[FDOS_UK]

LuganoPirate – 06/11/2015 08:19 GMT

Re the middle seat, I used to do this when I had to use Ryanair from Malta to Luton.

TBH, I didn’t mind the other passenger also used the seat, so long as there was room for my stuff and a quiet (positive) word at the outset avoided any unpleasantness. I also left the BP on the seat, too.

I once booked a whole row of three and what was interesting, as I had to get the CC to tell a guy that they were all mine and he couldn’t move to the aisle after take off – he wasn’t best pleased to go back to his B seat.

[PeterCoultas]

Maybe something like supermarket parking for the disabled..but they should be tucked away so that in emergencies a greater proportion of passengers can get out unimpeded by slower moving traffic ????….Apologies for this post !!!

[LuganoPirate]

Ian, I think like FDOS I’d not make a fuss or even say anything if s/he was just placing their jacket. Any attempt to monopolise the seat or tray would get a word.

I think I’d likely inform the person in advance that I’d paid for the extra seat so we won’t have anyone sitting between us and if s/he wanted to place a jacket there it was fine.

[Bath_VIP]

I think some people still don’t get the point I am making so let me try again.

I have no problem whatsoever with disabled people like myself being prevented from sitting in emergency exit rows. It makes eminent sense on safety grounds and I would not trust myself in such instances.

If airlines did not sell exit rows for a premium (as used to be the case many years ago) then this would not be discrimination. Everybody is able buy seats without conditions and decisions on who sitts in the exit rows can be made on operational grounds.

However, when airlines sell such seats for a premium, they are offering an additional commercialised service i.e. get more space in return. When businesses sell services to the public, they are not allowed to discriminate directly or indirectly on the basis of gender, race, sexuality or disability.

if the airline, sold a mixture of extra leg room seats, some in the exit rows, others not in the exit rows (as happens in the USA), then that is fine since I can purchase an extra leg room seat that isn’t in an exit row.

If however, as happens in Europe, airlines sell only the exit rows as extra leg room seats then this is indirect discrimination disabled people. I am prevented from purchasing a service available to others who are not disabled just as a stadium would be guilty of indirect discrimination if it didn’t provide any female toilets.

I hope that makes my position clear to everyone!

[PeterCoultas]

The point I’m making is that car parking for the disabled has usually wider than average spaces, often with no parking zones on each side. Maybe airlines could provide a few seats with easier access reserved for the mobility challenged (though possibly not if due to gross obesity) ?

[WillieWelsh]

Having read through this thread may I ask the origin and destination of this flight?

I saw an older man moved from an exit row just a couple of weeks ago. He protested and said he was very fit but the crew were having none of it. He was old and that was that which I think is also age discrimination.

I can remember in the BD days being asked on several occasions to take an exit seat particularly on the F100s when there was one empty and there was a crew seat there too.

[jsn55]

Hmmmm, I thought this was only in the US. Continental used to allow the elites to request an exit row when booking but we were always scrutinized when checking in to be sure we were able. Now, of course, exit row seats are revenue producers and nobody cares.

[FDOS_UK]

Bath_VIP – 06/11/2015 16:47 GMT

I agree that there is discrimination, but don’t think you would get very far with this line of argument, as the airlines will say that the reason is operational safety.

If you look at the categories of people who are not allowed to sit there, it scopes in non-disabled people, too, such as families with young kids and older people.

The exit seats are required by law, so the airline didn’t create a new category of seat that is only available to certain people.

I agree it seems unfair, but if you feel strongly about it, would you check out the position with the Citizen’s Advice Bureau or a charity?

[AnthonyDunn]

Worth watching:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC_VRBuGQtA

but, regarding the OP, see from 06:23 onwards!

[trippleF]

Great threat! I’d like to add an experience which relates to Alex-Fly’s question regarding drunken people in exit row. I was in the row behind the exit row, and two youngsters in the exit row in front got quite drunk. When I raised my concern with the cabin staff they swiftly moved them to the back of the plane! Safety MUST come first.

[Charles-P]

UPDATE

I received a response from the airline in question, there was a few paragraphs of meaningless corporate waffle but the final sentence makes clear their position,

“But we only warn about the restrictions and it is upon the passengers to decide whether they meet the restrictions “

I had to read that three times before I believed it, they really are saying that, I have it in black and white in an email.

Incredible !

[MrMichael]

Charles-P, I hope you forward that outrageous letter to the relevant authority as an addendum to your previous correspondence to them.

[Charles-P]

MrMichael – I have indeed.

[CathayLoyalist2]

Another case of Common Sense not being applied. Case in point. You book front row seats which also happen to be bassinet seats. Some airlines do not allow those seats to be booked until closer to the departure date or make it clear that you might be subject to seat reallocation in the event a bassinet is booked. So a simple notice in the booking system which states that “the extra leg room booking and extra payment is subject to the traveler being able to carry out the required duties, see below or wherever, so be sure you can before you complete the booking. You will be subject to reallocation if it becomes apparent that you cannot carry out said duties” – or words to that affect. From the comments above I can only deduce that not to move a passenger/s who are incapable of carrying out the required duties would be in breach of aviation law. Know doubt someone here will correct me if I am wrong.

[CathayLoyalist2]

Another case of Common Sense not being applied. Case in point. You book front row seats which also happen to be bassinet seats. Some airlines do not allow those seats to be booked until closer to the departure date or make it clear that you might be subject to seat reallocation in the event a bassinet is booked. So a simple notice in the booking system which states that “the extra leg room booking and extra payment is subject to the traveler being able to carry out the required duties, see below or wherever, so be sure you can before you complete the booking. You will be subject to reallocation if it becomes apparent that you cannot carry out said duties” – or words to that affect. From the comments above I can only deduce that not to move a passenger/s who are incapable of carrying out the required duties would be in breach of aviation law. Know doubt someone here will correct me if I am wrong.

[Author]

Posts