Does flying on Business/first entitle you to be entitled?

[AuSammy]

Of course, we should not abuse airline staff or you will get banned by the airline. because its the wrong thing to do.

Fixed that for you

 

[elanshin]

We are entitled to it!

A sense of entitlement means wanting special treatment that hasn’t been earned, or paid for.

If you pay, you’re entitled to all the benefits and perks that are advertised and come with the fare.

I think thats the crux of of my problem here. From the outset of the poll the word, "entitled" is setup with both of its meanins.

The neutral meaning which is you should receive (or expect to) a service but also entitled as in the negative connotation (entitled brat version).

It's then hard to follow which meaning is being referred to.

 

[Noah Count]

The rudest passengers that I’ve ever come across were almost invariably on points or an upgrade. Nobody is entitled to be entitled.

I surely hope I was not that rude PAX, given your background I would suggest we have been on the same flights however you were most likely well forward of any seat I would have access to.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

I expect what the seat purchase is advertised, promised as. The space/seat is the most important thing for us so happy to forgo some meals, drinks, nice to have as long as the seat is big and comfy.

Edit, oh and boarding priority. Yeah, Im not standing 100+ deep behind Y

In my view this might be a reasonable expectation in business class.
But if I am in first I'm certainly not happy to forgo some meals, drinks, or anything really!

 

[SeatBackForward]

But that's definitely not how J or F are sold for real airlines, so it's not what you're paying for. It may be the primary cost to the airline, but as the customer that's not all you're buying.

*cough* Conditions of carriage *cough*

 

[SOPOOR]

In my only trip on sia suites, I deliberately chose the room that had the divider , as I had heard that if no one was on the other side , they may open it up for you.

When I boarded they asked me , if I was wiling to swap to the single room to let someone else take the double room.

I politely declined, however got declined to lower the divider later in the trip, some ppl on here thought I was an entitled, and deserved what I got,
however , im paying big $, I only felt mildly guilty.....

It could have been worse if the other passenger was a kid, which i never found out

------------
And on my only emirates first class flight, the Cabin maybe only had 2 or 4 ppl, the staff were deeply apologetic when they told me the Prawn entree they had given both portions to one customer, (which was the one I was going to order), I guess being able to order at least one of whatever you want, would be an expectation on a $10k+ flight, but i can imagine a diva losing their head over it, i was more fascinated trying to work out how many portions they had of each dish

---------
On another singapore flight i requested a second portion of caviar which I got told they ran out, (if I recall they may have found another one and gave me it, not getting more caviar is the epitome of first world problems,

 

[Happy Dude]

And on my only emirates first class flight, the Cabin maybe only had 2 or 4 ppl, the staff were deeply apologetic when they told me the Prawn entree they had given both portions to one customer, (which was the one I was going to order), I guess being able to order at least one of whatever you want, would be an expectation on a $10k+ flight, but i can imagine a diva losing their head over it

I reckon you'd be perfectly entitled to take personal offense to staff treating that customer preferentially so that you missed out.

 

[Big John]

I try to have low expectations on most things in life, in order to avoid disappointment.

For me, anything over Y is a bonus!

 

[Quickstatus]

Just entitled to a bundle of rights

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Just entitled to a bundle of rights

Don’t confuse the contract of carriage - your bundle of rights if you like - with the other contractual and consumer law provisions that sit alongside. If an airline advertises caviar and champagne, that’s also included. And as we saw from the Emirates case in NZ, pax can get remedies if they don’t receive them.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

In my only trip on sia suites, I deliberately chose the room that had the divider , as I had heard that if no one was on the other side , they may open it up for you.

When I boarded they asked me , if I was wiling to swap to the single room to let someone else take the double room.

I politely declined, however got declined to lower the divider later in the trip, some ppl on here thought I was an entitled, and deserved what I got,
however , im paying big $, I only felt mildly guilty.....

It could have been worse if the other passenger was a kid, which i never found out

------------
And on my only emirates first class flight, the Cabin maybe only had 2 or 4 ppl, the staff were deeply apologetic when they told me the Prawn entree they had given both portions to one customer, (which was the one I was going to order), I guess being able to order at least one of whatever you want, would be an expectation on a $10k+ flight, but i can imagine a diva losing their head over it, i was more fascinated trying to work out how many portions they had of each dish

---------
On another singapore flight i requested a second portion of caviar which I got told they ran out, (if I recall they may have found another one and gave me it, not getting more caviar is the epitome of first world problems,

So in order… I think #1 is a perfect ‘sense of entitlement’

#2 is an entitlement… you should get your first choice in F.

#3 depends what’s advertised. If the airline offers unlimited caviar I’d expect at least two serves to be loaded per passenger. If it’s just an me u item, i’d expect one serve per passenger. And any leftovers would be a bonus.

I was disappointed on my QR flight when they made a big song and dance advertising the caviar service only to find out they loaded for 70%. Not good enough.

I don’t like the terms ‘first world problems’… i think it’s a bit dismissive. A problem is a problem, and we shouldn’t be excusing service limitations ‘just because’ there are bigger problems elsewhere!

 

[SeatBackForward]

Don’t confuse the contract of carriage - your bundle of rights if you like - with the other contractual and consumer law provisions that sit alongside. If an airline advertises caviar and champagne, that’s also included. And as we saw from the Emirates case in NZ, pax can get remedies if they don’t receive them.

But consumer law can be very subjective and doesn't mean you must get caviar unless it's really expressed in your agreement. And the airlines know these loopholes and their own T&Cs cover these off.

 

[CaptJCool]

But consumer law can be very subjective and doesn't mean you must get caviar unless it's really expressed in your agreement. And the airlines know these loopholes and their own T&Cs cover these off.

Section 18 Australian consumer law
Misleading conduct

Section 2 perhaps as well

 

[SeatBackForward]

Section 18 Australian consumer law
Misleading conduct

Section 2 perhaps as well

But what's misleading? They clearly state that meals, seats and aircraft are not guaranteed. What they provide as an alternative is likely to be considered as fit for purpose.

 

[esseeeayeenn]

But what's misleading? They clearly state that meals, seats and aircraft are not guaranteed. What they provide as an alternative is likely to be considered as fit for purpose.

First "misleading and deceptive conduct" doesn't require untruth.
Just conduct likely to mislead or deceive. Certainly a change in the menu wouldn't qualify.
However a failure to deliver a service substantially the same as the service advertised would qualify.

Second, the concept of "fitness for purpose" isn't relevant here.
That's an implied warranty under consumer law but a breach of such an implied warranty is completely separate to misleading or deceptive conduct.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

But what's misleading? They clearly state that meals, seats and aircraft are not guaranteed. What they provide as an alternative is likely to be considered as fit for purpose.

True, but perhaps that refers to a specific seat, a specific aircraft (type - although that is actually debatable), or a specific meal.

They can’t routinely sell first class tickets and seat passengers in economy. They can’t routinely not load meals.

And if the advertisement shows caviar and vintage champagne then that’s what you are buying.

Consumer guarantees can’t be written out through contract.