In August 2025, two nearly identical lawsuits were filed: one against United (in San Francisco federal court) and one against Delta Air Lines (in Brooklyn federal court). They claim that each airline sold more than one million “window seats” on aircraft such as the Boeing 737, Boeing 757, and Airbus A321, many of which are next to blank fuselage walls rather than windows.
Passengers say they paid seat-selection fees (commonly $30 to $100+) expecting a view, sunlight, or the comfort of a genuine window seat — and say they would not have booked or paid extra had they known the seat lacked a window.
As reported by Reuters, United’s filing argues that it never promised a view when it used the label “window” for a seat. According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall, not a guarantee of an exterior view.
If the seat doesn’t include a window then it needs to be called a wall seat. This is an open and shut case of false advertising.
Or at least put a monitor running Microsoft.
At one point in my career, they moved us to a long white room with no windows. (The reason this particular room on this floor did not have windows was that on the wall, where the windows normally would have been were large external letters on the outside of the building spelling out the original name of the building. So of course you couldn’t have windows behind the externally mounted letters.) And their attempt at making it bearable was to put giant vinyl stickers of somewhat cartoonish window scenes along the big long outside white wall. I did not enjoy working in that space.
At least they tried
ah yes the fresh taste of that (checks notes) vinyl sticker air
It is a seat that is closest to the windows for the row. This is an open and shut case of common fucking sense
If they had marked which particular seats didn’t have actual windows, it’d likely be fine to keep the terminology.
That isn’t what the name implies. Way to move goalposts. You should work for united.
I promise the airlines don’t need you defending them on lemmy.
Not defending them, and don’t care. There are a bunch of self righteous people on here who think they’re coming up with a profound statement when it’s just common sense they need.
Some people are claustrophobic and having a window to look out makes a ton of difference. A middle seat isn’t an option they can handle and while an aisle seat is preferred, a window seat is tolerable provided it actually has a window. Personally I don’t care but knowing someone that is quite claustrophobic, this would be a big deal for them.
Would you have the same opinion it if they didn’t include a seat either? Since there are two words at play here and we’re apparently making gross allowances for meaning in one could we do the other? Would it be acceptable if they placed you near the area with a seat?
"Seat” refers only to the location allocated near to a row of seats, not a guarantee of actual place to sit.
What kind of legal linguistic creep are we going to tolerate under this heading of “common fucking sense”?
I know you are getting downvoted, but I call the seat furthest from the aisle the “window” seat no matter what is on the “far” side of it.
So, I think it’s entirely possible that United wins this case in front of a judge. If it gets decided by a jury, I’d expect at least one person of the 12 (or so) to insist that “window seat” means there has to be a window.
“War is peace”
That’s what they are trying to pull. Look it up.
According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall
Then call it “wall seat”
It’s like trying to call the non runway parts of airports ramps, aprons and taxiways. Because technically none of it is made with tarmac anymore but the general population is too stupid to go back so now that’s what it’s all called.
I don’t understand your gripe here. What’s wrong with those terms?
Exactly!
I don’t think the public would be confused if they called the windowless seat a wall seat and made attempts to clarify. They could even warn the buyer when they select the seat.
Cool. So since the government is going to side with this bullshit: I say that “income tax” doesn’t mean a tax on my income.
This scam already exists. That’s why Jeff Bezos pays a much lower rate on what is - bullshit aside - his income.
Since I don’t technically ‘come’ ‘inside’, so I won’t pay it
Avoiding being forced to buy a minivan, I see. Clever you. 🤌🏼
Sprinter or a Transit. Not a minivan. Full sized van. Heck an Econoline 1500 or similar conversion vans would work if they still made conversion vans.
The agreement was im paying 355 dolars for a window seat. If ‘window seat’ just refers to the location, then dolars just refers to the fact its an amount of currency, and ill have my bank adjust the payment to reflect that was in pesos.
Wouldn’t that be the definition of, “Bait and switch”??? Which is already illegal?
You PAY EXTRA for a WINDOW SEAT and there’s no window?! Why would someone pay more then? What would be the point of paying more if there’s no “window” seems very cut and dry! That’s like paying extra for an aisle seat and get a middle seat, that’s NEVER in question, they are just trying to get people’s money! Savages!
This just proves don’t fly United nor Delta… which they are already super high priced anyways…
Well, yeah, that’s what the controversy is. They’re saying “window seat” implies sitting in the opposite of the aisle, not necessarily having a window. (Which is BS. People take it to mean window.) So they’re saying it’s not a bait and switch.
This is so fucking dumb. It has that “boneless wings can contain bones” judgement energy from Ohio awhile back. 🤦🏻
That case does at least make some sense. All meat products can contain bone due to them being from you know animals.
Basically they felt that encountering bones in a meat product is a normal, acceptable, and understood risk.
Now if he was give a plate of boneless wings and each wing was full of bones that would be a different case entirely.
This was an inadvertent bone fragment. Can happen in any meat product.
My issue with boneless wings is that they are not Wing meat at all. They’re chicken tits.
I remember back when the seats actually aligned with the windows on airplanes, such that you could sit in a seat and look out the window.
Then they started shoving more rows of seats in. Over the past 20 years or so, I’ve often got a “window seat” where the nearest window is positioned directly beside the seat in front, where nobody can open or close the cover without fully reclining (ha) the seat, and there’s zero view because of the angle.
Technically still a window seat, as there IS a window nearby, but not what you’d expect coming from any other mode or era of transport.
In my experience the window also isn’t usable from the window seat unless you’re really short. And the way the fuselage curves up at the side, there’s also no shoulder room.
To me:
Window seat has lack of shoulder room - bad.
Middle seat had 2 arm rests that I have to shrimp to rest my arms on - bad.
Aisle seat has 1 (bad) arm rest, but has shoulder and leg room - good.I don’t care about window seats AT ALL
And newer planes all have windows where the tint is controlled by the crew (so as to minimize conflict between passengers) which… I still like to look out while stretching my legs near the bathroom but pretty sure staring out a ridiculously tinted window at some clouds isn’t what people think of when they hear “window seat”.
Like… I kinda agree that “window seat” doesn’t actually mean you have a window these days. I would argue that they should be renamed but “wall seat” is going to just make people realize why aisle seats are the best choice… and I like my aisle seat so piss off.
I rode a 787 intercontinentally for the first time earlier this year and was very disappointed by the forced tint. I was really excited to see, I believe, the arctic ice cap. Nothing. Like, I get it’s a long flight and apparently most people just take drugs and sleep, but damn. I would have shielded it with my jacket anyway.
But even still, know how I deal with wanting to nod off when a 4am flight hits day break? A $6 sleep mask. I’m not affected by windows, reading lamps, the crew flicking the lights for fun, that one person typing in Word at full brightness on a red eye flight, or people using flashlights to search their bag.
Its time
Past time
I’m going to grease up the blade ways
I mean, don’t charge extra for something then not deliver it. Seems cut and dry.
If the aisle/middle/window in coach all cost the same price then no one would have any standing to sue. The airlines charged customers extra. They did this to themselves.
Ironically, that could be the technicality they’re banking on. They aren’t charging for the window seat - they’re charging for the ability to select your own seat which is the same regardless of where you select.
Delta not only charges you for the privilege of selecting your own seats, but charges you for the “preferred” aisle or window seat.
Here’s a flight in January 2026 to Atlanta:
And here’s the seat key denoting the aisle and window seats as “preferred”
And this is why the civil court system is just plain broken. Despite the astronomical cost of taking this upsurd stance in court, it is worth it. Thier needs to be damages assesed for the absurdity of the logic used to force something to cost more court time than it should get.
That’s punitive damages, but they aren’t punitive enough to discourage this behavior. The courts don’t work for us.
Yup. Make it 10x actual damages for this kind of bullshit. Then they’ll stop, maybe.
dismiss with prejudice/disbar the lawyers that push these lawsuits at all
course, there are plenty of rigged court systems in the US that justify their whole existence via these sham lawsuits, so…
Next there won’t be a seat, the term “seat” just means the place you stand for the whole trip
If airlines could get away with stacking people in there like a transatlantic slave ship they would do it.
As a mildly tall person, not even exceptionally tall, flying as it is already is borderline painful. The seat space is not built for anyone who isnt pint sized
You know I wouldn’t mind flat bunks though, like stack 3 high. You have a table time to go sit and eat and have a coffee then back to the bunk.
As a a 5’11” person, yeah it’s painful to fly.
Just imagine if you were 6ft! The horror!
Ryan Air has entered the chat.
reminds me of this meme:
“Sweet window seat, bro”
United, probably
In any case if you’re on a flight longer than a couple hours you’re not allowed to open them anyway, they make you keep em shut so people can nap 🙈 But it’s fun to look out for the takeoff and landing. But the planes that tint the windows are the best.
What? No they don’t.
Would a reasonable person assume that is what it meant? Probably not. United should lose this case.
Reminiscent of the lawsuit about pints of beer being less than a pint. Bars argued it was a style of glass and not a unit of volume.
This one is infuriating. It’s a legal measurement here, and when they go out and test in major cities the failure rate is very high.
A lot of places have switched to glass or sleeve though.
It would be nice if the US had laws like Europe that mandated etched glasses for specific volumes.
There was a point in time I thought about carrying an actual pint glass to a bar with me so I could call them out if it was blatantly not.
