WHENEVER I board a plane, I always look longingly at those lucky enough to be seated along the exit rows of the cabin.

Once in a blue moon, the airline I'm flying on grants my request to have one of these "privileged" seats, usually when the flight is not full.

Among other things, the seat is coveted as it provides more legroom, and there's no worry about the passenger in front reclining his seat all the way and eating into one's already-cramped personal space in economy class - all at no additional charge, too.

This has been a cheap thrill of sorts for travellers who saw air travel become increasingly expensive due to the increase in jet fuel costs this year.

But, as they say, all good things have to come to an end some day. On Nov 3, Singapore Airlines announced that passengers who want such "preferred seats" on their planes will have to fork out US$100, about S$147, more for a return flight, and an extra US$50 per sector if their journey includes a transit stop. This new policy applies to all its flights except those within South-east Asia. Journeys served by the Boeing B777-200ER jets are excluded as they do not have exit row seats.

What's different about this new option is that it will guarantee you an exit row seat on a first-come-first-serve basis, rather than on a request basis previously. I do not entirely agree with this move by the world's top airline.

Here's my beef: Why should a passenger have to pay the extra $147 to SIA when his extra leg room comes with far greater responsibility? This is clear from the fact that money alone will not guarantee you that seemingly more luxurious seat.

SIA has drawn up a list of seven terms and conditions that one must meet before being even entitled to reserve an exit row seat. These include being at least 21 years old, be "fully able-bodied", not pregnant, able to understand safety instructions in English, travelling without infants, and not requiring an extension seat belt "because of large body size".

These are safety considerations because, in an emergency, the passenger occupying these seats is obliged to help the crew. I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling that paying for the preferred seat sounds more like a burden rather than a luxury, what with all these expectations and responsibilities placed on the shoulders of these passengers. And surely, someone who agrees to shoulder this responsibility should not be charged more, however remote the possibility of an emergency.

And why is there a need to charge per sector, rather than per flight? Given the choice, it's safe to say that most passengers would prefer to fly direct, rather than have to transit midway.

It's not difficult to see that SIA is thinking out of the box for new ways to boost sideline revenue in the wake of the airline industry being hit by the global financial crisis, but this latest move makes one wonder if other airlines will follow suit now that SIA has taken the lead.

On the flip side, what about less desirable seats, such as the middle seat between a window and aisle seat, or those right at the back next to the toilets and with hardly any space to recline at all? Shouldn't there now be a "discount" for passengers who are assigned these less popular seats?

Levying different charges for seats within the same "class" is a slippery slope.

This article was first published in The Business Times on Nov 4, 2008.