this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2025
953 points (99.5% liked)

Not The Onion

18625 readers
917 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Plurrbear@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

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…

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The main reason I like window seats isn’t because of the window, it’s because I can fall into deep sleep and nobody will wake me up because they need to get out and pee.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So jealous of being able to sleep on the plane...

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don’t do this. Then you’ll have to pee and be stuck in your windowless seat.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Small price to pay for sweet sweet airplane sleep.

[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

Don’t pee in your dreams.

  • United
[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

I took edibles before flying once. Slept across the Atlantic and then a bit more on the connecting flight.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Lol yeah little counterproductive in the long run

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 8 points 1 day ago

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.