5 ms·

> If you booked a ticket that doesn't have a signed seating that's the fair class you chose and you get what you get. n.b. "a signed" -> assigned, "fair" -> fa

> If you booked a ticket that doesn't have a signed seating that's the fair class you chose and you get what you get. n.b. "a signed" -> assigned, "fair" -> fare What you're in effect saying is that young children & their parents traveling with them should be ineligible for the cheapest fare classes, i.e. you're advocating for what is effectively an extra tax on them. Is that the intention?

joebob42 2y ago
Well, the cheapest fair class doesn't include a features they want, which has a cost to the airline. That seems reasonable. If they are eligible and get to pick seats, then it's a tax on everyone else to support that.
DiggyJohnson 2y ago
Well, I think they're arguing that if you want to be guaranteed to sit next to your child, you need to pay whatever fee is required to select your own seat. That seems normal and mostly, even though I understand why this new policy exists as well. There's plenty of things parents have to pay for like this.
- metabagel 2y ago
  > That seems normal It didn't use to be normal.
  - DiggyJohnson 2y ago
    What didn't?
    - dataflow 2y ago
      I believe they're referring to having to pay more to sit next to your children.
elmerfud 2y ago
I'm sorry I use voice to text and sometimes it spells the words wrong. Since you clearly understood what I meant apparently you like to shame people with disabilities that need to use accommodating features. Yes people who require additional features should pay for additional features. Just because it's an airline doesn't mean you get to aggregate expenses to other customers for the features you want. Would you be okay if overweight people automatically got first class for the same price point as the cheapest fare? Your lifestyle and that includes having children is not the burden of other people to finance.
- arrowsmith 2y ago
  > people who require additional features should pay for additional features. This is a strange thing to say immediately after chiding someone for not considering the disabled. Should wheelchair ramps on public buildings be funded via a special tax that only wheelchair users have to pay?
  - elmerfud 2y ago
    Disabled people who required specific accommodations for their disability in a specific sense yes need to pay extra. You will see this when they buy a vehicle that requires things like hand controls or a wheelchair lift or other things like that. Those features cost more and there is no expectation that every other car purchaser will chip in to pay for that. When talking about accessibility to public buildings and making certain basic accessibility features part of the design and construction is different. Trying to conflate the two confuses the argument here. Requiring that your child automatically get a seat next to you for no additional charge in no way relates to ensuring that a wheelchair can make it to the plane.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    The ADA is the law (In the US, other countries have their own version which is broadly similar), but you are allowed to not provide a ramp or other disability assistance in cases where it is not reasonable (the ADA defines this in detail). If you look at the rules, most of them do not add very much to the cost of a building - making a hall a little wider so there is room for a wheelchair doesn't cost much. Where it would cost a lot the ADA will generally let you out of doing it.
freetanga 2y ago
Why should a 300lb neck beard fly cheaper than a 80lb kid if he requires much more fuel to burn? Lets weight passengers and luggage at the gate…
- bluGill 2y ago
  Most of the cost of a flight is fixed. If the plane is empty (other than the minimum airline staff) or full to max weight (not mass!) makes very little difference in the amount of fuel burned.

joebob42 2y ago

Well, the cheapest fair class doesn't include a features they want, which has a cost to the airline. That seems reasonable. If they are eligible and get to pick seats, then it's a tax on everyone else to support that.

DiggyJohnson 2y ago

Well, I think they're arguing that if you want to be guaranteed to sit next to your child, you need to pay whatever fee is required to select your own seat. That seems normal and mostly, even though I understand why this new policy exists as well. There's plenty of things parents have to pay for like this.

metabagel 2y ago
> That seems normal It didn't use to be normal.
- DiggyJohnson 2y ago
  What didn't?
  - dataflow 2y ago
    I believe they're referring to having to pay more to sit next to your children.

elmerfud 2y ago

I'm sorry I use voice to text and sometimes it spells the words wrong. Since you clearly understood what I meant apparently you like to shame people with disabilities that need to use accommodating features. Yes people who require additional features should pay for additional features. Just because it's an airline doesn't mean you get to aggregate expenses to other customers for the features you want. Would you be okay if overweight people automatically got first class for the same price point as the cheapest fare? Your lifestyle and that includes having children is not the burden of other people to finance.

arrowsmith 2y ago
> people who require additional features should pay for additional features. This is a strange thing to say immediately after chiding someone for not considering the disabled. Should wheelchair ramps on public buildings be funded via a special tax that only wheelchair users have to pay?
- elmerfud 2y ago
  Disabled people who required specific accommodations for their disability in a specific sense yes need to pay extra. You will see this when they buy a vehicle that requires things like hand controls or a wheelchair lift or other things like that. Those features cost more and there is no expectation that every other car purchaser will chip in to pay for that. When talking about accessibility to public buildings and making certain basic accessibility features part of the design and construction is different. Trying to conflate the two confuses the argument here. Requiring that your child automatically get a seat next to you for no additional charge in no way relates to ensuring that a wheelchair can make it to the plane.
- bluGill 2y ago
  The ADA is the law (In the US, other countries have their own version which is broadly similar), but you are allowed to not provide a ramp or other disability assistance in cases where it is not reasonable (the ADA defines this in detail). If you look at the rules, most of them do not add very much to the cost of a building - making a hall a little wider so there is room for a wheelchair doesn't cost much. Where it would cost a lot the ADA will generally let you out of doing it.

freetanga 2y ago

Why should a 300lb neck beard fly cheaper than a 80lb kid if he requires much more fuel to burn? Lets weight passengers and luggage at the gate…

bluGill 2y ago
Most of the cost of a flight is fixed. If the plane is empty (other than the minimum airline staff) or full to max weight (not mass!) makes very little difference in the amount of fuel burned.