US airlines are pushing to remove protections for passengers and add more fees

> [Elimination of] Automatic Refunds for Cancellations

Does this mean when the passenger cancels or when the airline cancels? If it’s when the passenger chooses to cancel, this seems fine and fair: he paid for a flight; he chose not to take it. If it’s the latter, then it seems very unfair.

> Transparency of Fees

This seems patently unfair. Folks should know what they’re going to be paying ahead of time.

> Family Seating Guarantees

On the one hand, this seems fair. If you want to sit together, pay for that privilege. It doesn’t make sense to tax every other passenger for it. OTOH, families are a net benefit to society, so maybe it’s right for everyone else to pitch in a bit. Also, nothing is worse than the folks who didn’t pay up ahead of time who bug one, ‘may we switch seats so we can sit together?’ So perhaps free family seating makes life easier for everyone.

> [Elimination of] Accessibility Protections for Disabled Passengers

I wonder what that actually means. It could be fair (for example, folks too large for one seat purchasing two) or unfair.

I know way too many parents who take the stance of not bothering to pay for assigned seating, on the assumption that people will move around to accommodate them.

As someone who pays for an assigned seat so I can sit where I want, this annoys the crap out of me as now they expect people like me to move.

When I point this out, their response is "why should I pay for that?"

I agree with the airlines here but if it makes life overall less stressful for all to put families together due to the bad behavior of those parents, I'm fine with it.

You don't have to engage or justify staying in your seat, just say no thank you and end the conversation

And I'll smile back knowing you're about to have a really great flight with my 3 year old :)

(to be clear, I don't do this personally and pay extra to sit together but I do hope people start parking their kids all over the plane since that's what we all seem to want! It's tempting.)

So according to you: they should give up their paid seat so that you don't have to pay for assigned seats, even when you know way in advance that you are traveling with a 3 yr old?

Let's ignore special cases where you didn't have a chance to buy assigned seats, and focus on the vastly more common scenario where parents can easily pay to ensure seats of their choice.

Yes, it's nickel and diming by the airlines to make all seat assignments paid. And hating airlines is completely justified.

But I find the entitlement of parents, that other passengers should accommodate their parsimonious preferences, just amazing.

No. According to me there is probably a middleground.

You can't have it both ways that you don't want a child next to you and just expect parents to spend extra money to accommodate you.

Easily pay? I assure you it isn't easy for a lot of us. The irony of your use of entitlement.

You're assuming a stranger will watch your kid and not just let them constantly unbuckle and run to your seat the entire flight.

If you can't afford to fly then drive.