Simon Calder offers travel baggage advice
We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. More info
On Reddit, the man said he had paid extra to book a seat at the front of the plane. However, he was then told the seat was needed for a mother and baby.
The man said the airline’s decision made him “so p*ssed” and said it didn’t feel fair that he had to give up his seat.
Express.co.uk commenters had a mixed reaction to the story, with some agreeing with the enraged man.
‘Rocco’ said: “My nightmare is a baby or young child making a disturbance while I’m trying to sleep on a long-haul flight.
“Always happens to me. Kid behind kicking the seat and there is nearly always one screaming.”
Another commenter said: “When entitled mummy came along she should have been told she was too late as all the type of seats she wanted were already taken.
“The issue was then between her and the airline, he should never have been involved. He is the victim of appalling customer service.”
Someone else agreed saying: “The male passenger was right to be furious. He booked, he paid and rightly should have travelled.”
While the irate man did end up losing the seat, the airline did offer him another seat with extra legroom although he wasn’t upgraded.
One commenter said: “If you pay for your seat, nobody has the god given right to ask you to swap your seat to accommodate a kid and mother regardless of the situation.
“You pay for that seat, the seat’s yours. End of.”
Another even thought that people shouldn’t take babies on long haul flights, saying: “Personally I don’t think people should take babies on long haul flights. They often cry which means they are unhappy.”
Others thought the airline was to blame for the situation and should have warned the man he could lose the seat.
One said: “Maybe the airlines shouldn’t take bookings for seats they may then give to another customer.
“Or at the very least have a warning on the booking that those seats are subject to this clause.
“I don’t like the man’s attitude, who is he to question someone else’s reasons for flying and he did get better seats in the end, but at the same time I can understand him being upset.”
While many Express.co.uk commenters supported the man, a few people said they felt he was in the wrong.
One commented: “If the airline did not make it clear the reservation was subject to a woman and child not needing the seat, then yes, it’s perfectly understandable to be angry.
“They probably have it somewhere on the terms and conditions though. And let’s be fair, most of us would indeed give up on our seat for a woman, especially one carrying a child.
“Be happy to have given a mother a little bit more space and comfort.”
Another added: “This man is selfish and typical of the society we live in.”
Source: Read Full Article