【The Way to Run a Business】 "Paid Seat Selection" Should Not Become an Industry Convention
Wang Wei
Recently, the issue of extra fees for seat selection in civil aviation has sparked heated debate. Some airlines have introduced a paid seat selection mechanism, claiming it's an industry convention, and lock certain seats such as window, aisle, or front-row seats, requiring passengers to pay additional fees. What was originally prevalent only among low-cost carriers is now spreading throughout the entire civil aviation industry, causing discontent and questioning among consumers. The Consumer Council believes that "paid seat selection" should not become an industry convention.
Previously, airlines would lock certain seats based on factors such as safety considerations, special passenger needs, aircraft load capacity, and the need to prioritize loyalty program members or group bookings. From a technical and operational perspective, this practice has its rationality. However, with the increasing competition in civil aviation, airlines have started to charge for preferred seats, such as window, aisle, or front-row seats, in order to generate more revenue, and "paid seat selection" has become a common industry practice.
Proponents of "paid seat selection" argue that it is a legitimate way to provide additional services and that this practice is prevalent in mature foreign aviation markets. Opponents argue that "paid seat selection" violates the principle of first-come, first-served, disrupts fair market principles, and turns a blind eye to consumers' rights.
If "paid seat selection" continues to expand unchecked, competition for better seats will become even more intense, with costs rising accordingly. If airlines include headrest seats in the paid seat selection range, it will essentially become a form of "high-stakes auction". From this perspective, the "paid seat selection" model, if left unregulated, will not only harm consumers' right to informed consent but also infringe upon their right to choose, violating fair trade principles and having a bad demonstration effect.
Airlines set up seat selection as an additional service or exclusive benefit for high-tier loyalty program members. Although this may bring some short-term economic benefits to airlines in the short term, it will ultimately come at the expense of many passengers' rights. Consumers can only express their dissatisfaction through boycotts and vote with their feet. In terms of actual execution, regulations are unclear, transparency is lacking, and reasons for locking seats are vague, refusing to provide consumers with prior notice. Such practices that disregard consumers' right to informed consent, choice, and fair trade principles should be stopped immediately.
In the face of widespread dissatisfaction among the public over "airplane seats being locked", the timely response from the Consumer Council has significant guiding significance and corrective value. We deserve praise. What's needed next is to reach a consensus on curbing airlines' "paid seat selection" practices, with all parties forming a joint effort to ultimately eradicate the chaos in air travel.
The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author only.