Other reasons airlines are failing...

[Eagle-ista]

Today, while flying as a non-rev on a major legacy carrier, I had the (un)pleasant experience of tolerating a toddler for 5 hours. This kid would not sleep or sit quietly. It was either laughing (not too bad to deal with) or screaming (intolerable).

What was worse is that the lap child was climbing all over it's parents in first class on a 767.

All I could think of was the other passengers that paid to sit in first, looking forward to the nice seat, upgraded food and drink, and quiet, up-scale passengers seated around them that wouldn't bother them.

If I was one of them, I would be pi$$ed! I would be asking the reservations agent if there was even a remote chance that there would be an lap child in first class, and if there was, I'd call a different airline. This is assuming I wasn't too angry to return in the first place.

I have had this joyous experience about half the time I have been commuting over the last six months or so. When are our managers going to get it? People pay the extra fee to sit in first to get away from screaming babies that climb uncontrollably over their parents.

Am I alone in this perception?

 

[737tanker]

Eagle-ista

So in your world children & their parents would only be allowed to fly coach. I guess they use a different type of money than you. Remember the airlines don't let passengers into First Class because they like them. They either paid for the ticket or used miles that they had earned to upgrade. Enjoy your free ride in First Class, just remember the parents with the child didn't get First Class for free.

 

[I.P. Freley]

The baby was crying and ruined my non-rev experience WAHHHHHHHHH...

Your whining is more annoying than any baby I've dealt with. You had a free ride in 1st and you're on here boo-hooing a crying baby. What the f*** were they supposed to do on this unfortunate legacy carrier, tell the people who paid $1500/seat that they had to stuff their infant in an overhead?? Shove a rubber ball in the wee one's mouth?

Sometimes the people who can afford 1st class have babies. Sometimes they bring those babies with them on flights. Sometimes you are going to have to deal with it when you get to sit there for free... And so are those who PAID for the seats. You're absolutely insane if you think that they should have to find a way to silence crying toddlers in First Class. This is what we call "LIFE".

Just my humble opinion, of course.

 

[Juvat]

Am I alone in this perception?

For the sake of all humanity, I hope that you are.

Aren't you embarassed to write such garbage?

 

[tranceport]

I know of at least two majors that do not allow children (under 5 I think) from being allowed to non rev in First. With that being said the screaming child was probably a paying passenger (albeit lap child, which I would not ever do to my newborn, but that's a topic all it's own and I digress).

So in conclusion, if you think filling up first class with revenue paying, cry baby customers is another reason this may be hurting airlines, then you are wrong. If they could fill first all the time those seats go empty with high fare cry babies then maybe they'd make some money.

I'd take a crying baby over a large farting business man anyday!

Moral of story: buy some soft NRR33 earplugs! they work for me!

 

[semperfido]

they are annoying in restaurants too

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Today, while flying as a non-rev on a major legacy carrier, I had the (un)pleasant experience of tolerating a toddler for 5 hours. This kid would not sleep or sit quietly. It was either laughing (not too bad to deal with) or screaming (intolerable).

What was worse is that the lap child was climbing all over it's parents in first class on a 767.

All I could think of was the other passengers that paid to sit in first, looking forward to the nice seat, upgraded food and drink, and quiet, up-scale passengers seated around them that wouldn't bother them.

If I was one of them, I would be pi$$ed! I would be asking the reservations agent if there was even a remote chance that there would be an lap child in first class, and if there was, I'd call a different airline. This is assuming I wasn't too angry to return in the first place.

I have had this joyous experience about half the time I have been commuting over the last six months or so. When are our managers going to get it? People pay the extra fee to sit in first to get away from screaming babies that climb uncontrollably over their parents.

Am I alone in this perception?

you obviously have not traveled much lately as a First Calss pax....it aint what it used to be...

most have $hit service, no magazines, ripped old seats etc....its certainly no treat.

Any really, are kids to be banned from First Class? WTF?

"quiet-upscale customers around them".....

P-LEASE...far from these days...try obnoxious self important over worked middle management scumbag with bad breath and gas....or the obnoxious "we used all our miles on this upgrade so keep the wine flowing" loud couple who think they are the Rockefellers in Row 1....

Ill take a laughing kid anyday...

 

[wms]

My kids acted up on a flight once...once. The minimum age for non-revs in first class at DAL is 8. I agree that the road warrior that supports our airline should not have to tolerate our kids. Mine are 7 and 5 and know travel manners as well as table manners. Unfortunately, manners in general are a thing of the past, and not just for kids.

 

[I.P. Freley]

My kids acted up on a flight once...once. The minimum age for non-revs in first class at DAL is 8.

Who ever said that the child and parents in question were non-revs? I know YOU didn't, at least not quite, but the point here is a non-rev is essentially complaining that his solitude was interrupted. How perfectly tasteless.... And how perfectly unaware of his/her own "freebie" status.

 

[91100 100 set]

Children should be seen and not heard. Or am I too old fashioned?

 

[wms]

Noone, but someone (tranceport) in an earlier post mentioned minor nonrevs in first. The point is that non-revs or not, there are no manners being taught anywhere, at any age.

 

[I.P. Freley]

I guess that parents should show those 18-mo olds who's boss! Just shove napkins in their mouths and tell them to shut the f*** up!! If that doesn't work, just pile 'em all in a minivan and back 'em into a pond, huh!? THAT'LL SHOW 'EM!!

Don't want to upset Eagle-ista, do we?? FOR SHAME!!!!

 

[Vik]

Excellent point.

I've only had this happen once and it was on American. I've flown 1st on almost any other airline you can think of without this happening. I rarely see kids let alone toddlers. After being through what you went through once, I'd leave the aircraft right prior to the door being closed if I saw a toddler in first. Its happenined once and will not occur again.

My exp: American Airlines flight was LAX to LHR. I asked to be moved to Business Class and when I returned to LAX, I wrote to customer service that refunded the entire difference between 1st and Business for the entire trip, not just the first leg. Now thats what I call excellent service -- FA agreed to do something to help me on a nice long 11hr flight, and the CS dept did the right thing in refunding me the difference.

Today, while flying as a non-rev on a major legacy carrier, I had the (un)pleasant experience of tolerating a toddler for 5 hours. This kid would not sleep or sit quietly. It was either laughing (not too bad to deal with) or screaming (intolerable).

What was worse is that the lap child was climbing all over it's parents in first class on a 767.

All I could think of was the other passengers that paid to sit in first, looking forward to the nice seat, upgraded food and drink, and quiet, up-scale passengers seated around them that wouldn't bother them.

If I was one of them, I would be pi$$ed! I would be asking the reservations agent if there was even a remote chance that there would be an lap child in first class, and if there was, I'd call a different airline. This is assuming I wasn't too angry to return in the first place.

I have had this joyous experience about half the time I have been commuting over the last six months or so. When are our managers going to get it? People pay the extra fee to sit in first to get away from screaming babies that climb uncontrollably over their parents.

Am I alone in this perception?

 

[Vik]

I think many of you missed the point of his post. He's not b!tching about how his free ride was ruined. He's pointing out that having infants in 1st is going to ruin the profitability of that airline since something like 15% of that airline's customers probably make up 75% of its profit.

 

[rajflyboy]

The problem was with the Parents! Not with the Airline!

 

[mdf]

FWIW I was deadheading on a SWA flight the other day and an infant in the row in front of me was screaming. I mean screaming! The mother was trying in vein to quite the child down. After a few moments two ladies from rows in front of us came back to the mother and helped quiet the baby down. These people were all perfect strangers. This all happened before push, and after that not another peep from the baby all way from LAS-MDW. A little compassion goes a long way.

 

[1-tacan-rule]

Another reason airlines are failing...

Because certain people in the industry don't realize who is paying their paycheck. Here's a clue to that question, genius...that lady with the screaming baby. I've found that nine times out of ten, people who complain about kids (screaming, or whatever) have blown the whole thing way out of proportion. And another thing, in addition to some of the great suggestions given above (earplugs...duh!) how about (since you say this has happened to you sooooo often in the past six months) whenever you walk on a plane and see a kid sitting next to you in FIRST CLASS, you glide to the back of the plane and announce "who would like to trade seats with me?....I'm in first class." Problem solved.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

I gotta agree..the fault is with parents these days. Kids have thier moments on airplanes, but look at the mom or dad traveling with them - 99% of the time they are TRYING to make the best of it. I can live with that...thats kids for ya..

but...

I really despise how parents allow thier kids to roam the halls of hotels, and my personal favorite -- roam restaurants being loud and obnoxious..so long as they get some peace and quiet they dont care what thier brats are doing to the general public.

Let me tell you why this is a bad idea....

About the 3rd time a brat runs by me at a restaurant screaming....I stop him/her and notify them (with a serious psycho look) that there will be a devil/killer in thier closet tonight when they go to bed....and he hates little kids...now run along and tell your daddy that, and then send him over so I can kick his a$$.

That usually stops the drive-bys by little brats.

 

[flyboytop1]

I non-rev alot too, But I'd sit on the wingtip to avoid a crying baby-I hear ya

 

[I.P. Freley]

I think many of you missed the point of his post. He's not b!tching about how his free ride was ruined. He's pointing out that having infants in 1st is going to ruin the profitability of that airline

I got the point, Vik. The point is that noone prohibits babies in 1st, at least none that I know of, and I don't think any passenger is going to say "boy, I hated that screaming baby on (insert airline here), so I think next time I will go on (insert other airline here) instead", or "boy, I hated that screaming baby on that airliner, next time I'll drive". This was just a b1tchfest about a screaming baby cloaked in a "this will cause that airline to fail" story.