Why seat selection charges on a plane are a waste of money - unless you're flying Ryanair
The consumer group, Which? has come out all guns blazing on the issue of payment for seat selection on airlines. Research by its Travel magazine found that, in 86 per cent of cases, paying extra for allocated seating is a waste of money, because you would be seated next to at least one of your travelling companions even if you didn’t opt to pay.
This, however, was an average percentage based on the ten most popular airlines which charge for seating. The figure for Ryanair was only 46 per cent. So, while Ryanair has denied that it actively splits up groups of passengers who don’t pay to select seats (though it has said it tries to keep window and aisle seats free), this survey suggests that, whatever algorithm it does apply in its booking software, means that it happens in most cases. Something tells me that the Irish airline won’t be too sad about this result. It will surely mean that more of its passengers are likely to pay up to avoid the risk, further enriching its coffers.
The Which? analysis was based on a survey of readers who had booked a total of 3,357 flights. The detailed breakdown of the results shows that with five airlines over 90 per cent of passengers who hadn’t paid for selection were seated next to each other. Aer Lingus was the best performer at 96 per cent, followed by Norwegian (95 per cent), EasyJet (92 per cent), Flybe (92 per cent) and British Airways (91 per cent). This compared with the 46 per cent with Ryanair, by far the lowest percentage, and 73 per cent for Wizz Air. The other airlines, Thomas Cook, Jet2 and Tui all scored between 85 and 87 per cent.
The airlines least likely to split you up
Aer Lingus - 96 per cent of passenger seated together
Norwegian - 95%
Easyjet - 92%
Flybe - 92%
British Airways - 91%
Thomas Cook - 87%
Jet2 - 85%
Tui - 85%
Wizz Air - 73%
Ryanair - 46%
Overall, Which? focuses its attention on what it sees as profiteering by the airlines – charging for a service that you have a high chance you will get for free if you don’t pay. It is important to expose this, but I think an even more significant issue is the question of transparency.
The ability to make a straight-forward cost comparison when buying something is an essential principle of a fair market – one which enables consumers to make clear choices. Confusion and complexity allows companies for example to advertise headline fares which may be much lower than you end up paying. And it means that cost-comparison websites are unable to do their job accurately and clearly.
The whole situation is made worse because charges for seat selection if you do decide to pay are so variable. They may cost more or less depending on the route, the type of seat and whether you are travelling in high season. On short haul flights prices ranged from ￡1–￡45, with Wizz Air for example, with BA it’s ￡7–￡24.
In short, we are in an odd place with this. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has also found that this practice means that passengers are spending ￡175m a year “unnecessarily” paying for seats and is also concerned about transparency and fair price comparison. Instead of wringing its hands it needs to take decisive action to reform the way that airlines are allowed to price their fares.
Which? also cited two other problems with current seat allocation policies. In some cases, it found that parents who didn't pay for allocated seating had been separated from their children, some of which were as young as four. This is clearly not acceptable under any circumstances, and again, it makes the CAA look ineffective. Its guidelines state that airlines should “aim to sit parents close to children” and that parents should not have to pay to avoid being separated from their children. But these guidelines are not compulsory, so they can’t be enforced.
Finally, Which? raised safety issues. It cited concerns voiced by the Royal Aeronautical Society Flight Operations Group (FOG) and by Dai Whittingham, Chief Executive of the UK Flight Safety Committee, that splitting up families on flights could pose a significant safety risk to all passengers. This is because if an emergency evacuation is necessary, there is a fear that vital time may be lost if friends and relatives who have been seated in different parts of the plane try to find or rescue each other.
Ryanair responded to the Consumers’ Assocation saying that it “fully complies with all EU safety regulations” and Wizz Air said “the safety of our passengers is always our number one priority”.
Overall the whole situation regarding seating charges seems to me like a dog’s breakfast, created by airline marketing departments against the interests of passengers. And no-one has the gumption to do anything about it.
Do you pay to reserve a plane seat? Or would you rather not cough up for these add-ons? Join the conversation by commenting below.