十家航司被约谈后，消费者仍受“锁座”困扰

Core Viewpoint - The long-standing and controversial airline "seat locking" phenomenon is expected to undergo rectification following a special investigation by the Jiangsu Provincial Consumer Protection Committee, which has interviewed ten domestic airlines and requested written responses regarding corrective actions [1][5]. Group 1: Investigation Findings - The Jiangsu Provincial Consumer Protection Committee conducted an investigation into the "seat locking" practices of ten major airlines, revealing that the proportion of locked seats during the purchasing phase ranged from 19.9% to 62.1%, with an average of 38.7% [2][3]. - Notably, Spring Airlines' Nanjing-Lanzhou route had a seat locking rate exceeding 60%, while Shenzhen Airlines' Shenzhen-Zhanjiang route exceeded 50% [2][3]. - Other airlines like Hainan Airlines, Eastern Airlines, and Xiamen Airlines had locking rates between 40% and 46%, while Lucky Air had a relatively low rate of less than 20% [2][3]. Group 2: Reasons for Seat Locking - Airlines provided various justifications for seat locking, including reserving seats for special passengers, ensuring emergency seat availability, and maintaining flight load balance [4]. - The investigation identified common issues with the "seat locking" phenomenon, including a lack of clear communication regarding seat locking rules, vague explanations, differential resource allocation based on membership levels, and unilateral rights granted to airlines [4]. Group 3: Consumer Feedback and Reactions - Consumers expressed dissatisfaction with the differentiation of paid and free seating areas in economy class, indicating that such practices increase travel costs and lead to a frustrating experience [6][10]. - Feedback highlighted that many passengers were unaware of the specific rules regarding seat locking, leading to limited seat choices, especially for families traveling together [10][11]. Group 4: Regulatory Actions and Implications - The Jiangsu Provincial Consumer Protection Committee has mandated that the airlines submit written corrective actions within 15 working days, including self-inspections and revisions of unfair terms related to "seat locking" [5][15]. - Legal experts have commented that the "seat locking" practice infringes on consumer rights and may violate consumer protection laws, suggesting that the committee's actions could serve as a model for regulatory oversight in other regions [15][16].