T here are airlines whose aircraft are equipped with reclining seats; and there are those airlines whose aircraft are equipped with seats which do not recline…
…but what if the seats on an airplane were equipped with two sections: one with reclining seats; and one without reclining seats?
“It would make sense either to have, e.g. the left side of the plane be for Recliners and the right side for Non-Recliners, or for the front to be for Non-Recliners and the back for Recliners”, posted FlyerTalk member lg10, who suggested this idea. “I say the front and back in this order because it wouldn’t be fair otherwise to be the transition row as a NR with an R right in front of you, and the Emergency Exit rows actually offer a reasonable break point where in fact, there is no reclining right in front.”
It is an interesting idea — but I do not believe that it would work. There inevitably would be those passengers whose seat recline preference would conflict where they prefer to sit: on the right side rather than the left side; or sit closer to the front of the airplane rather than the rear. Besides, there is no financial impetus to compel an airline — many of which are attempting to squeeze even more seats into what seems to be an already cramped economy class cabin — to go through the trouble of dividing an airplane into sections with reclining seats and seats which do not recline.
Unfortunately, people can be downright vicious when it comes to that precious few degrees of recline, as demonstrated on a flight operated by United Airlines on August 24, 2014.
For the record, I have never had an issue with a person in front of me who decided to recline his or her seat. I would think that if it ever did bother me, I would politely ask that the person in front of me please consider not reclining. If the person was reasonable enough, a compromise could be worked out where the person could recline for half of the flight and not recline for the other half.
Is that really so difficult?!?
