This is the result of a really neat cascade effect.

Aircraft need to speed up their boarding time. It's a pretty tight window to get everyone disembarked, the plane cleaned and stocked, and the new passengers on board.

The increase in time it takes to load the passengers is because everyone is taking a carry-on to store in the overhead.

The reason everyone is loading up the carry-ons is due to the baggage handling fees.

The bag handling fees exist because stockholders demand it.

Stockholders demand the fees because fees are not taxed the way tickets are so less of the money goes to the feds. So there's a much higher profit margin to have bag fees than to tack $25 to a ticket.

So because the Federal Government and the airports are taking a bigger bite out of the ticket sales (where prices are ultra competitive and sales margins ultra slim - largely thanks to aggragators like priceline) there's a direct line to not being able to board early with little Suzy and Jimmy.

Ah, Amy and her "kids should never travel" rant. If families with small kids are enmeshed in the normal boarding crunch, it is entirely likely that boarding will go even more slowly.

To speed up the boarding process, the two most important things airlines could do are:

- Actually enforce "boarding by row", so that people sitting farther back are on-board and out of the way of people sitting farther forward.

- Actually enforce carry-on restrictions. "One carry-on" does not mean "one suitcase, a duty-free shopping bag, a huge purse, a winter coat, and whatever else you think you can get away with."

Oh, and get rid of TSA. I miss the days I could arrive at the airport 40 minutes before departure, park, walk to the gate, and get on the airplane.

Get rid of (or re-hide) the checked bag fees, this will help your carry-on problem (a little).

random_guy is right about the carry-ons, though. I've seen people carry-on bags bigger than the one I check. And then they have another backpack or laptop bag.

TSA? Thousands of Stupid Asshats.

I could understand not wanting to sit next to a screaming kid, but a parent needing time to install a car seat for a child without having the entire plane try to squeeze past him isn't so much asking for special favors as much as its allowing the boarding process to go as quickly and smoothly as possible.

I wouldn't take it as them being rewarded because they reproduced and you didn't. I'm on your side when it comes to people raising well-mannered kids, but you're off on this one. It isn't about manners or rewards. And really, do you want to penalize people for having kids and traveling?

I flew from VA to CA with my 2-year-old son a few years ago. He did not scream, kick (after one "NO" from me), or run up the aisle. I got compliments from my seat neighbors and the flight attendants on all flight segments there and back.

That said, while boarding I had my son, a car seat, purse (the smallest they make) and diaper bag (slightly bigger than my purse). Getting those down the aisle was tough. Not only was it faster without lots of other people, but when I accidentally bonked a seat with the car seat, I didn't hit somebody (which would probably have happened without the pre-boarding).

I have to say though, when exiting the planes I always got multiple offers for help carrying things, etc. People were always very nice about it because I was polite, thankful, and not abusing the system.

That said, when one leg of the trip had us board an already partially filled plan from a connection, it was MUCH harder to get stuff through because people's arms/legs/etc were dangling in the aisle.

I think pre-boarding saves time, but I would NOT do it for "kids 5 and under" which is what I usually see. Instead, I would say 2 or 3 and under. After that, they can sit in the regular seat and parents can check the car seat if need be.

Also, a whole gigantic family where one kid is very young shouldn't get to pre-board. 1 parent per pre-board child. I have seen cases where both parents, three older kids, grandparents, and aunts/uncles/cousins all pre-boarded (or tried to) since they were all under the same name.

We're not talking about carry ons and TSA and all that jazz. Amy's complaint is simple, if you want special privileges for boarding, pay for them like everyone else. I think some parents tend to treat the fact that they are parents like a disability. It wasn't like they were in a car accident and the doctor said, "well, it looks like you have kids" instead "severe spinal injuries". The vast majority of parents choose to have kids and should accept that the world isn't always as "family-friendly" as they would like. At least not for free. This IS America.

The problem isn't kids traveling but their parents traveling inefficiently. It's bad enough traveling alone with gear but I can't see why bringing your kids means bringing the house.

We've traveled with our child (now 4) since he was only a few months old. Boarding with him is not all that hard. Of course, he's used to it, has been raised and trained by two frequent travelers, and boards early anyway because he's also elite (just give him cookies, one of our iPods and an upgrade and nobody will get hurt). We also do NOT use the car seat in the plane and use the 5-pt belt they make (fat lot of good either will do in a crash) since we prefer to travel light (at best, we do one checked bag for all of us and our briefcases/backpacks on board with the squirt's gear in our gear).

What I don't get is the need for parents to make sure each their kids has their own carry-on (that Mom and Dad will have to carry) and of course the in-flight car seat which if anything is a hazard when boarding and deplaning. Any "perk" of boarding early with all of your early possessions is negated since you will have to wait for everyone to leave (or be a jerk and hold up the people behind you) and then have a masochistic laden-down death run to the next gate.

(and at the risk of turning this in to an ad for the product which I won't name, the 5-pt toddler belt they make is barely $65 and pays for itself on the first flight leg -- maybe even on checkin)

It's not like a United flight was going to be on time, anyway.

Actually to speed up boarding it would make sense to board the window seat people first. or pre plane arrange people by seat number.

What I have a problem with is the phrasing of the original complaint. Today we have become either Anti something or very pro to it.
The ANti-family label is being applied to a buisness who is treating them like everyone else, and not bending over backwards for them. Nowadays that equals being Anti. Non-pro family I can see since they aren't giving extras to families, but that is a far sight from being anti.

I certainly hope families with small children stop flying United. I'll fly United much more often if that happens. I fly for work a lot. Most kids on flights don't behave themselves, and their entitled parents don't do a damn thing to control them.

I'm with Amy that young children shouldn't fly... at least if they're a disturbance to other passengers stuck in a can 20,000 feet above the earth.

But, I'd prefer to get these families settled into their seats far ahead of me, instead of having to be stuck behind them during normal boarding. Just seems practical.

The worse passengers I've put up with aren't kids, but European (especially German) college students.

Incidentally, United is the worse airline I've ever flown on. (A friend of mine claims that Continental in the 90s was the worse, which is why he always flew it. It was so bad that he never had a problem getting a good price and seat. The key was to not expect anything to go right.)

One the one hand, now that my kids are all walking right along, I wouldn't preboard. I'd rather let them use up their energy till they HAVE to sit down.

On the other hand, when I was traveling with 4 kids, 2 carseats, and 2 boosters, by myself, if I hadn't preboarded the flight would have been held up. No more then it is with the assholes who bring too much carryon and search the plane for space for it, but still. Also, it's nearly impossible to haul a carseat down a full plane and not bump someone. And yes, they take a more than 2 seconds to buckle in.

I never fly United anyway. I'm a Southwest till I die kinda chic.

Why reward the old and inform with early boarding? It's not a 'reward", it's an efficiency. The rest of us don't want to be stuck holding our crap in the aisle while shuffling after a slowpoke.

WIth well over a dozen flights by myself with my kids under my belt and only one complaint EVER about them and tons of compliments, I'd have to say I'm a damn good traveling parent, too.

"Most kids on flights don't behave themselves,"

I've flown a decent amount, and don't think I've ever seen a misbehaving kid. Am I alone in that? Crying baby, sure, on occasion, but they're babies. They hurt. They can't help it. It doesn't offend me.

Pre-boarding for those with kids doesn't bother me. Even well-behaved children are going to be slower than an adult, because they're too short for long strides, reaching the carry-on bin, etc. I do agree with Shannon though, that abusing the system, e.g. the entire family reunion boarding first because one relative has a child is rude. The only people who need to board with the children are the parents or guardians.

"reaching the carry-on bin"

Ah HA! (emphasis on HA!) And now we reach one of the main problems of "kids" boarding first. If they are too short to reach the carry-on bin, then they can stash their cute but totally unnecessary
Hello-Kitty make-believe roll-aboard under the seat and they can sit happily with their little feet dangling, never touching their bags and not being a burden to other passengers.

BUT....

... if they are being made to be the unpaid sherpas for Mom and Dad's oversized carryons to avoid baggage fees (and I've seen this stunt pulled) that may be different. And that is part of the problem. It's not the kids. It's the rotten parents among them spoiling it for the rest of us -- and of course the more responsible and considerate parents (not to mention their abused little valets).

Funny thing about Southwest. People gripe about them, but they are the most reliable airline I've flown. (I also like how they use only 737s, so I don't have to worry about getting bumped to one of those teeny commuter jets.)

Regardless of my personal feelings, if a company decides it helps to let small kids on first, fine. If they don't, fine. I agree that it's not anti-family, just a policy. Businesses can make their own policies and people can shop for what they want.

Nobody complains that family-friendly restaurants exist - they fill a market niche. Similarly, fancy restaurants don't need to have high chairs. They aren't anti-family, they are for grown-ups. As long as policies are clearly stated or easily located, the consumer can buy what they want.

That said, I will DRIVE from VA to Chicago (13 hours or so) rather than fly now that I have 2 kids. I'd rather have my kids drive ME nuts for 13 hours than try to stop them from driving somebody ELSE nuts for 3. As I mentioned before, my son is well behaved on flights. My daughter (we haven't tried yet) would probably want to run up and down the aisles.

One of my problems with pre-boarders is that they put their stuff in the front row overhead bins and head to the middle or rear of the plane to their seats - to avoid carrying their bag through the plane when disembarking and so they don't have to put their second carry-on under the seat in front of them. Then, when the plane fills up, the folks in the front rows run out of overhead bin space and are forced the gatecheck their bags.

Families are not the only ones I see abusing the system, but they are frequent abusers.

I used to travel frequently and I've seen every one of the complaints made here:

• Extended families boarding because they have one 2-year-old
  
• Twelve carry-ons allowed because "this one's the child's"
  
• Underseat storage not utilized even when the child won't be inconvenienced because his feet don't reach the floor - it's easier for mom to reach the bag if it's in the overhead
  
• Passengers bringing an infant's car seat on the plane ... and not using it for the infant (WTF?)
  

"Twelve carry-ons allowed because "this one's the child's"

Why does this bother you? The child is sitting in a paid for seat. That seat comes with a carry on. There is no difference in a kid having one, and you having one.

"Passengers bringing an infant's car seat on the plane ... and not using it for the infant"

Again, if they've paid for the seat the carseat is filling, who cares? if they chose to let that seat sit empty that they've paid for, how is it any skin off your back?

Why should others get earlier boarding free of charge simply because they've reproduced?

So the plane can leave on time, with relatively minimal impact? I'd rather get to my destination in good order than be late because it took longer to get the plane boarded and on its way.

Also: will you complain about the elderly, the handicapped, and uniformed US military also getting the same pre-board courtesy?

Ultimately, this is between you and your airline of choice. And it's their aircraft and business and they can run it as they see fit, so long as they don't run afoul of the law or the regulations implementing the law.

I never saw pre-boarding for families with young children, or the elderly or disabled for that matter, as an unfair advantage. Don't the gate agents often lump them in with the general phrase "passengers needing extra time to board"? That's all it is.

People with little kids, walkers, whatever, are bound to the same rules of courtesy as the rest of us, and if they behave rudely they should be called on it. But if they are otherwise considerate, just happen to need to travel by plane, yet move more slowly and with necessary equipment, what's wrong with giving them a little extra time and space to get settled? As others have said, it usually causes far less of an inconvenience and delay if the slower ones get settled before the masses. And I don't think they should have to pay extra for that, any more than your friend in his wheelchair should have to pay for unimpeded access to the local cafe.

Yes, while people have no choice about getting old or disabled, people choose to reproduce. But wouldn't you offer a seat on the bus to someone who had a small child or was heavily pregnant? It sure does make their day easier, on the physical level alone. Yet it was their choice (hopefully) to have that kid, why should you care about the daily challenges they voluntarily took on and help them out by giving up your comfortable seat?

Because it's a kind and civilized thing to do.

Why does this bother you? The child is sitting in a paid for seat. That seat comes with a carry on. There is no difference in a kid having one, and you having one.

I don't have a problem with kids bringing carry-ons. The situation I'm describing it the parents circumventing the carry-on rule by having two pieces of luggage for eveyone, including the toddler who can barely manage his backpack, much less the rolly suitcase Dad is managing "for him."

And yes, m4, I'm being slightly irrational about this because they did pay for the seat and are allowed two pieces of luggage per person - but one of those pieces of luggage is supposed to go under the seat in front of the passenger - and it usually doesn't when mom & dad are circumventing the rules by assigning some of their luggage to the kids.

Overhead space is precious on flights these days - and I'm getting tired of early boarders hijacking space they should be leaving for the late boarders (especially now that I've lost my exalted member status and am more likely to be a late boarder).

Again, if they've paid for the seat the carseat is filling, who cares? if they chose to let that seat sit empty that they've paid for, how is it any skin off your back?

If they're not using it for the kid on the plane, then it does nothing more than take up room in the overheads (those things take up a disproportionate amount of room in overheads).

The real reason they're bringing it is to avoid renting one with the rental car later. So check it as luggage.

If they want to pay for a seat for their car seat to occupy during the flight, then fine I have no issue with them bringing it along.

Carseats go in the overhead? Wow. I've always either used or gate-checked mine, so I had no idea. I wouldn't ahve thought that was allowed.

Renting them is HELLA expensive, though, paying the baggage fee would be much cheaper. Buying an extra seat might even be cheaper, depending on length of trip and the deal you get on the flight.

I wouldn't ahve thought that was allowed.

It may not be anymore. It's been over a year since I've flown.

When I was flying regularly, I saw car seats being brought onto planes and stored in the overheads.

At some point, generally on the smaller planes (with smaller overhead bins), the passengers began to be directed to gate check them.

When I was flying regularly, I saw car seats being brought onto planes and stored in the overheads.

New business idea - rent the carseat separate from the dang rent-a-car dealers! Have a boatload of different-sized seats, from infant to older baby-sized, and then the booster seats for toddlers. You could probably get them from friends, relatives, and neighbors. Set up a kiosk right next door to the rent-a-cars, or even 2 doors down or near the hotels or something. Five bucks/per child/per week of use. Dollar a day if they're only there for a long weekend or something. I'm sure someone will pick it apart though, and the remt-a-car bastids will probably threathen them with lawsuits or something. So maybe you'd have to do this online, ahead of time, and pay for someone to just meet you at the airport with 'em. I dunno. It could work!

"Carseats go in the overhead?"

More to the point, people are willing lift carseats up into the overhead? These people are too crazy to be let on airplanes let alone supervise children.

Regarding idea, I suspect Flynne hasn't had to install/uninstall a car seat in recent year :) The big disincentive besides the cost (if you don't get it for free) from the car company is that the rented ones STILL aren't installed in the car. If you want to be competitive, pay a slight surcharge to get the darned seats in the car before you arrive.

I have never seen anyone try to put a carseat in an overhead bin. People gate check them (along with their strollers.)

If each passenger gets one personal item and one carry-on, my family of three will absolutely have a total of six items, and I don't care if you suspect that my child's second item is really mine. Guess what, I paid for three tickets, and it's not your business who's stuff is in the bag. I've got some of my stuff in my husband's bag, too... so there.

*BUT* in my case, the kid's carry-on really is the kid's stuff. It's filled with a change of clothes, something to chew on during takeoff and landing, her stuffed animal, and toys to keep her busy during the trip. It goes under the seat.

And pre-boarding little kids seems to me to be a courtesy to the other passengers, not some fancy privilege for people with children. Plus, if you're on a cattle-call airline, you can spot where the kids are and sit as far away as possible... instead of being the lucky fella with the only open seat when Mommy With Lap Baby who's almost two finally makes it on the plane.

Anyway, I hate flying, and avoid it if at all possible. If I can be somewhere in under 12 hours by car, I'll drive. The only time we've flown with our toddler, it was on United... and I wouldn't fly them again, anyway, ever. They're ALWAYS late, which is disasterous if you have a tight layover, plus their regional jets fly out of the crappy terminals and they have those awful little planes that are like sardine tins. It's not like you get a discount when you're on one of those crappy little planes. I'm all about Southwest, and if we're leaving the continent I'll just pay more (if neccessary) for a European carrier.

Regarding idea, I suspect Flynne hasn't had to install/uninstall a car seat in recent year :)

LOL! You got that right, Bill, my girls are now 19 & 16! But I remember flying with the elder (she was almost 3, but still rather small for her age; I, on the other hand, was almost 8 months pregnant and H-U-G-E!) when I was pregnant with the younger, and taking the car seat with us, to use on the plane and in the rental (non-stop to FLA, my great-gramma was dying and I had to see her. #1 was very well-behaved, and it wasn't a very long flight anyway). By then I was a pro at buckling and unbuckling the thing one-handed and damn quick about it too.

Ah, memories!

I don't see how preboarding is necessarily a privilege. The earlier you get on the plane, the longer you have to sit there. And since I do have my daughter (now 2 and a half) and her bulky car seat and diaper bag, I usually wait until the plane is nearly empty to disembark. I think that's fair, so I don't impede anyone's progress off the plane.

Also in my experience, preboarding with car seats prevents other passengers from being whacked in the head. Although, as others have mentioned, it's rare that someone doesn't offer to carry it for me. Personally I would prefer not to have to bring a car seat on the plane. Is it really going to be that much safer if we crash?

We have a trip planned for August, and driving is not an option because we live in Hawaii and my daughter is going to be the flower girl in her aunt's wedding in Seattle. My husband has to stay home because of work, and I'm pregnant. Ha ha! This is going to be fun!

Then again I've never really expected to be allowed to board early because I have a child. I think it's really nice but ultimately doesn't really matter. I already try to avoid United for myriad other reasons.

Put me in the camp of people who'd rather the kids boarded first so that they're in their seats when I'm boarding.

I think filling the plane from back to front makes the most sense, regardless of who has kids in tow and who doesn't. If you do it this way, you still won't "bonk" someone with your carseat, as there is no one you have to pass.

Common sense.

That said, I hate United with the heat of 1,000 suns, but if they're doing this I *MAY* have to consider flying with them again.

I hate United with the heat of 1,000 suns, but if they're doing this I *MAY* have to consider flying with them again.

Go sit down and have a cool drink until that urge passes.

People who don't have kids should not get medicare and social security. Also, when they get old and even more lonely and bitter, childless people should not be able rely on other people's children who eventually become pilots, mechanics, doctors, farmers, etc.

Hell hath no fury like a woman without kids.

This post confirms for me that it is very highly likely that your "handling" by TSA is due to your kid-hating I demand a perfect experience because I paid good money body language. They pick you out a mile away for special treatment, then laugh about it at break-time.

People who don't have kids should not get medicare and social security.

Then they shouldn't have to pay into it.

So, give me my money back.

I always felt people with kids, or the disabled and those who 'need more time' should be boarded last and made to sit at the very front of the plane, that way they never have to drag their kids or shit ton of luggage past anyone

Lujip that makes a lot of sense. Lots of families get bulkhead seats anyhow.

Interestingly, "What to expect the toddler years" suggests NOT pre-boarding, because why be in a cramped space longer than you need to?

I'm a bit worried. My kid has travelled well so far, but now she's walking and running, but not speaking yet, so I don't know if she'll understand me when I say things like "We need to sit still because the stewardess wants us to be safe" or whatever. She's been good on planes so far. I hope she continues.

On our last trip we had her crawl (on the way there) and walk (on the way back) around the lobby before the flight. We figured a bit of dirt was less bad than not sleeping. All the passengers were like "Go, baby! Exhaust yourself!"

I just don't buy Amy's "People who have special needs (such as kids) shouldn't fly" thing. I remember a while back Amy writing how great it was that no one could afford a home because it was better to be able to move around for work. Well, if you move around for work you travel to see your families, or you dissolve ties with them. I don't think the latter option is a nice one. I think roots are good to have.

Do you think handicapped people should have to pay to board early, too?

It's not the PARENTS who are handicapped, it's the kids who are handicapped by being smaller and slower. Kids are people, too. They are passengers, not carry-ons.

I haven't flown anything but Southwest in ages, & I haven't flown in about 4 years. Back when I was flying, Southwest just lumped you into groups based on when you got there - with the exception of people who needed extra time/assistance & children traveling alone (so the flight staff knew who they were and could make sure they were only released to the right people on the other end).

In that case, there is one VERY good reason to sit families with small kids first. If they end up at the end of the line, then they are very likely to either be scattered about the plane (who wants a toddler on a plane for the first time as a row-mate? parents not included!) OR there's going to have to be a bunch of shuffling to get parents near kids on most flights. Neither of these is good.

Coincidentally, the last time I flew non-Southwest (circa 1999) the later situation happened, where a family somehow goofed and the 4 of them were scattered about with a 4ish kid and a crawler/toddler. My family of 4 (I was the youngest & in college) gave up our seats in a row as soon as we heard. The flight crew was so thankful they did some sort of workaround where we were bumped to 1st class on the return trip... Sunday after Thanksgiving. We found out when we boarded on our way home. Also, about 10 different passengers (esp the ones whose we ended up next to) also expressed great thanks. To us it was just the humane thing to do & we had the right number of seats.

As for kids themselves. I don't like them. I love MY kids (I tolerate their friends), but can live without the rest. I understand where Amy is coming from, and it doesn't mean she's evil or anti-kid. They are loud, sticky, unpredictable, and sometimes vomit at random. That's just not everyone's favorite thing... especially at 20 thousand feet during Joey's nap but he's too excited to sleep.