have your say
What do you think of the decision by Malaysian Airlines to ban babies from its first-class cabins because of complaints from other passengers that they had paid big money for first-class seats but cou
©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.
Login to comment
This is an utter disgrace. If a babies father has worked hard enough to pay for first class why shouldn't he bring his whole family? So the father now has to have a lonely journey without his family while the mother and baby have to travel in economy.
Malaysia airlines or Moneycare Airlines ?! please do care for babies as well.
It's first class. People who have paid the big bucks are entitled to their sleep. Rich dads should be allowed to sit in first class with their families BUT when junior starts spoiling it for other passengers the kid should go. Whether one parent takes him out or the whole family leaves should be a family decision. If first class really meant first class service, then the airline would make some kind of provision; provide a separate space where baby can yell without upsetting anyone, or a ration of baby milk with a slug of gin in it to keep it quiet.
Or you can ride a different airline. Vote with your wallet.
I don't know why they don't have cry rooms for families on board anyway. Makes sense to have a place where only families with small children are, mothers can nurse their babies, etc.
Great idea. Hopefully they will soon start no children flights or have a kids section. I have no idea how many horrible flights I have had because of crying babies or screaming kids. I would be happy with a sound proof children's room though if that option became available.
Some parents are great, some are not. Why should the rest of us have to listen to a screaming two year old on a 12 hour flight?
tmarie; I think one will find that most screaming badly behaved kids are from working mothers. Strange this was not needed in the days of traditional families. Nonetheless a small section of society are making the rest suffer and this airlines rules mean hardworking fathers cannot see their family during flights,
Yes it was, steve, be fair. Maybe not first class air travel (how many traditional families could afford that?), but I remember street excursions on trains and buses that were turned into nightmares because of screaming babies and badly-behaved kids. And whether they belonged to working mums or stay-at-home mums made no difference. My mum was a working mum, I didn't scream on public transport.
Yes they can if they go back into economy where the other hard-working fathers are with their families. (Hard workers in first class? Not lucky blokes either born with the proverbial silver spoon, or on a cushy number? I doubt many people who really have to work hard for their money would have enough of it to splurge on first class, but maybe that's my own class prejudice rearing its ugly head.)
As a Mother of 3 young kids who once a year takes a looooong flight home with them, I can honestly say this is a GOOD thing, and anyone who has to put up with screaming kids has my sympathies! Seriously! It is incredibly stressful travelling with children because I am always so concerned about the other passengers and how they are going to react. I work incredibly hard on flights to keep the kids as entertained as possible, but unfortunately with the best will in the world 12 hours is 12 hours and kids get fed up, tired and frustrated. When one (or two!) goes into meltdown, my blood pressure shoots up and I am almost frantic trying to get them to calm down. A sound proof "scream room" would absolutely help!!!
miamum; "Utter rubbish" Really? Then why is it becoming such of a problem for the airline to bring in this rule? Many young kids spend more of their waking lives with strangers, thus theie children are less well balanced and less able to understand discipline from their mother who is almost a stranger.
This rule is a further example of how lack of family unity, values and parental responsibility are making lives not just bad for the children but companies and others who put up wuth screaming for uncontrollable children.
Rules like this were not needed in the past were they!
Very good idea! Either that or make a special soundproof cabin
I applaude the airline for taking a stand for it's business. People are not "entitled" to fly in first class. The airline has rules, follow them. The same for people who have 3 carry on bags that don't fit and inconvenience everyone else. And people too big for one airline seat.
Follow the rules or take your business elsewhere.
Nice question though shame about the lack of punctuation in what is really far too long a sentence maybe you should think about making use of a comma or two or even just separating your question into two sentences what do you think a reply would be nice thanks.
Ive traveled first class with a baby/young child on a few occasions, and we did so because I didn't want to breastfeed pushed up against people I didnt know, because we could afford to do so. There were a few tears on landing, but the baby was easily soothed. My husband works very hard, and does not want to spend a flight separated from his children.
Ive seen the damage working mothers cause, first hand, and totally agree with Steve. Mothers who are not centered on their kids, don't spend enough time with them to know how to soothe them, children who are not confident and at ease with their mothers because they spend more time in a nursery, poorly disciplined children who are used to socializing in a big pool of other kids, with not much individual attention being paid to their behavior or manners, attention starved kids who cry just to get a reaction off their mothers. Mothers can make all the excuses in the world saying their working does not affect their children, the evidence says otherwise.
There should be flights laid on which are no children, no families for those grumpy, misanthropic types.
Excellent step from MAL. I hope that airlines also will do something about economy class like getting special seats assigned to them so that they don't bother other passengers. The kicks in my back were painful.
If a family has enough money to have EVERYONE of their members fly first class, why not just rent a private plane? Wouldn't it be a similar price?
Foxie, if they were my kids, they would not have done that, and if they swung their legs you would have got an apology from me and from them, and they would have ceased immediately. Its only bad mothers who let their kids do these things.
Dont be silly, shogun, we could never afford a private charter plane long or short haul, but first class is expensive, but within the realms of possibility. The first time we flew first class was because we had a new baby, who I didnt want to put in ecomomy with all the recycled air and close quarters germs, so we specifically chose to pay more because the baby was the one we wanted in first class.
Great idea. I wish they would do it for the whole plane. Or have a baby section that is sound-proofed.
No, it wouldn't.
It's a ban on babies, not children. Babies scream, it's what they do. You can't 'discipline' them for it, unless you want your name on a child abuse case. Babies don't kick the backs of seats.
Good Idea. I'll think of them next time I need to go to KL.
To all those busily congratulating this airline have you paused to think why a predominantly Muslim airline has done this? In effect they're not just banning babies from first class, they're also banning mothers.... in short you're all busy applauding a sexist policy.
If this was an American airline, where the parent taking the flight with the child might be male or female then this wouldn't be an issue, but in this case it's men complaining about women and "their" babies. It's disgusting and sexist.
Infants are not trained to respect and contribute to the environment of adults. They don't know the rules and cannot integrate. Store them away with the baggage, out of hearing range, so long as they are safe and can be looked after by their parents. Parents shouldn't be so blind as to assume infants can fit in anywhere without causing significant damage to the adults in the space they occupy.
Amazing insight! Such an entertainer!
God works in mysterious wars. The people who complain and the people who implement these kind of rules do not and will not have babies.
No, I know you don't mean abuse. But I fail to see how you can discipline a baby to stop crying. The courts are full of so-called parents (usually live-in boyfriends) who have been 'disciplining' babies for crying. Please read and comprehend what people write before you start throwing around adjectives like disgusting and horrible.
I doubt that the the curtain separating first class from scum like me is soundproof. Not going to make a whole lot of difference.
So is United a Christian airline, Thai a Buddhist airline and ANA a Shinto airline? I suppose British Airways would be an aetheist airline these days....
I thought this was already a rule.....I guess I was wrong, so yes, I think this is a good rule. Babies are going to cry, it's what they do. Especially in an uncomfortable aircraft/enviornment, so banning from from 1st class is a good idea for the comfort of the airline's most valuable paying passengers.
It's a myth that people in first class pay big bucks for their seats. Mostly they're flying on corporate expense accounts, which means when everyone else buy goods and services from these corporations, they are paying for the first class passengers' luxury. Malaysian Airlines' policy only confirms an entitlement complex and the contempt corporations have for regular people.
This is a business decision, pure and simple. Lets say for every screaming baby, (one paying customer) you have about one person that complains. Most business figure that for every complainant, there are about ten more like them that are silent, which are very close to voting with their wallet. It would be absolutely idiotic to cater to ten percent of your customers at the risk of upsetting (and potentially losing) the other ninety percent. (Unless of course you are an Eikaiwa owner with absolutely no business sense whatsoever.)
The world is not a free place where everybody can do whatever they want all the time. Everything requires trade offs. And one of the trade offs of having a kid is that you are likely going to upset people when you take your screaming kid in certain public places (movies, restaurants, airplanes.)
Excellent idea. If I had paid the first class price, only to realize I'm sitting next to a screaming infant, I would regret my decision and wish I had selected economy. I mean, you don't pay that kind of dough to be miserable. That is what overpriced coach seats are for.
Simple solution. Provide everyone with nice noise canceling headphones, or in first class, noise canceling capsules. I have made constant requests for at least one white noise radio channel. That might help for sleep, but when a stewardess walks down the isle and bangs into people on both sides of the isle, it is a no win situation.
Shame on Malaysian & those who think babies shud be banned from 1st class, if you can afford the ticket you can bloody well sit there!
No one enjoys babies/kids who cry etc but come on SUCK IT UP or are you all just a bunch of over grown BABIES! Wusses all round, wudnt it be nice if more of us cud simply try to help a mother if possible instead of bitching & stewing!
I mean whats next you going to ban people on religion, skin colour, whether they fart, stink or drink too much! Crap happens all round society, if you dont want to deal with it like an adult they STAY HOME!
end of rant.
You and I both know babies can be soothed so they stop crying, or given a dummy to suck so their ears don't pop, older toddlers can be taught right from wrong, also known as discipline. I dont know what YOUR idea of disciplining a child is Cleo, but mine doesnt include child abuse. Of course if you are at work all day usually, then you probably dont know what soothes your own child.
Why should the other people in first class have to "SUCK IT UP" because of someone's screaming kid?
Instead of banning all babies from first class, why not install a soundproof baby area, with basinet/seats, for all classes of travel, explicitly for quieting babies.
They don't cry all the time, but when they do, this is a good option, for everyone...
Obviously that doesn't work 100% or Malaysia Air wouldn't be upsetting part of its clientele by banning babies. They could just dole out dummies with the boarding passes.
Neither does mine. I was pointing out that you cannot discipline a baby, in any way, to stop crying. Those who even raise the possibility are usually talking about stuff that you and I would both call abuse.
Neither of my kids ever went to childcare. I was a full-time mum until the younger one started kindergarten, when I started working from home. They never came home to an empty house. I knew exactly what soothed them when they were little. A crying baby can be soothed, but it takes time, during which your frazzled first-class passengers would find plenty to complain about.
Most flyers buy Business or First Class because they are expected to go to work as soon as they arrive at their destination which is very often 8 to 10 hours diffferent from they departure time zone. That's why companies and private businessmen pay big bucks for the higher class. It's got nothing to do with elitism, it has to do with economics. So, if my company buys me first class to fly to Oslo and I arrive at 7:00 in the morning and go directly to the office, they expect me to arrive rested. If I arrive jet-lagged and dead tired because a baby kept me awake the whole flight, they are not going to be pleased and probably look for another carrier.............like maybe Malaysian!
GW - well said. Id rather sit next to a crying baby for 12 hrs than some crotchety putz who came to the airport in a bad mood, flew in a bad mood and disembarked in a bad mood. And has mommy issues.
"Or have a baby section that is sound-proofed".
And this section should be out on the wing.
Another section called the old fart snoring, sound-proofed could be added on the other wing.
You know to balance the plane.
Its about time that an airline was brave enough to do this. As another poster mentioned business and first class is often used by companies sending its workers on business trips. They pay the extra so that they arrive as refreshed as possible. Having a crying baby screaming in your ear during a flight is not a relaxing way to travel. Its not like you can get up and move away, go to another room and shut the door.
Maybe more airlines can take a leaf out of Malaysians book. And while their at it please get rid of your annoying reclining seats in economy class.
In the past people didn`t fly as much as they do now, and with children. International and long-haul flights have increased over the years, as has international business travel. People and families are travelling more than they ever used to.
But my point in all this is that to say working mothers are bad, stay at home mothers are good, kids from working mothers are bad, kids from stay at home environments are good is a massive generalisation. There are some excellent working mothers and appalling stay at home mothers, ditto the children. It is about the quality of the parenting, not the quantity (IMHO)
I think that this is a good start. I can never afford to fly first class, but if I could I would be very upset if there were a crying baby next to me. Since I fly economy, I just take it as part of the experience. Hopefully in the future, airline carriers will rearrange the layout of their planes so that there could be a family area or a soundproof bathroom like area that parents can take their screaming children to sooth them.
As for older children, if they are beeing naughty, the family should either discipline them, find a way to entertain them or just not fly. Usually you can tell how a child will react to a long flight by taking them on a long road trip in the car. If your own child annoys you then, maybe its best not to take them on a flight (barring emergency situations).
I totally agree with the airline. First class seats cost a bomb! They are so over-priced, and imagine how many people feel lucky to be there, and then have to put up with a screaming baby on & off for 14 hours....
I believe they should go Economy, or not fly until the child is old enough to be controlled.
It's not called First-Class for nothing.... It's there to provide COMFORT: how can you be comfortable with a screaming baby next to you?!
I think it's perfectly reasonable for an airline to ban a mother and baby from first class. It stands to reason that if they can pay for first class, then they can also pay for business class.
Is it so horrible to have the mother and baby sit in business class? Business class is quite nice and with the money saved, the mother can start a college fund for the baby.
@Cleo, gin to babies? That's VERY idiotic.
Ive flown 1st class 3 times with babies/young children and it was for them, not for myself or my husband. I didnt want to be in cattle class with everyone coughing and sneezing over the baby, and I didnt want the whole row of seats to see my boobs as I breastfed. We wanted the bed type seat so I could lay down with the baby, and the shutters for privacy, and got what we paid for. Whether we fly first or not next time, I wont go to Malaysia, nor fly with this airline. We will go someone a bit more welcoming to children and families and with an airline that doesnt try to prohibit mothers and babies from comfortable travelling. Dummies or instructions to feed on take off and landing should be given out, as the sucking helps equalise pressure in little ears. It really is as easy as that, and the ears is often what leads to the screaming. Mia's mum, quantity AND quality of parenting matters. You can be the best mother in the world for 2 hours a day, but when the rest of the child's awake time is spent in day care, the day care workers and environment are having a bigger impact than the mother who dumps her child there. Ive known a lot of working mothers, and they are a selfish bunch in general, who treat their kid like a hobby instead of centre of their life then wonder why little Takashi is such a handful, or the baby is crying incessantly.
Simple, because WE ALL CANT pick & choose who flies same time as we do, that simple.
, Cry me a river, in case you dont know there are also LOTS of people in the cattle section that have to do the same, in first you got yr better seats, food, etc, how about investing in a set of ear plugs & yr set, loose the wuss excuse, doesnt wash
Can't stand crying babies; there's something about that particular sound.... I guess humans are programmed by nature to try and comfort them but you can't of course when it's not yours.
I'd pay huge money to be knocked out at home, loaded into a crate and not brought round again till I arrived at my destination. Now that would be better than any first-class experience.
I agree wholeheartedly. First class is what the airline wants to make it; and you'll find that most advertisements of first class emphasize being able to sleep in comfort. The cry of a baby is designed to stop people sleeping.
Many posters here seem to confuse business class with first class. First class is out of this world expensive and not many employers will pay their employees to travel it.
Building soundproof area is not really possible due to safety regulations etc.
LOL, no these days BA (following the example of Air France) would be a Muslim airline if anything... : )
If I paid for a First Class ticket (which is highly unlikely), I'd be pretty annoyed to have a screaming baby as my cabin companion. That's what cattle class is for, and to a certain extent, you expect and accept it in Economy. I can understand the exclusivity First Class entitles you to. You pay for certain privilidges, and they should get value for the expense. You don't pay a premium for a sleepless night.
Whats wrong with being 'upper middle class' as you put it? Working mothers are not what is best for families and Im sick to death with hearing them evangelize about how wonderful they are, when in fact they are creating a lot of problem children who are not going to be productive and well adjusted members of society, or not members of society at all, because mummy let them go out alone at 7 and they got run over etc.
You know why my 4 year old can read fluently? Because I stay at home. Or why my kids dont run feral, or get drowned in a pond. Because I stay at home. My husband would take on another job if he couldnt afford to keep me at home with the children. He was the victim of a working mother, and didnt want the same for his children. We paid quite a bit more to sit in first class, and had every right to be there. People can vote with their feet, and I certainly will cross Malaysia off the possible vacation spots list, and give our money to a more welcoming country.
A lot of airlines only have Business Class, not First Class. Therefore, Business is the equivalent, for all intents & purposes; it's still extremely expensive. @gwragged ... wow, you have some extreme views. It's rare for a woman these days to stay home and not work, so I presume you are suggesting that most mothers in today's world "are a selfish bunch in general, who treat their kid like a hobby instead of centre of their life"?? Like I said before - just because you and your family can afford to have a single income & still live comfortably enough to enjoy First Class travel ... does not mean that everyone can. Most people CANNOT. I would never dare to suggest, however, that most stay-at-home mothers are a bunch of privileged and lazy beings who can't be bothered to go out and work. I prefer a balanced view of life ...
Ask me again when I can actually afford to fly first-class, and then I might give a shit.
Back on topic please.
Maybe Malaysian Airlines studied their first class customers and a no-baby policy was what they wanted in numbers significant enough to make the policy a logical business decision for the airline. As a business that's their prerogative; to maximize customer service and profit. There are apartment buildings and entire residential communities that don't allow children (or pets) so why not an airline? Do those of you who disagree with this policy have issues with those?
As for the geniuses above blaming single/working parents for screaming babies, you have got to be kidding. Talk about a ridiculous generalization. As another poster already said, it's the quality of the parenting not the quantity, and yes good parenting can be practiced by caretakers other than the biological parents. I am obviously full time military and my wife is a businesswoman who is far busier than I am. Between the two of us we spend as much of our non-working time with our three kids (11, 10, 2) as we can but they have all spent the majority of their days cared for by their grandmother and nannies. In contrast to many screaming babies I've endured who were flying with a parent that looked like s/he had never held a job before, not once have any of my kids cried on a flight. EVER. I guess there goes your theory Steve. Oh, and GWragged, I hate to burst your bubble but everyone on the plane breathes the same circulated air (also often REcirculated) so you and your babies in First were breathing the same tainted air as the diseased cattle back in Coach. The horror!
A joke, YongYang. A jest. (Though back in the 19th century they did used to dose kids up with all kinds of stuff to keep them quiet, no joking matter)
@GW: I do know that the are a lot of business travellers in economy, usually on a tight company budget or busines/first were all booked. Why should I have to buy earplugs?? just ban babies from first class is a better option for me. I can tell you are a jealous cattle car denizen and think it's just about seats and food. FYI I rarley eat on planes whether it's first of economy.......so it aint the food. I do like to stretch out when I sleep and I don't like ear plugs.......so I'll fly with Malaysia and you can fly with whomever you like. BTW if you are a mother with a baby or toddler and you are seated in first and the kid starts crying, move to the rear of the plane (the stews will find you a place to sit) and come back when the baby is sleeping.
Why would you take a baby on a plane anyway? It's a sealed can full of people breathing and coughing in a confined area.
Next step enforce a dress code. You don't need go break out the tuxedo on my account but for the sake of all that is holy flip-flops and a wife-beater in scorching hot weather is a sure fire recipe for a sweaty, funky smelling fat guy that will always find their way into the seat next to me. I have sweat stains on my shirts that aren't mine, that's just wrong.
Oh for the days when flying was a classier way to travel. Not a greyhound bus in the sky bull of TB and screaming children.
For those saying that tey work etc and their kids are well behaved, so what!! If what you say is true just proves what is true about life, that there are always exceptions to the rule. Most of the childrens/babies bad behaviour is because of their upbringing and these days that is due to their mother not putting their kids first.
What Malayasian airlines have down will become the norm soon. Expect contracts to be signed with parents payinga fine for badly behaved kids on airlines and banning orders.This is another sympton of society pushing a womans "right" to work shortly after giving birth whcih also costs a lot of money to society due to extar taxes caused by lack of productivity at work and day care. All working motehrs do is increase GDP which only benefits the Governemnt figures for growth same as GDP rises during wartime.
We hear about the working mums right etc, how about the babies rights how about others rights when society is disrupted by their offspring that is neglected of their mothers love.
In the UK working mothers of children aged 1-3 cost far more to taxpayers than stay at home mums on benefits due to tax breaks, child care and work absences. Except for these wroking mums we are all paying by coughing up cash, having rules like this made that effect responsible parents all so a woman can work at the expense of the rest of us. Hopefully this rule will be awake up call to us all. Our duty is firts to our family , especially kids.
Gwragged: Wow...elitiest much? Your poor husband had a working mother, how horrible! I am a product of a stay at home mom; one who was an alchoholic but that is ok because she was present in the same building as me for most hours of the day. Also, I know lots of working mothers that are working to pay for their children to go to better schools, be able to enroll in special classes and have a comfortable life. Perhaps some women don't have to work because their husbands are well off and that's fine but you really should not be bashing women who work to provide a better life for their children. Who know's...they might even be working another job just to save up enough to fly first class with their children.
sakurala; Not giving the child the mothers love in the first few years because of working for better schools etc is silly, that should have been saved up for before the child was planned. As isaid befor expect more of this, a small child needs its mother there at all times. Badly behaved babies and kids do so because they are unhappy and frustrated by being neglected of love. Malaysian Airlines will be the first and not the last to make rules like this that showa downturn in society due to "women's rights".
Until we have a new look at rights and realise that the childs rights to a full time mother are more important than a womans right to work, expect more rules like this. Eventually the penny will drop and we will realise what has gone wrong.
How wonderful for you that you are able to fly first class on one income, and have no need to work. Good for you. However, not everyone is so fortunate and that doesn`t make them bad people, just ordinary people doing the best they can with the circumstances they have. I know a woman back home who stays home with her 4 children and even homeschools them. They are feral and have no concept of basic social skills.
Yes, there are exceptions to every rule - so why then label working mothers as bad?
If you have some stats to back up your claim that working mothers cost more than mothers on benefits I would seriously like to see those because I find that very hard to believe.
BTW - hate to burst your bubble but many kids are actually reading before 5, including my older two in both English and Japanese and - shock - I worked.
miamum, Educational ability does not ensure dedent behaviour and well rounded kids, don't believe the myths. The need for this rule proves otherwise.
Good to know that some people are still living in 1950.
I think this is a splendid idea. Last times I flew there were just oodles and oodles of tiny tots, and I wound up spending 10+ hours with babies in my vicinity. I already don't really like babies (noisy, smell funny, etc.) and of course they all had problems mid-flight. One mom had to spend the whole 5 hour flight bouncing her baby around while pacing the aisle. She was only ever seated during take off and landing. The kid just would not stop screaming.
Even a slightly soundproof room would be better than moms changing their kids in the seats and having to soothe the kids in the aisle where there's only enough room for one person to walk around. I bet a lot of people would be happier to fly with an airline that had a "screaming kid" room. Stick a security camera in it and have an attendant pop in every so often ... probably would be fine.
My only problem with any of this is that I flew Malaysian once (LA to Tokyo) and there was a smoking section. If they've gotten rid of that in the last 12 years, maybe I would use them again. Enduring 11 hours of cigarette smoke wasn't so great. So if it's gone, I just need to figure out how to afford first class.
Steve - sorry - didn`t want to also go on and on about how wonderful and well-rounded my kids are - but of course, they are ;) !!!
miamum; I am not doubting they are but nearly all mums say the same even my mum did and i was far from good and well rounded that is why i don't want other kids to be the type of child i was.
Well, if i may say so, much as I disagree with some of your opinions, you seem to be reasonably well-turned out now!
You seem to care very much about the state of society and the way of raising of children that contributes to it, and although we are coming at it from different angles, I think we are basically concerned about the same thing. It`s a good thing that you do care - too many people including parents just drift along not giving a damn.
Of course I think my kids are wonderful. But they are not perfect, and I call them up on it when they break the rules. I always try to make them considerate of others in particular. I was very proud of my son actually when aged 4 he accidentally kicked the seat in front of him on a plane (he slipped trying to sit up in the seat). The guy in front turned aroun and gave him a mouthful (big man, attackng a small child) and when he had finished, my son just said "Im really sorry, I didnt mean to!" and by his politeness just made the guy look a total jerk!
I know that it drives me insane when babies shriek near me or when toddlers run around (be it on a plane or wherever) causing trouble, but they're just kids (or babies)! It's not like they're trying to bother people (until they hit three, anyway).
This is a bad decision that could lead to a whole lot more bad decisions, and ultimately it teaches that we are still separating people based on class (literally, in this case). If a parent can afford first class tickets for his/her family then the baby should be allowed to ride in first class with them instead of being segregated in order to bother the people in the economy class section. Give the first class whiners some first class earplugs.
Or, as one person mentioned above, make a special room they can go to when babies are crying (in first AND economy class!).
And now the question of the centurey the answer to which everyone is dying to know.... Did Steve@CPFC's mother work or was she a stay-at-home mother? Was he a victim of his "most screaming badly behaved kids are from working mothers" rule or was he the exception? Drum roll please!.....
Ah, plying babies with drugs Cleo... HILARIOUS!
That's the whole point isn't it? The airplane's physical cabin and level of services ARE intentionally separated and different. Hence the differing ticket prices and the desire for people to sit in one class over another. In the case of Malaysian Airlines, peace and quiet are obviously included in the services provided to First Class passengers and this is their way of ensuring it. First Class seating is still First Class seating without infants but it certainly falls short if there's a screaming baby sitting in it. Thank god not all airlines are ridiculously egalitarian like Southwest.
I think gwragged and steve are my two new fav posters. Great for a laugh!
Best part is... Malaysia Airline... A country that has more stay at home moms than working moms yet gwragged is talking about avoiding the country because... of one company she disagrees with regards to a policy. Narrow minded but perhaps staying home with the kids all day does that to some.
While I sympathise with people who want a peaceful and quiet environment in First Class, I'd like to see the uproar that would occur if people with disabilities were banned from first class because they were disturbing other passengers. Babies are not "different" so are not deemed as being needed to be "protected" but I don't see why a baby has any less right to travel with it's mother or father in First Class than people with more extreme mental or physical disabilities that can disturb other people, assuming you think they do have the right.
Reversing the situation, I would never have booked First Class when my son was a baby. Money might buy you a seat, but it doesn't buy you good manners and consideration for other passengers who everyone knows has splashed out the extra cash to take advantage of conditions different to Economy Class. Good manners and consideration for others comes from being brought up well, and it's free.
You're talking about a Palace fan, for G's sake! What kind of mother would let that happen to her child?
Stay on topic please.
Oh, well, Lucabrasi, I didn`t know that ;) LOL !
I have to agree with hatsoff actually - in that I find it stressful enough travelling in economy with children trying to keep them amused and entertained and as little a disturbance to other passengers as possible. I think if I was in first class I would feel under even more pressure to keep them quiet and 12 hours (for eg to LA or Europe from Japan) is a long time to feel under that kind of pressure.
I can understand how people travelling with children feel (oh god, yes!) but I actually do also sympathise with the first class passengers too, or anyone really travelling with children on board. It wasn`t so long ago that I remember gritting my teeth as the baby 3 rows down entered its 3rd hour of screaming. It is just that now I have a lot more empathy for the parent of that baby!
While I sympathize for those who have had to suffer through a tantrums in a metal cylinder forty thousand feet in the air, I am really worried how we are creating a society that has no room for babies and children.
Miamum, thing is, if all parents were like you, this wouldn't be a problem as people would be looking after their kids. Screaming babies are a part of life. However, there are the parents that get up and take Jr. to the back to quiet him and others who just seem to sit there not realizing that everyone wants to throttle THEM, not the baby, for remaining in their sit and appearing to do nothing. Perhaps they are trying to quiet the baby but I think the issue is when they don't pick the kid up and go somewhere where most people don't listen to the baby howl.
You can see which kids are going to be problematic while checking in. Running around while the parents check tickets, repack bags and ignore them. I ask to be seated away from them. Babies? Luck of the draw. I have sat next to and behind some amazing babies that I was happy to play with. I have also asked to be moved when babies kick off and the parents ignore them. Not my kids, not my problem. Why should I have to sit there next to them for 12 hours??
Sounds good to me. Parents are always getting high and mighty about their right to spoil everyone elses experience because they are so wonderful for having children in tow.
Having said that, by agreeing to this move I am just accepting a greater number of babies crying throughout a 12 hour flight back in economy. But maybe the upper classes babies cry in a nicer way.
To the palace fan. I like how you stated that a father will have to travel alone in business class while the mother and children sit in economy. That sounds like a wonderful father. "I'm not giving up on my froie gras and reclining seat to sit with my wife and offspring". Superb!
To add to the discussion - some times ago, Scandinavian airlines told me, that they usually don't have baby food for the economy class - they only have it for the business class. Sorry, this is not a joke, but I have already experienced that I had ordered baby meal in economy, and then at time of flight, it was not available. On the other hand, with 3 kids (well, first one, then 2 then 3) so far no big problems with long haul flights from Japan to Europe as long as the parent(s) have enough time to spend with kids. In business class, or even first class, a crying baby should not be a big deal, as most airlines have noise cancelling headphones in business (at least I know from Lufthansa).
But why should econonmy class passengers be subjected to a howling baby's cries, just because they paid less? It seems to me that a first class ticket entitles you to nice food (although airline nice isn't that good) served on china, not plastic, a fully-reclining seat and free champagne etc. etc. I've never come across a "baby-free" pledge before. And what about people who snore very,very loudly? Are you going to ban them, too?
harkins; Most fathers will choose first class because it allows them the comfort to work whilst in flight. The fathers priority is to provide the income to support his family financially in a resonsible manner. I would expect many of the people who can afford first class do so because they have huge responsibilities and need to be on call almost 24/7.
I will travel economy as the cash i save i would rather choose to spend elsewhere. You think the father is bad when in reality it is kids that are badly bahaved through lack of being with families. If the man of teh house works to teh best of his ability and is prepared to work as much as possible for his family,then there is no need for his wife to work. The wife then can perform her duties in the home and in most cases the child will be better behaved than those that go to day care.
You just did. You're commenting on an article about it.
Don't even try to claim that the worst snorer can be anywhere near as loud or annoying as a screaming baby. No way in hell.
Actually crying babies are fairly far down on my list of pet peeves. Number one is reserved for people who insist on bringing aboard half-gallon cups of hot Starbucks coffee, and who stagger down the aisle as they juggle their coffee cup and three pieces of carry-on luggage. Second are gamers who jiggle and bounce enough to simulate severe turbulence to the persons seated on either side of them. Likewise for people with iPods who are unable to restrain their urge to dance the bee-bob while seated. Fourth are those determined to proselytize some bizarre cult. I can name plenty more.
That' why I said "before" i.e. until now. I'm a very precise guy .
And as for snorers, you've obviously never slept with my wife ;)
It seems that age discrimination is the only form of discrimination that is legal these days, just so far as you are aiming young. Personally I think its first class that should go, not the babies. If you are not rich enough to afford your own jet, then I think you are not rich enough to pretend you are too good for the masses with their babies.
What about all the people who pay good money for cramped economy class seats and can't sleep because of crying/screaming youngsters?
My goodness, chewitup, this is twice in ten minutes I've felt obliged to commend your opinion. Keep it up!
What I want to know is when airlines are going to ban thoughtless passengers from putting their oversized luggage in overhead compartments that aren't assigned to their row.
You think the father is bad when in reality it is kids that are badly bahaved through lack of being with families. If the man of teh house works to teh best of his ability and is prepared to work as much as possible for his family,then there is no need for his wife to work. The wife then can perform her duties in the home and in most cases the child will be better behaved than those that go to day care.
Then perhaps daddy can get his back in economy and look after his kids? The wife can perform her duties at home but last I checked, an airplane wasn't home.
I would also like you to post links to the research done that states families with SAHM have better behaved kids.
As a parent I would ABSOLUTELY LOVE a " mother and child" section at the back of the plane. Soundproofed, with a small play area and diaper changing facility. All the kids could scream and the mothers would not get all flustered and stressed, and there would be no dirty looks from the guy sitting next to you.
Kids cry, sometimes coz they are in pain on a flight, sometimes because they are hungry, bored, or tired. BUT I do think we should let kids go where there parents have paid for. Even tiny babies have to pay a percentage of the fee just to sit on their mothers knee. Its not free.
While crying kids do suck, I have had worse flight experiences sitting next to a morbidly obese and extremely sweaty guy who got pissed, tried to feel me up, shouted at air staff and then passed out after his 10th free gin leaving me stuck on the inside seat.
I do believe that our friend SteveCPFC enjoys winding people up with his 1950's persona, I wouldn't let it get to you. He's actually pretty funny, seen in the right way :)
Kids with stay at home moms are at higher risk for psychological problems later in life. Crying on a plane will be the least of their issues. The helicopter mothers who do not have a life of their own, or cannot make one, with their usually one child are a danger to society. It would be far better for society if the kids were in pre-school.
The most famous study of the value of preschool for disadvantaged kids, like those with obsessive mothers and fathers, is now gong on 40 years. See the Perry preschool program in google.
zurcronium; the matter is about ALL kids not a select part of society, Kids with a stay at home mother have less problems are higher educated and less likely to turn to crime. Children from disadvantaged homes are unliely to travel first class anyway.
Should be "...have fewer problems" and are "more highly educated."
Nice try for a neglected boy, though ;) **
Respect, steve. I even gave you a thumb's up, which I rarely do. Problem is, you're going down with the Millwall :(
USNinJapan2; Many studies have been made in the UK and other countries showing that working mothers are used to lower wages and increase GDP. It is a well known fact the children develop better after having fulltime care by the mother. There are zero studies to show that a women working while a child is under 5 years of age has a benefit.
If my posts are outragous and offensive i would expect some proof that they are wrong. There is none and society falls apart even more as the family unit breaks down. I have yet to read of anyone offended by my posts, upset yes possibly, but reality hurts sometimes.
SHHEEEEEEEEET.....First class is a vacation away from my family. The same is true for my wife when we trade places. We don't have the right to impose the unpredictable behavior of kids on others -- especially those who paid premium for a nicer flying experience.
I recall one particular flight from LaGuardia to Atlanta nearly 10 years ago. This Hindu/Indian family brought their kids in first class and let them run wild. I have donated generously to family planning organizations ever since.
Nope. No way. Babies are a hundred times worse. Especially when their little ears start to hurt on the descent.
I used to travel with a half-dozen packages of earplugs that would have the opportunity to sell -- and those little tykes were like money in the bank.
Sqwak; I agree with you entirely. I think many are overwhelmed by modern technology like the internet and their brains sort of overload. I would love to see the day when a child behaved itslef and rules such as this were not needed. Of course babies and toddlers can act annoyingly and loudly. They are undeveloped and are unabvle to communicate due to their age. However, the child will usually cease making noise when held and stroked by the mother as this is the natural way of soothing. If the child if shipped out to daycare then various people perfom the task and the caring is massively diluted and behaviour is erractic and possibly uncontrollable. Th end result are rules such as this.
Do not blame the airline, blame the poor parenting encouraged and exploited by modern societies and governments.
Sounds like "economy class" to me.
Of course we can. They're the ones who've got the seats to sell, and the ones who can decide not to sell them to parents with "underdeveloped" infants.
yabits; We cannot blame the airline as they cannot control behaviour. I ahve had another idea that could help with this mattera nd i will email the airline shortly.
Parents or parent with a child under 5 should sign a contract. This contract will be that they will be responsible for their child whilst on the plane. Bad behaviour can be graded in 3 levels. 1= Minor, crying or shouting for a5-10 minute period, 2= Over 20 minutes of disturbance during flight. 3 = 30 minutes or over.
Their should be fines of the following amount (in USD); For stay at home mothers; level 1= 100/2= 200/ 3=500. For working mothers (more materialistic so fines reflect that) ; level 1= 1 weeks salary./ 2 = 1 Months slaary/ 3 = 3 months salary.
The airlines should all club together and anyone who defaults on fine shuld be banned from all flights on all airlines. This threat will encourage better behaviour and quiter flights for traditional families. Let's strive for family unity and a better society.
Actually I commend Malaysian Airlines and I think they have a good idea. If possible also make a babies only, SOUND PROOF area??
Himehentai and Elbuda
This is what I was going to suggest as I was scrolling down the posts - how about a section at the back of the plane, cordoned or sectioned off, that is exclusively for families with kids say, 3 and under. As you rightfully point out, it reduces the stress on parents ( because the parents I know are always freaking about flying with infants), it eliminates the screaming babies from the rest of the passengers, and First Class get the trip they paid for. Everybody wins! You could have Peppa Pig and Yo Gabba Gabba on the screens, the babies could howl in symphony, the parents could revel in the joys and pride of parenthood...what a flight! I wonder how the 'First Class' Mums would go though.....
For all the people suggesting special rooms, I think safety wud work against that idea, and of course airlines & that little thing known as revenue wud throw in another wrench......
@lucabrasi - Economy Class is a catch-all, basic class. From there, you can buy various grades of exclusivity by paying more money. Now I'm not saying that the exclusivity of First Class makes that passenger a better person than someone who flies Economy. I'm just saying that First Class passengers have paid the extra money because they want to take advantage of a particular environment. They are just paying for a certain exclusivity, implied by the airline and expected by the passenger. If I was a heavy snorer I wouldn't fly First Class either. I do speak from experience - when my son was a 3-year old, he cried with gusto throughout a 4-hour flight (probably the effect of the cabin pressure on his ears). I was totally embarrassed, even though we tried everything we could to settle him down. I felt so sorry for my fellow Economy Class passengers.
Wonderful! People pay to sit in First Class for first-class attention and I commend Malaysian Airlines for this decision! More airlines should do the same thing!
What about the parents/family that also pay for 1st-class seating?
So if I buy 2 seats for me and my son I can't use them due to some snob-noses that paid the SAME price for their seats.
Get real people. People pay for those seats and should be offered the same service as they paid the same.
Forgot should Famous Actors(Angela Jolie, etc) also forego their seats as they might travel with their kids.
For that voted me down do rich and influential people raise their kids better than others? Heck they use Nannies to raise their kids and both parents usually got little contact with their kids.
So should an actors/actress(not all travel via private jet) be allowed to take their baby in 1st class or not? Simple answer and should be straight forward and simple answer.
If I or anyone else pay the same, refusing service to me is pure "Elitism". Plain and simple.
Forgot should Famous Actors(Angela Jolie, etc) also forego their seats as they might travel with their kids
Fly with someone other than Malaysian.
This is a good PR point for Malaysian targeting people who don't want to be in first class with kids, Other airlines can promote first class that accepts kids. Works for everybody.
Well, yeah, isn't that the definition of 'First Class' - that financial expenditure precludes you from certain conditions you might have to endure in Economy Class?! It's absolutely elitism. Thats what they pay for.
And elitism is wrong because...? Goes hand in hand with capitalism IMO. Absolutely nothing wrong with it and I'd go as far as saying that its one of the motivations many people have to work harder to earn more to be able to afford the better and more exclusive products and services that are available. Soviet-era Aeroflot seating is gone for a good reason...
Looks like it needs to be spelled.
I buy 2 1st-class seats for and my baby, 2 other passengers also buy 2 seats for themselves. We ALL pay the same for our 2 seats but I have to change and travel in economy where it is tougher to look after a baby and tougher to get to keep it quiet.
So I am being punished for deciding to have a kid and wanting to travel, regardless if I travelled 1st-class for the last 10-15yrs.
Malaysia right now is promoting themselves as a heavy tourist destination guess they won't attract many rich families to vacate their with such rulings.
Sorry, kids and babies are a fact of life. Rent a private jet if you don't want to meet them.
No, you won't because the airline won't sell you the second ticket when it sees that the second passenger is younger than two. Also, your infant wouldn't rate a full ticket/seat as you'd be holding him/her in your lap so you wouldn't be paying the full fare, more like 10% of it. In essence up until now you would have been paying a small fraction of the full First Class fare to bring your baby into First Class so s/he could possibly ruin other passengers' $5000 flight. As far as Malaysian Airlines is concerned it's no longer a problem for you, and most importantly others. Another detail that is omited by the original JT story and this poll/question is that a parent wishing to fly First Class with their infant would be redirected to the Business Class seats that actually have attached basinettes for the infant unlike the First Class seats. This applies to all Malaysian Airlines aircraft to which this new policy applies, 747-400s and A380s, so it isn't like you would be hauled off to suffer in Economy Class. I've flown a lot in Business Class when my three kids were infants and I much prefered Business Class that has basinettes than First Class where you'd have to physically share your seat with your baby the entire 12+ hour flight.
No, you're not being punished; the airline is simply preventing you from punishing First Class passengers with your crying infant. That's great that you've traveled First Class for over a decade. If you took any of those flights in First Class with your infant then you yourself may very well have contributed to the countless complaints the airline president received regarding cying babies in First Class that led up to this new policy.
I really don't think that there are many people who would consider taking an infant who isn't even two on a vacation to Malaysia. If there are, I'm pretty certain that the're quite outnumbered by the repeat business (and non-business) flyers who don't want them in First Class with them. The airline realizes this and simply made a business decision that makes the most passengers happy on this issue.
Only an Idiot would try to hold a child for a few hours. And if I pay full-price for a seat it should be available and if I buy it and seat no-one in it or a baby that should be my choice.
But good luck trying to fly with the family while you relax in 1st-class and the wife and kid is stuck in coach. most likely she will insist that you also fly coach and don't just dump everything on her.
How do you know it makes the passengers on the WHOLE plane happy on this issue?
Now I'm starting to suspect that you don't actually have children of your own or if you do that you don't fly too much with them. Even if you could buy a full First Class seat, or any class seat for that matter, for a sub-two year-old s/he can't sit in by him/herself. S/he can't be properly buckled in using the seatbelt and unlike Economy Class where you can usually raise the armrest and connect your seats, in First or Business Class your seats are almost completely closed off from the other seats and there's no way you can tend to an infant that's not in the same seat as you. That pretty much means holding him/her in your lap. If you fly with an infant in any class s/he is going to be in your lap. No airline will sell you a ticket for a full seat for a 0-2 year-old.
My family doesn't fly First Class because it's not the best configuration for us with our young daughter. At least in the case with 747s and 777s Business Class is much better for infants because they have these really comfy little beds for them that bold into the bulkhead in front of your seat. Once the baby is asleep you bundle them up in the little bunks and strap them in so they're safe from turbulence. You can't do that in First Class. So my wife, 2 year-old daughter and I fly Business Class and since our 11 and 10 year-old sons don't care what class their seats are in we buy them Economy Class seats where they're happy as clams pretending like they're flying internationally on their own without parents. Needless to say, they are both very well behaved.
Hardly relevent. Economy and Business Classes already have infants flying in them so this policy changes nothing for passengers flying in them. And if a few of them did have issues with it, it's not like their seats are going to go empty if they go as far not flying with Malaysian. The only change is for the First Class passengers who weren't happy before who will be happy for their now quieter environment thanks to this policy.
Personally I think business class should be the one which is child free.
Business class = for business people, who generally need sleep but whose companies are not going to pay the full first class price.
First class = If you can pay for it and a seat for junior then it should be fair game.
Agree with Zenny though, I doubt that Malaysian Airlines would have the same policies if the Beckhams or Jolie-Pitts decided they wanted to fly with their brood in first class.
1) Not all planes have a separate First Class seating where as most of the Boeings and Airbusses flown currently have a Business Class as an upgrade to Economy. That's why this policy is being enforced only on Malaysian Airlines' 747-400s and A380s which have dedicated First Class seating.
2) When the Beckhams or Jolie-Pitts fly on a commercial airline I'm pretty sure they buy out their section if not the entire First Class to ensure privacy.
Again, even if you can afford it 'junior' is under two so s/he can't have a seat to him/herself.
The airlines should modify the last row of the first class seating by placing a thick lightweight clear lexan glass (shatterproof) between the seat in front of you. This could be used for executives who want more quieter space or families that have children. The modification will take minimal additional space since row ahead of you have to recline.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Funny thing is, this is 2011, they can easily design planes to accommodate whiny kids, just like first class and make a section for them, if not, then they should start designing, because I do see a lot of potential in that. Let's face it, I fly all the time and myself having a child, I know it can be challenging, but my child is very quiet on the plane, but there are kids that go nuts and parents, sadly, that don't make a stronger effort to try to keep junior quiet and let the kids do whatever they want, thinking that since they are 30.000 feet up in the air, there is nothing you can do, so just deal with it. That kind of attitude is sadly becoming the norm by many selfish parents.
Great idea. They should take it a step further and make a special area of the plane where all the parents and kids can get together and enjoy each others whiney kids. Then again, on my last flight there was a parent that I would of classed as a whiney kid, what to do with them.
"Then again, on my last flight there was a parent that I would of classed as a whiney kid, what to do with them".
I hear duct tape will fix anything.
To everyone who has said 'babies' behaviour is about their upbringing' I think you are all missing one very large and physiological point about small humans.... they CANNOT equalize pressure in an aircraft cabin. Ever seen a baby hold its nose and blow? Pressure build-up, as anyone who has ever had the misfortune of flying whilst they have a head-cold will know, is painful. Babies scream when they experience pain. Adults can keep it in.
Then there are all the comments from people who assume kids just go on holiday with their parents. As a family who has migrated away the UK, we have flown a lot with our kids through necessity not holiday. Typically the kids have always been well behaved as we have tried to keep them entertained... staying awake for the whole duration of the 14hr flight from London to Tokyo to do so whilst all you other folk sleep, watch your in-flight movies and sup your free drinks.
Comfort on planes is directly linked to money, for all of us who travel. For babies, what do we get? A shitty and uncomfortable cot or the baby on our lap. Try holding a baby on your lap for the whole duration of a flight. Only our adult sensibilities have kept us from screaming. Once the children hit the age of 2, we're paying full-fare and they get their own seat. Kids travel at half-fare on trains and buses until they are 10 or 12. Not on planes. I once had an airline complain to me that my children had bags that weighed-in at the full, allowable weight of baggage. Eh? They are paying full-price for their seat. Why cant they have the baggage allowance that comes with it?
Alfie, sucking equalises pressure in small babies, get them to breast or bottle feed on landing and take off, and I know dummies are horrible habits, but the constant sucking does help to pop those ears, also dont let them sleep on landing. http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/2612/how_to_avoid_ear_pain_on_airplanes/
Its always worked for us, I just timed the feeds to coincide with our take off/landing.
Mia's mum, Im glad that your kids were reading fluently before the age of 5, and are well behaved, I would say that is an extreme exception to the rule. I know I could not give my children the attention they need to succeed if I were out at work.
"The more time children spent in child care from birth to age four-and-a-half, the more adults tended to rate them, both at age four-and-a-half and at kindergarten, as less likely to get along with others, as more assertive, as disobedient, and as aggressive, according to a study appearing in the July/August issue of Child Development."
True, Gwragged. It does help. But as regards the breast-feeding part of your suggestion... refer back to the privacy issues which were voiced at the very start of this piece. Yeah, dummy helped our kids. Never let them sleep on landing or takeoff. We tried our best to offset the effects of pressure but it doesnt work 100% of the time. Thanks for your comments.
Gwragged, why don't you come off as a little MORE superior why don't you. Just because you think having babies is the end all be all everyone does not have too. I wish every airline had a chile free zone of a zone for moms/ families. I have seen many stay at home moms with bad ass kids. Because they think the are superior and don't discipline them. You may think your kids are the worlds best, hell most moms do. that is the problem. Everyone thinking its always someone else's' kid but "not mine".
And mothers in general are not bothered by loud screams from children as much as men. I have read several studies on this and have had my ears in pain in many places while the women just chatted as if it a no big deal. Well it is to many of us. To th point of headaches. Thank you Malaysian Airlines for at least having balls. Hopefully other carriers can make some kind of section...for holier than though mothers too.
"holier than thou"...I must have had a working mom....
Steve @PCFC you sound like someone who would love to go back to a time when women followed their men like cattle. A child's right to a full time mom? Next a husband's right to make her stay at home. And working fathers are the only one's who pay for plane tickets? OK.
Readers, please do not be impolite to one another.
Correction to what I posted earlier: airlines WILL sell you a full-fare ticket for your infant so it can have its own seat. This may work fine in Economy Class and in some Business Class configurations but I don't see how it would work in First Class where each seat is completely isolated from the next by barriers if not open space. Seating a one year-old in its own First Class seat will in essence be leaving them unattended during the flight.
Alfie, yes I too was worried by privacy issues, which is why we chose to fly first class with our breast feeding baby. If I was stuck in economy I would have had to get on with it and try and be as discrete as possible I suppose, and anyone who didn't like it could have got lost. I'm sure crying babies are more irritating than ones who are quietly feeding.
I'm sure not every carrier will ban babies from first class, but this is really bad publicity for Malaysian travel. The trouble is the child-friendly zone is in cattle class, and I have no desire to fly with no legroom, no privacy, air that stinks, and no way to fully recline my seat, whilst people cough and sneeze everywhere. My husband would like to be able to work and stay connected.
Perhaps there should be child-free flights available at a nice big premium to all those who want to fly without children on the plane, that should fix it.
Why does the air stink in economy? Do we emit some kind of vile "stench of poverty" that only rich folk are sensitive to? If so, apologies and I'll try a higher strength deodorant next time I can afford some.
Perhaps there should be child-free flights available at a nice big premium to all those who want to fly without children on the plane, that should fix it.
Gwragged, I have a better idea, just ban babies and young children from flying entirely. Or at the very least, they should be restricted to economy class.
Our money, we can chose how we spend it, and where there is a demand for a service there will be a fulfillment of that need. Ive never felt unwelcome when we fly, in fact other people didn't give us a second glance, who were flying in the same section. I don't see other airlines rushing to follow suit, so what is this? The actions of one airline. They will either raise their profits by this move, or else people will boycott them and they will return to their old practices.
I have no idea why the air in economy seems so thin and stale, perhaps the direction in which it is blown through the craft, or more recycling of air in economy. Its not so much BO, as stagnant, stale, low oxygen air that just makes you feel horrible.
Im happy to fly with miserable and intolerant people, if they are not happy to fly with me and my kids, then it should be those people who pay more, then they can have the whole plane in glorious silence. Perhaps you can also ban the overweight who spill over into the next seat space, those who put their seat all the way back in economy, the smelly and unwashed, or any other social group of people who bother you. Because that is where this kind of move leads.
bogart (what an appropriate name by the way.)
Parents with kids are not just going on exotic holiday. They are often going to funerals, or weddings, or graduations. How do you know that its not that toddlers first ever trip back to see grandma in the US? Or they might be fleeing a nuclear meltdown.
Agree with Gwragged. Premium, no children flights, (which cost a fortune) should be available for those who don't want to fly with kids, should be available. However kids are a fact of life, you were one yourself once. Get over it.
Well I am sure some woman will bring an action for sex discrimination before long. However I can well understand. I have been on planes when poor children have been screaming because their ears were hurting from the change in air pressure.Surely there is something the airlines can do to show staff how to show a parent how to get a child to hold its nosewhile blowing?
Obviously the comfort of their business class passengers are their utmost priority.
Someone needs to invent a form of vulcan neck pinch to put children out if they get rowdy.
Gentlemen (and women), start your engines...
GwraggedJul. 06, 2011 - 12:48PM JST Im happy to fly with miserable and intolerant people, if they are not happy to fly with me and my kids, then it should be those people who pay more, then they can have the whole plane in glorious silence. Perhaps you can also ban the overweight who spill over into the next seat space, those who put their seat all the way back in economy, the smelly and unwashed, or any other social group of people who bother you. Because that is where this kind of move leads.
Maybe you should take the bus or ship. That is your slob style. If I was traveling first class, what happens if I sit next to you and your baby continues to cry loudly the entire duration of the flight that last many hours? Or you smell bad. I might not there to have fun. I might have important meetings with other executives after the flight and might be reviewing negotiations and contracts and cannot concentrate because of excessive crying. You can't forcefully quiet the baby or child. That's their nature. However, you have rights and I have rights to some peace and comfort during flights. We are not at the baseball game like you.
All the airlines should have three sections for customers to choose from. The first section is no noise. The second is for people who wants to watch movies and listen to ipods. The third section for those who wants to talk and crying babies.
Neither JAL nor ANA are keen on having Infants in the First class cabin. On the other hand Business or coach and you can even arrange a bulk head seat with a bassinet.
Most US based airlines don't care, but let's put this into perspective. A US airline gets between $5K-12K USD for a First class flight between the US and NRT. JAL and ANA get $15-25K USD. If you want to bring the family fly business class. It's still very nice compared to coach and frankly better suited to people traveling together. Most international first class cabins are set up so you don't see the other people, let alone be able to talk to them.
**** May I suggest "The Cone of Silence"....
I read one comment that stated "So the father now has to have a lonely journey without his family while the mother and baby have to travel in economy". I understand what they were getting at ..meaning that if they paid for first class then all should be allowed.
As for myself if I were told my wife and children have to ride in the back of bus then I would be with them. After all this is the woman that has given me the honor of being able to share all of lifes joys and sorrows together. A woman that is willing to make a family together and her fate is my fate. I know that may sound a bit retarded to many but we as one. We she goes...I go and vice versa.
If the Airlines ban babies then they do all that means to me is that "WE" will never fly first class...which is fine be me as I could never afford it anyway. Yet if they ban babies then they also need to have an Obese section. It is rather frustrating to someone overlap and take 1 third of my seat as well as their own.
Some people are making the assumption that it will be a mother with the children. Aren't there many rich two income families so it could be a father with his children, a nanny with the children.