MSE News: 'Family tax': Dad's outrage as Ryanair tries to seat 3yo away from family

Lewie

Pollycat wrote: »

Not a great analogy really.

Who must sit next to their travelling partner?

It's a great analogy.
On the basis you stated you can opt out of pretty much all taxes.
They are compulsory if you feel the need to do the things that incur tax.
As for must, some feel that way.
If they want the 'guarantee' it is compulsory to pay the extra.
I agree, still not a tax in the literal sense but a levy that has been introduced to make people think they'd better pay just in case.

teffers

The real issue here is that these companies don't allocate these seats 'randomly'. They allocate them in such a was as to create these situations to generate more cash.

Now you can call it part of their business model, but in reality it's bloody sharp business as it's not transparent (to all) that they're actively doing this.

If you want specific seating (seatguru.com etc) that's one thing, but actively and deliberately allocating family members with children non adjacent seats ? that's a !!!!s trick.

Pollycat

Lewie wrote: »

It's a great analogy.
On the basis you stated you can opt out of pretty much all taxes.
They are compulsory if you feel the need to do the things that incur tax.
As for must, some feel that way.
If they want the 'guarantee' it is compulsory to pay the extra.
I agree, still not a tax in the literal sense but a levy that has been introduced to make people think they'd better pay just in case.

No, it's not.

If you want to drive and do so without paying 'the tax', you are breaking the law.
Hardly the same as wanting to sit together on a plane.

At least we agree it's not a tax.
And not compulsory - in the true sense of the word.

Pollycat

teffers wrote: »

The real issue here is that these companies don't allocate these seats 'randomly'. They allocate them in such a was as to create these situations to generate more cash.

Now you can call it part of their business model, but in reality it's bloody sharp business as it's not transparent (to all) that they're actively doing this.

If you want specific seating (seatguru.com etc) that's one thing, but actively and deliberately allocating family members with children non adjacent seats ? that's a !!!!s trick.

We have been allocated seats on Easyet next to each other by the system.
All we had to do was accept them.
If we had been sat at opposite ends of the plane we would have had the choice of paying to choose out seats or accept the ones we'd been given.
So Easyet certainly didn't randomly allocate seats to generate more cash from us.

bluenoseam

Pollycat wrote: »

Why didn't you ask cabin crew to find people who hadn't paid to book seats?
I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to do at all, especially as you had booked specifc seats for a very good reason.
I'm sure there would hve been lots of people on the flight who hadn't paid for seats together.

You wouldn't have been the reason that a family was split up - the adults in that family who'd decided not to pay to book seats together would have been the reason they were split up.

Did you ask for a refund of the extra you'd paid?

Because there's a better than fair chance that they had already asked all the "unassigned" passengers who refused & were now onto the "sensible" people.

I've tried to stay away from this because I know my views will be unpopular, but here's the problem - KIDS ARE EXPENSIVE. That's not a new development, you know that before you get into the whole situation so why then do people feel the need to whine when it turns out they're paying a premium for what is after all a personal choice? YOU decide to have children that means it's on YOU to accept the circumstances, that includes ensuring that you care for your children at all times unless it's physically impossible to do so.

The "parents" got cheap, it backfired on them, it's not Ryanair who have made the poor decision, it's the PARENTS who have made the poor decision.

shaun_from_Africa

Pollycat wrote: »

But it's clearly not the policy of a lot of airlines so passengers who have paid to sit together or paid for specific seats should refuse requests to move.

The problem is that the captain of the aircraft (or someone acting on their behalf) has the legal power to insist that you move. Failing to follow one of their orders can see you getting removed from the plane. (I'm sure that it doesn't happen too often but it can happen).

Pollycat

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

The problem is that the captain of the aircraft (or someone acting on their behalf) has the legal power to insist that you move. Failing to follow one of their orders can see you getting removed from the plane. (I'm sure that it doesn't happen too often but it can happen).

Pollycat wrote: »

Were you asked to move or instructed to move?

Did you point out that you'd paid to reserve your seats? Were they specific seats e.g. 12A & 12B or 'seats together'?

If it were me I would have produced my invoice and suggested cabin crew move somebody who'd not paid for seats.
AND I would have retained my boarding card and requested a refund.
I know airlines don't guarantee the seats you've paid for and in a case of aircraft change that's understandable, but to move passengers who've paid to accommodate those who haven't is clearly wrong.

Of course the captain can.

And that is why I asked another poster if they had been asked to move or instructed to move.
And posted this earlier:

Pollycat wrote: »

I wouldn't move (unless instructed to do so by cabin crew - as opposed to requested to move) for anybody who hadn't paid to reserve their seat if I had paid.

Personally, I think if there is a family who are not sat together and ask cabin crew to find them seats together, they should ask the passengers who haven't paid for seats first before moving on to those who have paid and if they still can't find anyone who is willing to move, they should instruct a party who hasn't paid rather than someone who has.

I think Thomas Cook staff got it right here:

Pollycat wrote: »

When we fly long-haul charter we pay to choose specific seats for a number of reasons (which may not be obvious to other passengers).

Unless I was instructed to move by the captain, there is no way we would give up our seats.

My OH & I ended up with a row of 3 seats each on a fairly full flight.
Cabin crew asked if we were travelling together - we were sat in aisle seats one behind the other - they were looking for 2 seats together for passengers who had obviously decided not to pay to choose their seats and wanted to be moved.
I told her that we had paid for those specific seats and she accepted that and carried on down the cabin.

tain

Has it been mentioned that companies doing this could be breaching the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999? (reg.3 and reg.19)

These regs state that all vulnerable people that are affected by their business have to be risk assessed, and seating a 2 year old away from their parent is a clear breach of this assessment.

There are also a lot of safeguarding issues coming from this as well as I'm guessing the airlines aren't doing DBS checks for the people sitting around the toddlers.

acd696

The UK tax child discount obtained on one child seat would go a long way to paying the seat reservation charge for the whole family.

mouthyman

Actually this ought to be the overriding Health & Safety matter that the HSE wades in with.

If a nasty scenario like that unfolds (and I hope it never will), then unless the parents can see that there is zero to minus hope of getting to younger family elsewhere on the aircraft, then they will refuse to get off an aircraft until they can see the kid(s) are clear of the plane too.

In an evacuation situation, the children need to be with the family at all times and prevention of delays is much better than trying to fix a delay during evacuation!

Keep the families together - and this practice of separating seat reservations from the fare already paid must stop now. Budget airlines thought they could introduce and get away with this practice, however there is now way too much of Pay-As-You-Go in the airline industry.