, prepay for exit row and hope for an op-up. Technically more privileges removed from status frequent flyers although this is not a published privilege.

I think dajop was refering to the fact if they are granted points upgrades then QF keep the exit row $$ and get then to spend the points on the upgrade.
But your line of thinking is a probable event i could imagine, then they can double sell the exit rows if they op-up somebody already with a paid exit row.

 

[JohnK]

I think dajop was refering to the fact if they are granted points upgrades then QF keep the exit row $$ and get then to spend the points on the upgrade.

If you have already requested a points upgrade upto 3 months before the flight why would you pay for an exit row 7 days before the flight? That sounds like wasted money to me. But I guess I am looking at it differently.

 

[medhead]

Why is it mean? QF clearly state who is eligible to sit in an exit row. If the op decides to purchase an exit row, but is not eligible due to the conditions listed, isn't it their fault?

I think it is mean because it is at the sole descretion of QF to determine if you are fit for the exit row. In effect QF can decide that you are not fit and kick you out of the seat with out regard to whether or not you are actually fiit for the seat :shock:

That is mean. An upset CIP and that's it "No exit row for you" :!:

 

[adrian]

Why is it mean? QF clearly state who is eligible to sit in an exit row. If the op decides to purchase an exit row, but is not eligible due to the conditions listed, isn't it their fault?

While the requirements to be eligible to sit in a exit row may be clearly stated, interpreting those rules and determining who is eligible is not so clear. They are open to interpretation.

My guess is that there won't be many instances where they move a passenger from their paid-for exit row seat, into a regular economy seat, and so the cost of refunding the money or points would be minimal to Qantas.

IMO, it is mean, and short-sighted.

 

[Dave Noble]

My guess is that there won't be many instances where they move a passenger from their paid-for exit row seat, into a regular economy seat, and so the cost of refunding the money or points would be minimal to Qantas.

IMO, it is mean, and short-sighted.

But the person who decided the regulations did not apply to him and decided to book regardless is denying the opportunity for someone else to be able to book the seat

Since they will refund the cost if informed in advance of a change to the persons suitability for the seat, it seems pretty fair to me

Dave

 

[Commuter]

But the person who decided the regulations did not apply to him and decided to book regardless is denying the opportunity for someone else to be able to book the seat

Since they will refund the cost if informed in advance of a change to the persons suitability for the seat, it seems pretty fair to me

Dave

I agree with what Dave is saying here.

I base this on my experience of witnessing issues on carriers that do charge for exit row seats (as well as hearing about it from crew). They have a lot of problems with people who are clearly unsuitable booking them even though they are shown the suitability criteria when they book and need to tick the box to say they agree.

It is QF's way of saying "if you make a false declaration that you are suitable when you are not, we will not refund you", basically. It happens more often than people think.

 

[medhead]

I agree with what Dave is saying here.

I base this on my experience of witnessing issues on carriers that do charge for exit row seats (as well as hearing about it from crew). They have a lot of problems with people who are clearly unsuitable booking them even though they are shown the suitability criteria when they book and need to tick the box to say they agree.

It is QF's way of saying "if you make a false declaration that you are suitable when you are not, we will not refund you", basically. It happens more often than people think.

But the problem is that qantas decide who is suitable based on the subjective judgement of the CIP. That isn't necessarily based on the actually rules. Qantas decides you are unfit and that is it, they don't have to justify their decision and they pax has no right to challenge the decision.

Dave has a point if there was going to be a transparent system on deciding these matters. Clearly that isn't the case.

 

[straitman]

But the problem is that qantas decide who is suitable based on the subjective judgement of the CIP. That isn't necessarily based on the actually rules. Qantas decides you are unfit and that is it, they don't have to justify their decision and they pax has no right to challenge the decision.

Dave has a point if there was going to be a transparent system on deciding these matters. Clearly that isn't the case.

No matter how you apply this the decision will always be subjective. I have to ask though 'Why would the CIP/CSM make a decision other than based on the actual rules :?:'

 

[Commuter]

But the problem is that qantas decide who is suitable based on the subjective judgement of the CIP. That isn't necessarily based on the actually rules. Qantas decides you are unfit and that is it, they don't have to justify their decision and they pax has no right to challenge the decision.

Dave has a point if there was going to be a transparent system on deciding these matters. Clearly that isn't the case.

I suspect they will be reasonably fair about it. There is nothing that defines the level of hearing impairment at which point the person becomes disqualified from sitting in an exit row seat, for instance. So the check-in person would need to apply his discretion in making an assessment. If QF does no make it clear that this is determined by their sole discretion, this can become open to argument and then you'll soon end up with silly situations.

While I may not be entirely happy with QF at the moment as you've probably noticed, I do defend their stance on this point.

 

[Moody]

I've always thought that exit row seats should be allocated on the basis of need rather than greed, and it amuses me to walk past a down-on-his-luck basketballer folded like origami behind a short fat businessman with the exit row seat fully reclined.

So offerring exit row seats it to anyone willing to stump up for them is a pretty good compromise in my book. That way the vertically enhanced or nervous flyers can get a bit of space around them that was otherwise denied them due to being second-class citizens in some peoples eyes.

But don't worry. I'm sure the platinums will still get their extra special greeting to make up for it

 

[JohnK]

It is QF's way of saying "if you make a false declaration that you are suitable when you are not, we will not refund you", basically. It happens more often than people think.

If it happens more than people actually think then the airline should not accept money from the passenger unless they are absolutely certain that the passenger can fulfill the duties required to sit in an exit row.

Personally I think the conditions specified for purchasing an exit row are not clear and open to interpretation. I would not want to pay for exit row and end up with a check-in/gate agent on a bad day.

That way the vertically enhanced or nervous flyers can get a bit of space around them that was otherwise denied them due to being second-class citizens in some peoples eyes.

But don't worry. I'm sure the platinums will still get their extra special greeting to make up for it

That is a really funny wind-up. And I am a Platinum and a nervous flyer. But now I have to get in line with everyone else and pay for the privilege. Yeah right....