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

peachyprice

tain wrote: »

:rotfl: Lol do you know what the difference between CAA rules and UK laws are?

You need to be asking NFH that question really.

leylandsunaddict

tain wrote: »

Eek.

I hope you don't just live by British laws when you visit other countries.

It's got nothing to do with what I do. Do the UK airlines keep other countries 'laws', or do they fall in line with the CAA and UK H&S?

leylandsunaddict

tain wrote: »

I've said already a few pages back - if the airline has no way of seating people together, that's an entirely different kettle of fish. I'm stating that the choice to seat people differently, which is quickly resolved on paying a fee, is not acceptable.

I think you're putting a price on something that doesn't have a price in this next bit. It costs the airlines nothing to seat people next to each other. I could write the algorithm to do it if I needed - and that includes working out the technical side of balancing the plane et al. There is no additional cost to build into everyone else's ticket price, it's simply an extra avenue for them to earn a profit on.

I think you're making a mistake when you discuss 'anyone' and 'everyone' then mention anyone under the age of 16/18. Children are NOT anyone and everyone - and should never be treated as such. The law is pretty clear on this. Can you leave a 10 year old at home looking after a 3 year old on their own? The law doesn't explicitly say no, but you'd be hauled over hot coals and thrown in jail if you did.

Whether you can write an algorithm or not is irrelevant.

Some airlines charge extra for prebooked seating. It is an option. You choose the airline and you choose whether to pay for that option. Why would a company not charge for an optional extra? They'd be daft not to. If they lose that revenue stream they will increase the cost of the ticket, to everyone and that is just wrong IMO.

What age are you calling children?

Talking about a 10 year old looking after a 3 yr old has nothing to do with it, because neither is happening in this case and neither of them are left on their own. Obviously a 3 year old can't look after themselves, but a 10 year old is more than capable of doing so.

peachyprice

leylandsunaddict wrote: »

It's got nothing to do with what I do. Do the UK airlines keep other countries 'laws', or do they fall in line with the CAA and UK H&S?

Neither according to the opinion of some on this thread

tain

Pollycat wrote: »

You've been banging on about 'Health & Safety' for the last 4 pages and you don't even understand the original discussion. :rotfl:

Your trolling is boring now. At least try to be smart with it so it's entertaining.

tain

leylandsunaddict wrote: »

It's got nothing to do with what I do. Do the UK airlines keep other countries 'laws', or do they fall in line with the CAA and UK H&S?

Haha yes. Yes they do. Both when they accept payments for flights in their country, and them flights land on that country's soil.

Seriously people - could at least someone have some research in their pocket before posting on here? I know it's just an internet forum and people post on a whim, but if you know zero about laws - please just don't make it up and presume you know what you're talking about.

tain

leylandsunaddict wrote: »

Whether you can write an algorithm or not is irrelevant.

Some airlines charge extra for prebooked seating. It is an option. You choose the airline and you choose whether to pay for that option. Why would a company not charge for an optional extra? They'd be daft not to. If they lose that revenue stream they will increase the cost of the ticket, to everyone and that is just wrong IMO.

What age are you calling children?

Talking about a 10 year old looking after a 3 yr old has nothing to do with it, because neither is happening in this case and neither of them are left on their own. Obviously a 3 year old can't look after themselves, but a 10 year old is more than capable of doing so.

Have you read anything I've said about H&S laws and how they make these 'optional extras' also likely to be breaching the law? Because you seem to be cherry-picking which of my posts to discuss, and it's boring having to repeat myself all the time.

tain

19 pages through now, and I've yet to hear a convincing argument that counters what I've said regarding our H&S laws.

I've taken the time and trouble to post citations from the law, and explain it in full. It would be useful to read someone else who has an informed opinion as well, as I'm not certain I'm right - I'm just saying how I'd interpret the law based on my professional opinion.

NFH

tain wrote: »

19 pages through now

I only see 10 pages. If you see only 20 posts per page, then you need to increase this at http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/profile.php?do=editoptions

zagfles

tain wrote: »

19 pages through now, and I've yet to hear a convincing argument that counters what I've said regarding our H&S laws.

I've taken the time and trouble to post citations from the law, and explain it in full. It would be useful to read someone else who has an informed opinion as well, as I'm not certain I'm right - I'm just saying how I'd interpret the law based on my professional opinion.

Good luck with that! People here aren't interested in actual facts and technical nitty gritty of the law. I predict another 19 pages of bitter whinging and judgemental "I've paid and so should everyone, only bad parents don't pay" type posts... and the needle returns to start of the song...