Unaccompanied Minor Flying Fees

[Kuyuk]

Youch.

Got the 90 day notice that the ex plans to relocate, so I was looking up options other than driving 9 hours each way to get my kid.

USAir/Delta/AA = $100 EACH WAY fee for flying solo for kids
Airtran is $98 round trip for flying solo.

Damn. Anyone else have experience with kids flying solo?

[Celephais]

How's the train situation? Something to look into at least...

Besides, $100 is a small price to pay to keep backlash away from him.

[Tisket]

I don't think Amtrak will allow minors younger than 7 to travel unaccompanied. And it wouldn't be wise to send a kid that young solo on a train anyway.

[Archigeek]

I have no experience in this, but I think it's dishonorable for the airlines to charge extra for this. Certainly, any parent would agree that their children are worth it, and undoubtedly there is some extra effort involved. But some things of value need to remain free, precicely because of how valuable they are: we should all be above charging an extra fee to keep children safe when they are in our charge.

[Clove]

I have no experience in this, but I think it's dishonorable for the airlines to charge extra for this. Certainly, any parent would agree that their children are worth it, and undoubtedly there is some extra effort involved. But some things of value need to remain free, precicely because of how valuable they are: we should all be above charging an extra fee to keep children safe when they are in our charge.You have no idea how relieved I am to hear you say that. My friend from high school was just expressing her frustration at child-care fees she'll need to pay next week due to a scheduling conflict. Please PM your address and contact info so she can drop them at your place next week.

[Allereli]

Since she's the one moving away, she should be the one to pay the extra fee (although I know it doesn't really work that way).

[Clove]

How's the train situation? Something to look into at least...

Besides, $100 is a small price to pay to keep backlash away from him.


I don't think Amtrak will allow minors younger than 7 to travel unaccompanied. And it wouldn't be wise to send a kid that young solo on a train anyway.Beats my suggestion. I was going to say give them each a 50.00 and teach them how to hold their thumbs out...

[CrystalTears]

Youch.

Got the 90 day notice that the ex plans to relocate, so I was looking up options other than driving 9 hours each way to get my kid.

USAir/Delta/AA = $100 EACH WAY fee for flying solo for kids
Airtran is $98 round trip for flying solo.

Damn. Anyone else have experience with kids flying solo?
It's still cheaper than a regular, adult fare. What did you think it would be, free?

Or use your truffle money to go get him yourself.

[Clove]

It's still cheaper than a regular, adult fare. What did you think it would be, free?

Or use your truffle money to go get him yourself.Because it's valuable and convenient. Der!

But some things of value need to remain free, precicely because of how valuable they are: we should all be above charging an extra fee to keep children safe when they are in our charge.

[Allereli]

It's still cheaper than a regular, adult fare. What did you think it would be, free?

Or use your truffle money to go get him yourself.

unaccompanied minor fees are tacked onto the adult fares. Only babies sitting on laps fly free

[CrystalTears]

unaccompanied minor fees are tacked onto the adult fares. Only babies sitting on laps fly free
Depending on how old he is, a child fare is still cheaper than an adult fare, yes? Tacking on another $100 would make it moreso but still sometimes cheaper.

Sounds like picking him up is a more affordable option. Imagine that great bonding you can do in the 9 hour drive back.

Oh by the way, Southwest is $50 each way.

[ElvenFury]

Oh my bad. I don't know how old his kid is so I figured he was a lap child.

Sounds like picking him up is a more affordable option. Imagine that great bonding you can do in the 9 hour drive back.
From the pictures that he's posted, I'm guessing the kid is 7 or 8.

Kuyuk, as long as he can sit still for a couple hours and doesn't have a problem with authority, he should be ok. My girlfriend's oldest has had some trouble flying alone, but he's a madman. I'm guessing your little vegan will be just fine.

They'll make you escort him through security when he's leaving, and the parent picking him up will have to go through security to get him at the gate, so he'll only be alone while actually on the plane.

The only really scary part is when flights get redirected due to do emergencies, and the kid is potentially stranded all alone in a different airport. However, it doesn't sound like he'd be flying too far, so I wouldn't worry about that.

[Allereli]

Depending on how old he is, a child fare is still cheaper than an adult fare, yes? Tacking on another $100 would make it moreso but still sometimes cheaper.

Sounds like picking him up is a more affordable option. Imagine that great bonding you can do in the 9 hour drive back.

Oh by the way, Southwest is $50 each way.

I was shipped to Florida to see my mother almost every vacation time. I would have thought frequent 9 hour drives are too much and akin to punishment.

[CrystalTears]

stuffSo much for editing my post, so that you can sit and stare at it for 10 minutes with the wrong thing before hitting submit. :tongue:

[Archigeek]

You have no idea how relieved I am to hear you say that. My friend from high school was just expressing her frustration at child-care fees she'll need to pay next week due to a scheduling conflict. Please PM your address and contact info so she can drop them at your place next week.

You're missing the point. The fee is extra, tacked on top of the price of a regular airline ticket. But the point is that the security of travelers, particularly children, should be a given part of service. Not only that, but in this day and age it is something everyone should just do without needing an "extra" fee on top of the ticket price. "Wait, you want your kids to be safe? Well that'll be extra". Talk about your antithesis of customer service. Next thing you know they'll charge you to bring a bag along...

[Clove]

You're missing the point. The fee is extra, tacked on top of the price of a regular airline ticket. But the point is that the security of travelers, particularly children, should be a given part of service.So everybody should pay higher rates for the privilege of providing extra convenience to parents. Yes convenience, businesses are not obligated to watch your children for you. You can mind them yourself, or you can pay a fee to have the business mind them. The business takes on liability for assuming responsibility of your children, insurance (and lawyers) cost money. This isn't "pay us or we'll let your child walk into an jet intake" this is, pay us for assuming YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME!

Tell you what, I'll agree with you- this service sshould be included in first class fares; but in coach, you get a service fee.

[CrystalTears]

You're missing the point. The fee is extra, tacked on top of the price of a regular airline ticket. But the point is that the security of travelers, particularly children, should be a given part of service. Not only that, but in this day and age it is something everyone should just do without needing an "extra" fee on top of the ticket price. "Wait, you want your kids to be safe? Well that'll be extra". Talk about your antithesis of customer service. Next thing you know they'll charge you to bring a bag along...
Maybe because it's not our (collective) job to take care of your child for you. Consider it the airlines' babysitting fee.

[Keller]

You're missing the point. The fee is extra, tacked on top of the price of a regular airline ticket. But the point is that the security of travelers, particularly children, should be a given part of service. Not only that, but in this day and age it is something everyone should just do without needing an "extra" fee on top of the ticket price. "Wait, you want your kids to be safe? Well that'll be extra". Talk about your antithesis of customer service. Next thing you know they'll charge you to bring a bag along...

So next time I buy my kid a movie ticket, I get free child care, too?

That is an awesome loophole to child care!

[Kitsun]

If you stuff the kid in some luggage and ship him in a way that he can't get into trouble then I can see there being no extra charge. But if he can unbuckle himself, run amock, need to go bathroom and need to be taken care of, I don't see why anyone, even a company, should just accept responsibility for someone else's child.

[Keller]

If you stuff the kid in some luggage and ship him in a way that he can't get into trouble then I can see there being no extra charge. But if he can unbuckle himself, run amock, need to go bathroom and need to be taken care of, I don't see why anyone, even a company, should just accept responsibility for someone else's child.

Because he already bought a ticket!

[Orp]

Southwest has/had the most resonable fee's if they fly to her area

[Keller]

You're missing the point. The fee is extra, tacked on top of the price of a regular airline ticket. But the point is that the security of travelers, particularly children, should be a given part of service. Not only that, but in this day and age it is something everyone should just do without needing an "extra" fee on top of the ticket price. "Wait, you want your kids to be safe? Well that'll be extra". Talk about your antithesis of customer service. Next thing you know they'll charge you to bring a bag along...
So next time I buy my kid a movie ticket, I get free child care, too?

That is an awesome loophole to child care!



http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gifUnaccompanied Minor... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=1100625#post1100625)05-03-2010 03:09 PMmissed the point....

Care to explain how I missed the point?

I purchased a movie ticket. The security of moviegoers, particularly children, should be a given part of the service, right?

[Sylvan Dreams]

You're missing the point. The fee is extra, tacked on top of the price of a regular airline ticket. But the point is that the security of travelers, particularly children, should be a given part of service. Not only that, but in this day and age it is something everyone should just do without needing an "extra" fee on top of the ticket price. "Wait, you want your kids to be safe? Well that'll be extra". Talk about your antithesis of customer service. Next thing you know they'll charge you to bring a bag along...

We're not collectively raising someone's kids. Waiving the fee means it gets redirected somewhere else - the other passengers. Hardly fair. You (general you) don't deserve special accommodations from everyone around you because you have children.

Oh, and...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/04/06/spirit.carryon.fees/index.html
(CNN) -- With many airlines now charging a fee for checked luggage, the next step had to come sometime: A carrier asking passengers to pay for the privilege of bringing carry-on bags on board.
Well, that time is here.
Spirit Airlines announced Tuesday that it will charge its customers $20 to $45 for items they place in the overhead bins.
The cost depends on whether passengers are members of the airline's ultra-low fare club and whether they "pre-reserve" their carry-on bag in advance.
Each passenger will still be able to bring one personal item that fits under a seat for free, such as a purse, briefcase, backpack or laptop computer. They also won't have to pay extra for items such as diaper bags, pet containers and cameras.

[Clove]

Yeah I got missing the point rep too (where's my damn .bmp). Archigeek, I'm pretty sure we understand your point. I'm not entirely sure you're getting ours.

[Cephalopod]

We're not collectively raising someone's kids. Waiving the fee means it gets redirected somewhere else - the other passengers. Hardly fair. You (general you) don't deserve special accommodations from everyone around you because you have children.

Oh, and...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/04/06/spirit.carryon.fees/index.html
(CNN) -- With many airlines now charging a fee for checked luggage, the next step had to come sometime: A carrier asking passengers to pay for the privilege of bringing carry-on bags on board.
Well, that time is here.
Spirit Airlines announced Tuesday that it will charge its customers $20 to $45 for items they place in the overhead bins.
The cost depends on whether passengers are members of the airline's ultra-low fare club and whether they "pre-reserve" their carry-on bag in advance.
Each passenger will still be able to bring one personal item that fits under a seat for free, such as a purse, briefcase, backpack or laptop computer. They also won't have to pay extra for items such as diaper bags, pet containers and cameras.


I don't know if his son will fit in the overhead compartment.

[Sylvan Dreams]

I don't know if his son will fit in the overhead compartment.

Pet carrier seems to be the way to go.

Or maybe he can dress the kid up like a dog. Does he like to color?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCR97weqHQY

[Clove]

And fly Delta, they allow ferrets in cabin.

[Cephalopod]

Pet carrier seems to be the way to go.


You disturb me.
http://deadendweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/cat-carrier.jpg

[Archigeek]

Care to explain how I missed the point?

I purchased a movie ticket. The security of moviegoers, particularly children, should be a given part of the service, right?

Well, I didn't give you the neg' rep, (or anyone else in this thread), but I'll do the best I can. But first, it's clear that a lot of people disagree with me here, and that's fine, but I do stand behind my original assertion. Feel free to disagree.

As for missing the point, going to the movies is not an act where you can reasonably be expected to be placing your life or the life of your children in someone else's hands. On the contrary, when you fly on a jet plane, you're arrival and life are entirely in the hands of other people. When an airline agrees to take a passenger, they are agreeing to be responsible for the safety of that individual. The theater is too of course, but to a much lesser degree, to the point where it is infinitisimal, because the risk is so much less.

My main point though is that children are a cargo more valuable than any other, and that value is not monetary, and in the rare instance where a child needs a little extra care we should all step up, including airlines.

Besides, and I know this is going to open up a whole line of "yeah buts", but I've never, in half a million miles of flying, seen an unaccompanied minor who wasn't well behaved. I've seen plenty of accompanied minors (and adults) who behaved poorly, but the unaccompanied minors are always on their best behavior. Are they a little extra work? Sure, but everyone has something about them that's a little extra work. Accomodating people well is what separates good customer service from bad, and right now, US airlines have about the worst customer service around. They need to start improving how they treat their customers, not making it worse.

[CrystalTears]

As for missing the point, going to the movies is not an act where you can reasonably be expected to be placing your life or the life of your children in someone else's hands. On the contrary, when you fly on a jet plane, you're arrival and life are entirely in the hands of other people. When an airline agrees to take a passenger, they are agreeing to be responsible for the safety of that individual. The theater is too of course, but to a much lesser degree, to the point where it is infinitisimal, because the risk is so much less.The higher the risk, the higher the fees.


My main point though is that children are a cargo more valuable than any other, and that value is not monetary, and in the rare instance where a child needs a little extra care we should all step up, including airlines.Well then stick them in a overnight bag and check them in. That way it's only about $50. I mean, they're just cargo, right?


Besides, and I know this is going to open up a whole line of "yeah buts", but I've never, in half a million miles of flying, seen an unaccompanied minor who wasn't well behaved. I've seen plenty of accompanied minors (and adults) who behaved poorly, but the unaccompanied minors are always on their best behavior. Are they a little extra work? Sure, but everyone has something about them that's a little extra work. Accomodating people well is what separates good customer service from bad, and right now, US airlines have about the worst customer service around. They need to start improving how they treat their customers, not making it worse.
And if God forbid something, anything, happens to that child, even so much as a hangnail or a bruise, and the parents will immediately sue. It's for liability more than anything else.

[Archigeek]

The higher the risk, the higher the fees.

And when's the last time you got an airline ticket for 10 bucks?


Well then stick them in a overnight bag and check them in. That way it's only about $50. I mean, they're just cargo, right?

I guess it's a small step from metaphor to hyperbole.


And if God forbid something, anything, happens to that child, even so much as a hangnail or a bruise, and the parents will immediately sue. It's for liability more than anything else.

Do you really honestly believe this? Bumps and bruises and hangnails... every parent knows they come with the territory.

[CrystalTears]

And when's the last time you got an airline ticket for 10 bucks?Flying is high risk, so the fees are greater. So obviously if you're going to send a child hundreds, if not thousands, of miles away supervised by someone other than a parent, the costs are going to be higher. You think a babysitter isn't going to charge more if you ask them to take them somewhere outside of their safe home?


Do you really honestly believe this? Bumps and bruises and hangnails... every parent knows they come with the territory.
Ask a parent how they're going to feel if their child was hurt because of the negligence of the airlines. You're going to honestly tell me they're just going to say "oh that's just kids for you" and leave? Good luck with that.

[Keller]

Well, I didn't give you the neg' rep, (or anyone else in this thread), but I'll do the best I can. But first, it's clear that a lot of people disagree with me here, and that's fine, but I do stand behind my original assertion. Feel free to disagree.

As for missing the point, going to the movies is not an act where you can reasonably be expected to be placing your life or the life of your children in someone else's hands. On the contrary, when you fly on a jet plane, you're arrival and life are entirely in the hands of other people. When an airline agrees to take a passenger, they are agreeing to be responsible for the safety of that individual. The theater is too of course, but to a much lesser degree, to the point where it is infinitisimal, because the risk is so much less.

My main point though is that children are a cargo more valuable than any other, and that value is not monetary, and in the rare instance where a child needs a little extra care we should all step up, including airlines.

Besides, and I know this is going to open up a whole line of "yeah buts", but I've never, in half a million miles of flying, seen an unaccompanied minor who wasn't well behaved. I've seen plenty of accompanied minors (and adults) who behaved poorly, but the unaccompanied minors are always on their best behavior. Are they a little extra work? Sure, but everyone has something about them that's a little extra work. Accomodating people well is what separates good customer service from bad, and right now, US airlines have about the worst customer service around. They need to start improving how they treat their customers, not making it worse.

Do you think airlines charge a fee for unaccompanied children because of the risk the airplane might crash? I seriously have no idea what you're even arguing anymore.

[Archigeek]

Do you think airlines charge a fee for unaccompanied children because of the risk the airplane might crash? I seriously have no idea what you're even arguing anymore.

I guess I don't understand your arguement either. You were the one equating purchasing a movie ticket with an airline ticket, not me. My response was to the arguement that a movie ticket was somehow equal in any way to an airline ticket. When you board an airplane, everyone is in the airline's care, child or adult, and a good portion of your fee pays for your safety and security. Not so when you enter a movie theater.

[Kitsun]

I think I understand what you're saying but you're making assumptions that aren't true. The airline is really only responsible for carting your ass from A to B. They do it with your safety in mind, but that is assuming you're a responsible adult that can care for yourself.

Children need adult supervision or a legal guardian or something present otherwise the parent runs the risk of the situation where the child has been "abandoned".

[Sylvan Dreams]

My main point though is that children are a cargo more valuable than any other, and that value is not monetary, and in the rare instance where a child needs a little extra care we should all step up, including airlines.

Negative. The airlines are responsible for taking us from point A to point B safely. They are not responsible for things a child needs that can only be monitored via adult supervision, such as: seatbelt use, not annoying other passengers, remaining seated, proper use of bathroom facilities, being fed, eating properly, not destroying things that they get their hands on, etc. Those things are not the responsibility of anyone except for the child's parents. Not the rest of the passengers and certainly not a corporation. The other passengers are not signing up for babysitting duty when they pay their fee, nor are they receiving a discount for giving it.

[Nieninque]

Do you really honestly believe this? Bumps and bruises and hangnails... every parent knows they come with the territory.

Every driver knows that its fucking stupid to drive with a hot cup of coffee in your lap...oh wait.

[Keller]

I guess I don't understand your arguement either. You were the one equating purchasing a movie ticket with an airline ticket, not me. My response was to the arguement that a movie ticket was somehow equal in any way to an airline ticket. When you board an airplane, everyone is in the airline's care, child or adult, and a good portion of your fee pays for your safety and security. Not so when you enter a movie theater.

My argument is that the price of a ticket, be it to efficiently travel long distances or view a motion picture, does NOT include the cost of babysitting. I'm not sure how that could could have been more clear, but I apologize for not making it more clear.

The fee you are paying for an unaccompanied child is to make sure that child (a non-rational, excitable, and general pre-human lifeform) does not harm themselves or others aboard the plane, does not become frightened or feel abandoned, does know what they are doing on the plane and after they leave the plane, does get to their connecting gate and/or baggage claim with the responsible adult.

Sure, these are all related to the "security and safety" of the child, but they are all also things that an airline (shit, any business) assumes it will not be required to do. The fact is, you need to pay for what you receive. There is no reason why I, a competent adult, should be saddled with paying for additional airline resources (concieges, attendants, etc) so that you can send little Jonny to visit his Uncle Rick.

[Ceyrin]

Speaking as someone who was once an 'unaccompanied minor' on airlines several times in his life, allow me to share some of my experience.

There are several people - employees who are involved in the process of making sure that the child is escorted from gate to gate (in the instance of connection flights). They even escort you around the terminal (you get to ride on the little golf-cart things where applicable).

EDIT: The implication here is that those employees need to get paid, and hence the 'unaccompanied minor fee'. Flying is a time consuming and expensive business, and it is a business. The last thing airlines want is some kid lost/crying in the airport or generally just running around being a little shit stain. It's a babysitting/escort fee. And neither babysitters, nor escorts are ever free.

Granted, this was nearly 20 years ago now, and I can't say much about how it is today. Based on what Allereli posted, I'd say they're a lot more lazy if your parent/guardian has to go through security with you on both ends.

Of course, flying has really sucked ass in general since 9/11.

[Clove]

It's both more work for the staff and more liability for the airline; hence, the fee.

So how early can I drop my friend's kids off Archigeek? You know, so you can "do the right thing"

[AnticorRifling]

Youch.

Got the 90 day notice that the ex plans to relocate, so I was looking up options other than driving 9 hours each way to get my kid.

USAir/Delta/AA = $100 EACH WAY fee for flying solo for kids
Airtran is $98 round trip for flying solo.

How can she move that far away from you with your kids? I, obviously, don't know the details of your divorce paperwork but damn that's some bullshit if she can just up and move your kids. It's cool though fathers shouldn't have rights in a divorce.