This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss
Back to Squawk list
  • 16

Another Passenger Fight Over Reclining Seats Has Caused A Flight To Be Diverted

Submitted
 
For the third time in a little over a week, a flight has been diverted because of a passenger fight over reclining seats. (www.businessinsider.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


mldavis2
Mike Davis 9
My solution is simple and painful. At 6'4", my knees actually contact the seat back frame in many aircraft, especially some of the older 757's. It is impossible for someone in front of me to recline their seat. I get bruised kneecaps - a built in seat limiter. Uncomfortable? Yes, but as Sir Isaac Newton discovered centuries ago, no two solid objects can occupy the same space at the same time.

I'm sorry, but I didn't ask to be this tall (not at all unusual these days). And if I must pay double for first class for a couple of inches of leg room because of my physical attributes, then airlines should be charging passengers by weight for themselves and their luggage. I can't afford first class, and I fly much less and drive more these days as seat spacing has become ridiculous. Why the heck can't airlines recognize the latent discomfort that is turning up these days, take out two rows and give everyone another 2" of room, charging the tiny percentage more for tickets for each passenger? I'd pay an extra $25 or so per seat like I do for my baggage now, and I'll bet some enterprising airline could win a lot of customer loyalty by advertising more passenger comfort.
outward
Well said. I'm 6'1" and don't fly that much and can relate to what you said. I can't afford first-class for the extra room either.
Bernie20910
6'2" and 265lbs here, and I pretty much stopped flying years ago because the airlines made it just too damned uncomfortable for me. Then the TSA came into being and the only time I've flown in the past decade has been for a family emergency where I didn't have time to drive or take a train.
gzelna
Greg Zelna 1
Ya about your only prayer back in the cattle section is a bulkhead seat or exit row.....I am only 5-9" and I feel crunched, you tall guys, its gotta suck.
murray07
Murray Wilson 1
The real solution is an additional section in the so-called "Passenger Bill of Rights": each passenger shall be provided with a minimum seating space of X inches in width and y inches of pitch... and x and y shall be sufficient that all but the largest customers can pass a six-hour trip in comfort and safety (i.e. room to move). Most planes would lose like 10% of seating space, and prices would probably go up a little, but if all airlines are forced to comply, none should be at a disadvantage to the competition.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Make it so.
Fairlassie
Did you know that you can choose an exit row seat when you book your ticket? Not for double.....maybe an extra $35, well worth it. And you will not experience the person in front reclining...the seats in front of exit rows are purposely not able to recline.
sgbelverta
sharon bias 7
I want a width defender to keep passengers on their side of the arm rest. I'll concede the arm rest, just keep inside your seat.
canuck44
canuck44 6
And an odor defender for the individual that thought marinating in Old Spice or Essence of Discount Counter was a good precursor to flying.
joelwiley
joel wiley 6
Not to mention eau du forget-me-bath.
Donstg
Don Stgeorge 2
I agree Sharon!! I was in a center seat on one flight and a HUGE college football player dude came and sat in the aisle seat next to me. After he sat down, he looked at my 6-0 170lbs and said (and I quote) "Good. I'm not sitting next to a fatty." I didn't say this out loud but thought "But I am..."
outward
Amen.

[This poster has been suspended.]

Bernie20910
50kg "monster"? Taking up three seats? What planet are you from Kyle? Because at 120kg I could probably take over as its king.
canuck44
canuck44 10
A single obnoxious passenger demanding to inconvenience the rest of those who paid for the flight? She needed to be turned over to those she was demanding to inconvenience and let them bundle her into a duct tape cocoon for the extra 270 miles. Her "hosts" would then be more than happy to allow her to be first off and turned over to the sheriff.
mldavis2
Mike Davis 3
There are three problems. People are getting taller, which means longer legs. That's my problem. Second, airlines have incrementally tightened seat spacing every year to cram yet one more row into the aircraft. Third, though the proponents of reclining seats always offer the solution of paying for extra leg room, unless you buy first class tickets for double the coach price, there are never (and I mean NEVER) any extra room seats available because they are always taken when you buy your ticket - or at least that's what they tell you.

It has gotten to the point of absurdity, and the public is beginning to rebel against inhumane seat spacing. This is just the beginning, believe me, it will get worse.

[This poster has been suspended.]

boughbw
Brian Bough 1
Exactly right, and I am not sure why others are not picking up on this. Even without the seat reclining issues, it seems people are just letting themselves go crazy, causing planes to land and be delayed. Beyond the cost of fuel, if the airlines have to rebook or put passengers up for the night in a hotel, there are major expenses that can accrue. To expect the airline to eat the costs of passengers behaving badly is unreasonable.
pr0ject
El Kabong 2
Anyone flown a newer 738 lately? When reclining the seat, the ass portion slides forward instead of the head rest moving backwards (much). It's less obtrusive to the people behind you while still allowing a reclined position. Instead of complaining about smaller spaces (the airlines are a business just like anything else and try to maximize their profits with more pax), how about engineers find better ways like the one mentioned to deal with the problem?
MattR
Matt Richards 2
Cathay Pacific has had those seats for years. Everybody hates them.
Bernie20910
And where do your knees go when they're already up against the seatback in front of you?
MattR
Matt Richards 1
they go nowhere. which is why everybody complains about those seats.
Bernie20910
That would be annoying
marqwitt
Marquis Witt 1
A small woman slouched in a seat with her knees wandering over the back of my seat has nothing to do with height. Unfortunately, it is the ME" attitude.
tpmorrow
tpmorrow 1
Those seats are very uncomfortable. They're not a solution.
arfdog
mags stumpp 2
The issue is that the "recline space" is shared between the person who wants to recline and the person who has to stare at the top of the recliner's head. Because it's shared, no one really owns it. Airlines leave it up to the pax to decide who gets the rights to the space, so it often becomes a fight. Although over 6' (without heels), I never recline because I feel that it's unfair to the person behind me. At this juncture, I think airlines should just install fixed seat backs in regular coach. That way, you get the advertised 32". Please don't say that one should upgrade if seat pitch matters. UA's domestic 1st has 37-38" of seat pitch. That's a whole 2-3" more than economy plus - hardly an improvement -- especially if you're trying to get work done on the flight.
dee9bee
dee9bee 2
Sorry to say, but here's where this may all be headed: No more reclining seats in coach. A mechanic can disable the recline function very quickly. I think RyanAir has already done this but I may be wrong.
ozmuzz
Murray Heldon 2
There is a desperate need for a "Passenger Bill of Rights" - seat pitch minimum must be 34" and so what if we have to pay more.... many people just don't fit into 28"-32" pitch seats
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
I think the airline response would be: There is a passenger bill of rights - you have the right not to fly. I get your drift, but they have to remain profitable ... either that or we all end up having to take a ship to get across an ocean or a bus / train / car across our own country. Eats into a lot of time. Seriously - I have a tough time wrapping my head around the fact so many people are whining about a few hours of discomfort. To fly from, say, Seattle to New York in just a little over 5 hours for a few hundred bucks is pretty amazing. It would be interesting to see what would happen if the person whose knees were getting jammed up asked (politely) to switch seats with the person reclining.
Bernie20910
"Whining about a few hours of discomfort"... I tell you what, let me attach a steel clamp to each of your knees and tighten it down to the point that it's just moderately uncomfortable. Then let me stick you in a confined space, where you can't really shift position very much, and leave you like that for 5 or 6 hours, and then we'll see how anxious you are to repeat the experience, or whether you whine about it at all. (screaming baby and severe turbulence are optional)
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
I'll allow my manners to kick in and not write what your attitude reminds me of.
byronhanson
Byron Hanson 1
Oh AWAAlum, lighten up, sweetie pie.....you must work for one of the airlines.
I recently had a flight from Kauai to Denver and about 2 A.M. I needed to use the rest room. My seat was next to a window which required two people to my left to get up and seventeen people in front of me to move their reclining seats forward so I could get up to relieve myself. This is so damn rediculious!!!
ueharaxg
Joao Uehara 2
What a metaphor.....

Forces of free market, reaganomics, etc always work better for people who ride on first/business class....
byronhanson
Byron Hanson 2
We can force the airlines to give us more room....STOP flying and I think all the carriers will see that we are sick and tired of this.
boughbw
Brian Bough 1
Sadly, this won't happen. If demand subsides, airlines will drop prices until demand increases. Given that most travelers purchase tickets based on price rather than comfort (cost prohibitive), such a boycott is undermined by market considerations.
byronhanson
Byron Hanson 0
I still think all of us should boycott a single airline and demand they give us more room. Their is power in numbers....that's how Obama got in office...Right?
kthurley
K H 1
He got in office by boycotting airlines?
byronhanson
Byron Hanson 0
I think you miss the point...Obama got into office by the majority vote. We can force the airlines to give us more room if the majority of us stop flying.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Oh Byron, lighten up, pum'kin. KH was kidding - I think you missed his point.
byronhanson
Byron Hanson 0
I'll lighten up when Obama is kicked out of office!!!
marqwitt
Marquis Witt 2
One of my reasons for avoiding flying especially on long trips is the reclining seat AND knees in the back of the seat. Commercial flynig is not fun.
w7psk
Ricky Scott 4
The airlines are making seats Smaller and leg room less. What the hell did they expect would happen.
s2v8377
s2v8377 6
I agree with you, however it still does not excuse their bad behavior.
nasdisco
Chris B 3
Time for a universal banning of these things
rayzeeman
I agree the knee defenders should probably be banned (supposedly most airlines already do) but in this case, and in the case of the AAL Miami-Paris flight, they weren't being used - - just pax becoming hostile when the seat in front of them was reclined.
boughbw
Brian Bough 1
If by "universal banning" you mean reclining seats, I agree. It is rude to lean back on other people and frustrating to see what little space I have invaded by the yahoo in front of me. If the seat pitch is less than 34", the seats should be locked into the upright position permanently.
grinch59
Gene Nowak 2
Let's place the blame where it really belongs. Due to corporate greed, the airlines have continually packed more and more passengers into tighter spaces. Why don't they recognize they created this problem, take seats out to increase more leg room and raise the fares to meet their costs. Is it time to go back to regulating the airlines again? It appears deregulation is not working as envisioned.
chzfrqsn
This is the truth of the matter.. That airlines need to make money like every other business is true, but when they get so greedy and forget that human cargo is the main source of their income, so that reasonable comfort is expected and a part of what is paid for.. Stuffing an aircraft with seats that don't recline on a flight over two hours should not be allowed.. Also, i've seen where a particular financial adviser suggested that the board of directors of Jet Blue air lines be replaced with one that is more stakeholder oriented than passenger oriented.. Her contention was that even though Jet Blue was doing really well financially, they should step up into the real wotld and charge for the first piece of luggage and increase the seating capacity of their aircraft so as to ensure Jet Blue stakeholders even greater returns on their investments.. She conceded that while the passengers may find it uncomfortable, they will get over it and allow the airline to achieve its true potential.. This is the kind of thinking that cost so many "insignificant lives" in the sinking of the Titanic.. Greedy people..
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Perhaps times have changed, but I've been led to believe cargo is the real money maker for airlines ... not pax. Has that changed?
Bernie20910
It may be, I really don't know, but my gut is telling me that if this were true there would be a lot fewer passenger aircraft, and a lot more cargo aircraft.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
When they can transport both, why wouldn't they? Pax up top, cargo below. Perfect. And an important issue - people have to be moved from here to there and back to here. Why not be diverse and gobble up as much of the market as possible. It's the name of the game.
n7224e
BC Hadley 0
The blame belongs on the individuals who do not respect others, and can't behave in a civilized manner. One so intolerant of others should not fly coach.
grinch59
Gene Nowak 1
Check out airline complaints. I'm afraid we will agree to disagree, but if you didn't have delayed schedules, missed connections, overly cramped and compressed seating, you would find passengers have a gentler side. I saw it many years ago when most passengers would even say good morning to the crew as they boarded and goodbye as they left.
Av8nut
If flight routes were regulated and the same price for all airlines, then airlines could focus on quality, rather than quantity.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 0
Prior to deregulation, only the well-heeled could fly. Regulation made it possible for everyone to take advantage of flight. Along with the good comes the bad. That's just a fact. Crowding people together in a tight space is never going to be fun, but it's efficient. We just need to put on our big boy pants, remind ourselves we're in for a few hours of discomfort, but the end result is really what we're buying, and behave like civil human beings.
Bernie20910
Only the well heeled?? You and I have had much different experiences then. Prior to deregulation my family flew a lot (with relatives all over the US and Canada it was often the best way to visit) and we were strictly middle class, and lower middle class at that.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Then yes, we had much different experiences. Air fares were equal across the board, but very high.
Bernie20910
I flew first class in the early part of 1974 from JFK to LAX and as I recall the ticket was about $200, or about a week's pay back in those days. Try doing it on a week's pay these days.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Just this last fact, and then I'm through because you and I are never ever going to come to agreement. Prior to deregulation, I moved from Chicago to San Francisco, sent my belongings ahead and flew for the first time. Air fares were so high that the airlines were offering "fly now pay later" options to encourage people to fly, and I took advantage of the offer. That's got to say something about how high the fares were.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Am I being naive when thinking the simple solution would be building a longer plane, thus carrying the same number of pax while at the same time making more space? (If the airline could resist using the space for more seats!) It would certainly make for a more satisfied flying public thus simultaneously increasing business. Yeah - I'm sure that idea wouldn't "fly". This so-called solution of rerouting flights due to irate pax surely must be costly.
Bernie20910
Yes, you are. No airline is going to pass up adding additional seating (and thus additional revenue) if they have it. You're also being naive if you think that such a length increase would come at no cost. Even overlooking the additional cost in labor and materials to make such an aircraft, the weight and drag such additional length would add increases fuel consumption. If you took two identical aircraft and made one longer so you could increase the seat pitch, that aircraft would always cost the airline more to fly.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
I'm aware. Don't believe I said or hinted it would come at no cost. My rose colored glasses are firmly in place when I assume happy customers increase revenue, offsetting the extra cost of the aircraft.
Bernie20910
You missed the part about no airline wanting to give up potential seat space. Otherwise, what you're suggesting could be accomplished with existing aircraft simply by removing seats, without having to make the aircraft bigger. If there's room to squeeze in a few more seats, they will squeeze them in, passenger comfort be damned.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
I think what a lot of people are missing, you included, and I know this because I worked in the revenue department of an airline for a while and know how fares are set, is that as uncomfortable as it is, the airlines are able to maintain lower fares by accommodating more passengers per flight. Your suggestion of removing seats in existing aircraft will reduce the number of pax, thereby bringing in less revenue per flight. I recall at one time my employer switched the upholstery to a thinner fabric, thereby actually gaining enough space overall to install an extra row of seats. However, no one here is going to resolve the issue. People being who they are expect a lot for their dollar - more than is feasible if the airlines are to remain profitable. IMHO
byronhanson
Byron Hanson 1
Granted there are financial issues the airlines must contend with, but they have chosen to create the conditions that are causing the unruly behavior to solve their financial woes. It is a proven scientific fact that the more rats you crowd into a confined space, the more unruly they become. Regular passenger seats are so close together in all directions that you must contort yourself just to get into your seat. Heaven help you if you need to reach for something stowed under the seat in front of you. I am of average height and build. Putting the tray down for use when the person in front of me is sitting up is bordering on uncomfortable...and almost impossible when they are leaning back. Why should I be uncomfortable so the person in front of me can be comfortable. Did we not both purchase tickets for the same accommodations. One simple solution is for all seats remain in the upright position and locked. My wife and I had planned several flights this year, including Hawaii, but....we decided to stay home because of the lack of space around the seats.
JENNYJET
The solution is simple, install non reclining seats on short haul aircraft and give greater legroom on all other aircraft on flights that suggest a period of rest or sleep.

I have flown many 12 hour plus sectors and have found reclining uncomfortable as it is not a natural position to gain useful sleep and never bothered to try.

Not wishing to be indelicate, I found snoring and farting to be worse crimes on flights than inept recliners in front of me and now we are subjected to unrestricted mobile chatter and other noises.
inorbit
Eddie Gist 1
The Aircraft Carriers are the Ones who are liable! They didn't provide ample Space!
inorbit
Eddie Gist 1
No more Reclining Seats problem solved! The Aircraft Carriers are the Ones who are liable!
KeithThomas
Keith Thomas 1
I hope it happens more and more until the greedy airlines decide to solve the problem by giving us all a little more space. It is ridiculous how close they have squeezed the seats just to make a few more bucks. Flying used to be somewhat enjoyable. Now they treat us like livestock going to market.
perrybw35
Bob Perry 1
To AWAALUM: you are correct on both accounts, regarding my post. I fly when I must and rail when I can. Rail is much more comfortable, along with the "berths" and meals. Blue Skies!
lgilgos
I totally agree. Airlines should have in their restrictions all perfumes. People are allergic to slot of them. They can wait till they get to their destination. They are all about themselves.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
What do you agree with? The thread isn't about perfume. It seems that you are all about yourself (and I meant that in the nicest possible way).
perrybw35
Bob Perry 1
This is why AMTRAK has become more popular, recently. Talk about leg room. You would be amazed. With proper planning, you have overnight births, meals included.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Only problem with amtrak is from phoenix you have to fly to california or nevada to catch it. It's very very expensive. And it takes a long time to get where you're going. And I sincerely hope you mean overnight berths, not births. Other than that, the scenery's great.
mullewalad
Ray Mason 1
Its time the airlines stopped taking the side of the ignorant passengers who recline their seats without regard to the person behind. Either that or provide more legroom.
gzelna
Greg Zelna 1
The seats are currently constructed to recline, as a paying PAX you have 'rented' that seat and the expectation that it will function as intended... Yes, I am not an 'ass' about it, if there is somebody big directly behind me or some other possible issue, I won't recline.... There is also an expectation that the space between the arm rests is yours, as is the floor space in front of you.. BTW if two seats in consecutive rows both recline, essentially the space between them remains the same, the real crunch is a reclining seat in front of one which won't or, chooses not to recline , in my opinion. If I am not mistaken the seats are bolted into floor rails which allow an airline to vary easily vary the pitch between rows to more, or less, seats with a consequent impact on the dimension between them. I imagine there is an FAA bare bones minimum seat pitch for egress , etc, as a matter of safety - and perhaps with the 'ever enlarging' (I mean dimensionally!) population, that number needs to be revisited.
mullewalad
Ray Mason 1
I choose not to recline my seat because I consider the person behind me. I had a lady recline her seat as soon as the sign went off. I put up with it but about an hour into the flight I looked through the gap in the seats and saw that the lady wasn't even reclining. In fact she was working on something on the tray and leaning forward. I lost it a bit and pushed her seat forward without saying anything. She reacted by saying to the steward 'isnt it my right to recline my seat?' which naturally the answer is 'yes'. She then complained that I had pushed her set forward. The steward shifted her to Business Class. I have never before or since had a disagreement with a passenger but it seems to me some people will recline their seat just because they can.
chezmonu
Robert Morley 1
When you pack people in like cattle and treat them like cattle ..... What can you expect?
mldavis2
Mike Davis 1
With all the recent outrage and publicity, I think it would be an excellent opportunity for some airline to out-comfort the rest by advertising their seat spacing compared to the competition.

And, yes, 737's come in all lengths and all they do is cram more seats in. I'm convinced that all aircraft interior design engineers are 4'11" tall.
boughbw
Brian Bough 1
You're being generous.
kthurley
K H 1
Jet Blue already does.
olddog864
Dan Gannon 1
If you're for prepaid torture try flying from Los Angeles to Sydney, non-stop in a 380. Their "regular" cabin seats are a combination of coffin and upright phone booth. I'm 6+ and trying to get out to hit the head became an international nasty-fest. I'm also sure if there was any kind of ground-contact event eminent most all of the seats would be already reclined, despite the pleas of the attendants. A simple solution is a sturdy bolt in the seat-rack mechanism so everyone sits the same way and reclining is ended. Can't sit upright? Get over
it. A lot of folks I know combine the GheimStatsPolezi tactics of the Body Corps plus the money for baggage (really??) AND the built-in discomfort already waiting and have decided alternate means are about the same price without the agony.
andyc852
Seems like a diversion is an expensive solution. People pay for a reclining seat and their ability to do so should not be controlled by a stranger in another seat. It is polite to slowly recline your seat so there is no surprise but that is not the norm. People are too tied up in their own needs and manners seem to be rarer and rarer!
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
Not to be argumentative, but rather a different viewpoint: I personally don't pay for a reclining seat...I pay to get from point A to point B. The reclining seat, just like the puny little bags of munchies are just part of that - but not why I bought the ticket.
Darrens
This is so bloody stupid. Seats recline and that's that. IF you don't like it then recline your own seat. Tall persons like myself need that little bit of recline to find any comfort and people of most heights need it for comfort on a longer flight. For those who don't like people to recline, how about being polite and doing like people in cars do. You say, "Excuse me, would you mind raising your seat just a little? I'd really appreciate it." When people use these blocking devices that's like a nonverbal declaration of war.

[This poster has been suspended.]

outward
The issue is money. First-class doesn't come cheap and not everyone can afford it.

[This poster has been suspended.]

gmcmanus
gmcmanus 2
They're (They are) ... Their (possessive) ... There (indicating location)
I hope this helps you out Phil, you dumbass.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
(Psssst...who's Phil?)
chzfrqsn
Let's see if any airline can survive flying only rich people around.. Change the whole aircraft to first class and then see how long the airline would stay in business.. It not a matter of being poor.. It's a matter of getting reasonable comfort for a price.. I've changed airlines based on what's acceptable to me..
andyc852
At least your remarks are consistently obnoxious
fllkap1
I am surprised the knee defenders are allowed to be used. They are taking an FAA approved item and changing the way it works. There has been no comments on this at all. Maybe I'm incorrect ?
Donstg
Don Stgeorge 3
If a passenger seat does not function correctly, it has to be MEL'd and unoccupied. Doesn't it seem like the Knee Defender is modifying the designed function of the seat? Hmmm...
boughbw
Brian Bough 1
I've been on two flights where the seat would not lock into the upright position. People were not allowed to occupy these seats. But if the seat doesn't recline - like exit row seats - they are still perfectly usable.
bthiago
bthiago 0
Are you kidding me? Anti Reclining?
pilot62
Scott Campbell -1
otherwise anyone = proof read after post :)

[This poster has been suspended.]

outward
That's a real classy response. However, it's the kind of response I would expect from you.
andyc852
I really feel quite sorry for Mr Oxlong. He is obnoxious but must lead a miserable life. As we would say in the south "Bless his heart"!
Bernie20910
Please don't feed the troll. However, do feel free to beat out a nice rhythm on his seat back as you tap your feet to the music on your headphones.
pilot62
Scott Campbell -2
Uh, yea you can pay for the bulkhead- first or in the back.
Otherwise why anyone thinks they have the right to limit the recline of others
should pick another mode of transportation. I once had a 70 year old lady kick my seat in first on the climb out, and then ring the FA call button! We hadn't even cleared the end of the runway .You whacked out flyers (and you know who you are) should just Drive, and those who don't behave should be banned for a year on all airlines until you grow the &^%$ up !
tpmorrow
tpmorrow 1
"Why anyone thinks they have the right to limit the recline of others..." Are you kidding? They have that right if they need to work, for example, but cannot, because the seat back, which you just took the liberty of reclining, is 4 inches in front of their face. People who recline knowing that it imposes significant space restriction on the person behind are simply self-centered and rude. It's a problem that airlines willingly ignore, and one that's exacerbated by people like you. I'd kick your seat too, and be happy doing it. Maybe more than your seat needs to be kicked for you to understand what it means to be crammed into a tiny space, and then for the space to become even tinier because it's your right to be comfortable, everyone else be damned. What a moron.
Bernie20910
Sorry but it's primarily a passenger aircraft, not a business aircraft, and not your mobile office. If you choose to work during the flight that's your business (pun intended), but it does not give you the right to restrict what others do. To paraphrase your very own words, people who try to restrict my use of a provided feature of the seat I'm in because they don't like it are self-centered and rude.
tpmorrow
tpmorrow 1
Whether you work or not, it remains a self-centered and rude act to intentionally make the person behind you uncomfortable. It has nothing to do with making it a "mobile office". Not sure why people don't get this.
Bernie20910
To intentionally make them uncomfortable, yes, that would be rude. But I'm not reclining my seat to intentionally make them uncomfortable, I'm reclining it to intentionally make me more comfortable. Making them uncomfortable is not the goal, making me comfortable is. A subtle but important distinction. It's part of what I paid for when I purchased my seat assignment for the flight. I don't fly any longer, but if I still did I would not knowingly purchase a seat assignment on a flight longer than an hour, for a seat that did not recline, injuries I've sustained over 40+ years working construction make that a consideration in purchasing a seat.

And before you start down the "well, then you should buy a seat in some other class besides economy" road... If you're going to be so inconvenienced by the person ahead of you reclining their seat, as it was made to, perhaps you should be the one buying the higher priced ticket and sitting somewhere else. It works two ways.
tpmorrow
tpmorrow 0
You really are a moron if you think your chest-thumping honesty approach - "...making me comfortable is..." - gets any traction with normal-thinking human beings. It's good that you're not flying anymore.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
And if he isn't flying anymore, what's his issue?
Bernie20910
My "issue" is all the people in this thread going on and on about how self-centered and rude someone is for reclining their seat without realizing how self-centered and rude they themselves are being in objecting to that. Did you not know that airline seats recline when you bought your tickets? Was this a shocking revelation to you when it happened? No, of course not. You bought your ticket with the full knowledge that the seat in front of you reclines, just as the person sitting in that seat bought theirs with the knowledge and expectation that theirs would. You bought the ticket anyway, knowing you wouldn't like it if it happened, and fully intending to have a confrontation about it and try to intimidate the other person over it if it did. And you think THEY are the ones being rude and self-centered?
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
1. "All the people on this thread" ??? You do make sweeping generalizations. I never said nor implied I did or didn't know (or care) about seats reclining.
2. I purchase my ticket, as I've already stated, to get from point A to point B, without so much as a moment's thought about whether or not a seat reclines. Nary a thought. I couldn't care less. I, therefore, have no intention of having a confrontation with anyone about it.
3. I've never said nor implied "THEY are the ones being rude and self-centered". I never addressed it.
4. YOU, on the other hand, have just made at least 4 unjust and inaccurate assumptions. I really wish you'd just fall off your high horse. You've stated you don't fly anymore, so the issue has absolutely zero effect on you.
chzfrqsn
Thank you..

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!