Air travelers want child-free zones: No kidding

Skift Take

There is a market for child-free zones on flights, although they could be a logistical and political nightmare.

-Dennis Schaal

Nearly one in three air travelers surveyed in a GO Airport Express poll indicated they would be willing to pay to sit in a child-free area on the plane.

Many air travelers desire more leg room and think Wi-Fi is important, with almost half and a third noting they would pay for these services, respectively, but the surprise third-place winner was child-free zones at 30%.

Although everyone was once a child, clearly many air travelers don’t want to have other people’s children help them rediscover their own inner child at ear-shattering decibel levels. 

On the other hand, just 4% of respondents indicated they would pay extra to sit in a child-friendly area.

The banishing children backlash

Although segregating young passengers wielding pacifiers and wrapped in diapers might make a few airlines some money, there would undoubtedly be a backlash to cope with, as well.

IMG_7318

Child on a plane. Photo by gurmit singh.

And, would there be legal issues involved? Possibly.

GO Airport Express, which runs shuttles to and from O’Hare and Midway airports in Chicago, received answers to its poll from 360 travelers across the U.S.

Willingness to pay for child-free areas on the plane beat out meals (21%), aisle seats (13%), movies (9%), window seats (6%), and pillows and blankets (5%).

Passenger acceptance

Meanwhile, perhaps passengers on flights are beginning to shrug their shoulders and accept that airlines are going to charge separately for services that once were included in the fare.

In the survey, just 17% of respondents noted they think that all of the services mentioned in the poll should be bundled into the basic ticket price.


Also seen at: The GO Express poll

Tags: ,
  • http://twitter.com/thomaspaine Thomas Paine

    In related news 1/3 of travelers do not have children, 3/4 of travelers would opt for for a fat free zone and 4/5 hicks would pay twice the price for a white only zone.

    Ok, perhaps I use a bit of hyperbole here but I find the results of the poll and your line about people not wanting to “rediscover their own inner child at ear-shattering decibel levels” rather asinine. Without kids we have no future so punishing people for having them is just rather short sighted. The truth is that traveling with kids is already punishment enough and is something parents try their best to avoid. Every second that your child is crying on a plane is incredibly nerve racking. I don’t expect people without kids to understand that but I hope they can have some compassion. While it’s annoying to listen to a crying baby it’s nothing compared to the pressure one feels when it’s their responsibility to the baby and the other passengers to fix the situation; wherein fix means try every pitiful tool you have in rapid succession until something, anything, mollifies the child.

    So next time you hear a crying baby or a cranky child, instead of saying “why me?” say “wow, I’m glad that’s not my kid”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=707976432 Dennis Schaal

    Thomas: I take umbrage — or even object — to your calling “asinine” the statement I wrote that some people do not want to “rediscover their own inner child at ear-shattering decibel levels” on flights. As a father of three, who remembers my youngest once engaging in a screaming, sit-down strike on the floor of Sarasota airport, I was merely stating the facts and not endorsing the attitudes of some child-averse travelers. Just telling it like it is.

Subscribe to a daily dose of news from Skift