Airlines - commence mooing in 3...2...1...

Fee for unaccompanied minors

American Air will charge for solo kids up to 14

August 21, 2014 10:20 PM ET

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) - American Airlines says it will extend its fee for unaccompanied minors to charge $150 extra each way for children between 5 and 14.

The change starts Sept. 3. Currently, American charges a fee on top of the regular fare for unaccompanied minors between 5 and 11.

The airline announced the change Thursday in an employee publication.


rest at link

_______________________________________________
“There are three things all wise men fear: the sea in storm, a night with no moon, and the anger of a gentle man.”

Make it $1500.

That'll stop them dumping sprog on plane and expecting the crew to be their parunt.

You have kyds, you fly with them, you look after them.

All airlines charge for UMs. American is just catching up to United. Expect Southwest to follow suit...

If you don't want to pay the fee, fly your damn kids yourself.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From a bottle cap message on a Magic Hat #9 beer: Condoms Prevent Minivans
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I want to pick up a bus full of unruly kids and feed them gummi bears and crack, then turn them loose in Hobby Lobby to ransack the place. They will all be wearing T shirts that say "You Could Have Prevented This."

I'd expect airlines to charge for the responsibility of minding even well behaved kids, much less the "little miracles" of today's "see not evil," litigious parents. Hell, I think they should triple the fee for those brats. What stuns me is how old they are still considered in need of help (14 years for some).

First time I traveled solo I was 12, there were airline strikes, and I was going in/out of LaGuardia - not some dinky 3 gate airport. At 15 I was responsible for getting myself and my 10 y.o. brother to our destination on a flight that had a connection. I'm pretty sure that once I passed 10 or 11 I would have been mortified to have an airplane nanny. I wonder if the extended age requirement is because today's kids are so overprotected and unprepared for life or if they airlines are being greedy jerks.

Maybe the airlines are trying to discourage parents from sending their children off on solo flights unless it's really necessary. I'm kind of surprised they allow it at all. It would really seem to be opening up the airlines for all kinds of lawsuits if anything goes wrong when an airline nanny was supposed to be watching the kids. Airlines really shouldn't be in the business of nannying solo children, IMO. The parents should be doing that. I guess it's unavoidable in some cases where the parents are divorced, have shared custody and live on opposite sides of the country, but taking on care of someone else's children is IMO risky.

Does it also mean that they buy up every seat next to, in front of and behind their pweshus spawn because "They cannot sit next to some stranger who may fiddle with them in fight..."

Though not.

Big fat no to parents who are divorced. It is totally avoidable. They wanted spawn, they pay for spawn visitation issues. Most of these "can't afford to fly an adult as well" assholes already have second spouses and a couple of spawn. Let then figure it out.

What I want to know it, what will the airlines do when (inevitably) some moo brings a 4 year old, 3 year old or 2 year old to be taken on the plane unattended?

Logic says they will refuse it... and much lowing will occur that the stewards don't want to diaper.

Oh you know they'll do it. They will.

Cabin crew will not do diapers. In pre-flight briefings, almost all of them roll their eyes when told about um's on the flight. Not popular passengers at all. Most are well behaved, but the responsibility implied is a strain.:smn