Overweight man barred from flight, misses uncle's funeral

[DearAbby]

Okamoni Fa flies a lot, and says that despite weighing 400 pounds he's never had to buy a second seat like some overweight passengers.

Until, that is, he really needed to get somewhere fast.

The San Jose man bought a last-minute ticket from Southwest Airlines to attend his uncle's funeral, but when he arrived at the ticket counter the agent looked at him and told him he needed to buy a second seat. The problem was, the flight was fully booked, and apparently there were no alternative flights. That left Mr. Fa stranded and he missed the funeral.

There's been a lot of debate about the policy of charging overweight passengers for a second seat. Southwest says that if a passenger can't put down the armrests without encroaching on their neighbors' space then they need to buy another seat. If the flight isn't oversold, Southwest says they refund the extra charge.

In this case, Southwest has said they will refund Mr. Fa for the one seat he did buy, but wasn't allowed to use.

That's cold comfort for him. He wasn't able to join his family in their time of mourning and must now be wondering what the ticket agent will say the next time he tries to board a plane.

Link:
http://www.gadling.com/2009/11/23/overweight-man-barred-from-flight-and-misses-uncles-funeral/?icid=main

[YOY]

1. Let me be the first to say the words of some others here: "Serves him right for being a fat fatty!"

Because being a fatty means being a lesser human being and embodying greed, stupidity, and sloth in one easy entity!

I just thought I'd spare them the typing of words they don't really think about before typing.

[Obamanaut]

11. The problem was not that he was a 'lesser' human being, but in fact

was 'greater.'

If a passenger needs two seats (or a portion of the second one) that passenger should pay for the extra seat.

edited to add: An anorexic (or a very tiny or thin person) who uses only a portion of one purchased seat must pay the full seat price, no reduction in cost.

[LisaM]

16. So what about the tall people who take up more than their share of room?

I'm constantly having someone knee me in the back or, worse, when they're in front if me, getting in their seat and reclining, thereby depriving me of room (this is a huge bother to me, because I like to do crossword puzzles when I fly). You can argue that the tall person can't help being too tall for the seat, but I could argue that the airlines should put in more legroom. With the obesity epidemic in the country, perhaps the airlines should likewise put in wider seats.

[Lance_Boyle]

21. that comparison would be appropriate, if

there was an immovable wall between seats, such that one person could not possibly overflow into another person's seat. No matter how tall someone is, his/her legs are not going to bend the steel in the seat in front of them to occupy more space than they paid for.

[LisaM]

26. No, but their knees can still push into my back

I'm more concerned about the person in front of me. Not much annoys me more than having to ride behind a reclining person the whole way. It makes reading, doing my puzzles, and having a place for my drink almost impossible.

[pink-o]

138. I'm a 6'1" woman, and believe me, this height is not a choice.

I also wear a size 4, so I don't think I take up an inordinate amount of space. I'm sorry, but obesity is indeed a lifestyle choice, and one has to be aware that they could be limited in many of their pursuits.

And before you accuse me of being unsympathetic, I have been fat in my life and I have an obese sister. Most large people I know are totally conscious of their size and do everything possible to accomodate others. Airline travel is one of those situations where we can't live in our isolated shells, we're stuck in a fishbowl with the multitudes and whatever selfish tendencies we have need to get put aside for the few hours we're strapped into a flying tin can.

It's only logical. If you need more room, you have to do whatever it takes to insure you get it.

[Missy Vixen]

73. There was no extra seat for the passenger to buy

As a result, he missed an event most people would consider important to get to. It's unfortunate that Southwest was not more interested in attempting to help by asking if there was anyone else who'd consider giving up a seat, etcetera.

I'm more than happy to pay for that extra seat the next time I fly. Don't even think about putting your laptop bag/purse/etcetera in it. Works both ways, buddy.

:eyes:

[Obamanaut]

81. Actually, I read that in the OP. Note that in my response I used

"a" person rather than "that particular person."

The law of averages finally caught up with "that particular person." Check this "...that despite weighing 400 pounds he's never had to buy a second seat like some overweight passengers..." This guy knew it happened to others, but he had not been caught, yet.

It is not out of the realm of possibility that if seated near a person who needs the second seat, there won't be room in for my etceteras anyway, so I will not bring any such just in case.

I think I'll drive.

[a la izquierda]

139. That's a shame, too...

I've voluntarily been bumped off flights by Delta for people who need to get to this place or that...Southwest should've done much more to help this guy get to the funeral. Sheesh, he was willing to pay for it!
(And I'm a 5'1 110 pound woman who doesn't have a dog in this race)

[southernyankeebelle]

137. Well let me be the first to tell you that your an idiot. It is now Ok to

have legal discrimantion against heavy people and nothing should be said about it. It isn't fair. It is down right discrimantion.

[Libertas1776]

2. Hmm,

did they ask if anyone was willing to give up a seat in return for some kind of food, hotel, and or money voucher and a seat on the next flight so he could get to his uncle's funeral. Usually they do things like that. But I guess if they did, no one took the offer. That sucks.

[MadMaddie]

3. This is another reason why people don't want to fly

Ticket agents making decisions like this, it's not even worth the effort.

This is just awful!

[Zywiec]

4. If the flight was full, how would he be be able to purchase a second seat? n/t

[bobburgster]

30. My thought exactly!

[walldude]

38. He couldn't that's why they wouldn't let him fly.

[JonQ]

5. If you take up more than one seat you should pay for it

it's not fair to the other passengers to lose part of the seat that they paid fully for due to "overlap" from other passengers.

[Sebastian Doyle]

13. Then tell the goddamn airlines to redesign their seating capacity to realistic proportions.

And no, it ain't just about fat people. I'm 6ft, 6 inches tall. If I don't get the emergency exit row seat on a plane, I don't have shit for leg room, and even then, it's not much. They're simply cramming too many goddamn tiny seats into a flying tin can.

[JonQ]

17. You can get better seating

with more leg room, it's called first class. It costs more in part because it takes up more space and thus leaves room for fewer passengers.

If "the goddamn airlines" were to redesign their seats to accommodate the largest passengers then prices would go up for all passengers. Which seems unfair.

[FarCenter]

24. You can't get better seating on Southwest -- there is no first or business class seating

[JonQ]

28. Then . . . tough

find another airline to use.

If you can't find the seating you like at a restaurant do you demand they change it to suit you and claim you are entitled to this or do you go to a different place?

[CTyankee]

48. I fly JetBlue to Burbank now. More leg room was only part of it.

They have a flight out of Boston to JFK and then straight to Burbank. With SW I was changing planes in 2 or 3 airports and the entire day took over 14 hours. Now I drive from New Haven to Boston, spend the night with my daughter and she drops me off a Logan and then picks me up when I return. Altho I am now going to start using the shuttle from Framingham, close to her house, so she doesn't have the schlep all the way into Boston...

I do pay more but at my age I figure that what I have money for...my comfort...

[Sebastian Doyle]

82. I've heard some good things about Jet Blue, and I'd probably give them a shot

But they seem to be limited in where they fly to. Seems their flights out of SeaTac are limited to Long Beach CA on the west coast and either Boston or New York on the east coast. No way to get directly to Arizona from Seattle according to their map - Phoenix only has flights to NYC, and Tucson doesn't have any Jet Blue flights at all. So since AZ is where I usually fly to, doesn't look like they would be much help. Maybe they'll add some more flights in the future?

[CTyankee]

136. Well, they did add the JFK-Burbank flight recently but that just may be

due to the number of people working in one of the several studios in Burbank needing to go to NYC. I like it a lot, but I could take a flight to Long Beach as well, altho that would be farther for my other daughter to drive to pick me up (she lives right near Burbank).

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. I'm 5.2 and far from fat, or even that overweight

I fit well in the seat, and there is still no leg room.

Airlines are fitting more and more seats into the same space, which is dangerous for other reasons.

Keep defending corporations... good for you.

Now I will agree that really overweight people should pay an extra ticket. We are talking of the grossly obese. It also goes into the same safety issues that the airlines are cutting into with the tin can policies.

[JonQ]

54. Yeah because not wanting to mandate

bigger seats through law is "defending corporations. :eyes:

If you don't like their service you can go somewhere else. You are aware of that?

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. I am talking of SAFETY issues here

so take it somewhere else. And yes, YOU ARE defending them.

As they say, if the shoe fits...

[JonQ]

92. Changing all seats to fit the morbidly obese is a safety issue now

Do explain.

This ought to be good.

[HuckleB]

95. Huh?

[JonQ]

102. I'm really curious on that one too

I'm guessing we'll either get insults (IN ALL CAPS!!!!!!) or yet another misdirection.

[Zomby Woof]

121. You're running quite an operation in GD

It's a crime what you get away with. Mind you, I wouldn't say that to just anyone.

[JonQ]

125. Huh?

[Missy Vixen]

135. Zomby, I owe you a cup of coffee if we're ever in the same zip code

Masterful.

:woohoo:

[nadinbrzezinski]

103. Plane evacuation, when you have more people

it makes it harder and harder

Little to do with size of passengers.

Sorry, as a former Paramedic things like that do enter my calculations, but planes are becoming death traps.

[HuckleB]

107. I don't see how they are moreso today than they were in the past.

[JonQ]

108. Wouldn't obese people be harder to get out than thin healthy people?

Seems it would make sense to ban them then. Cripples too, and children.

Not that many people are going to be evacuated in most plane wrecks, healthy or otherwise.

[nadinbrzezinski]

113. Yeah sure

9.11 what is your emergency?

Plane in trouble coming down.

Already then, will call the coroners then... after all why bother? After all some folks believe that most planes will not be evacuated.

:sarcasm:

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt...


There are days I wonder what gets into the water at DU.

Any how I just pointed one concern form rescue services...

But you are right... why should we even bother?

After all, we all know most planes are never, evah evacuated when in trouble...

Oh and here is a hint for you... if you have trouble evacuating... well guess what sparky. you are not the first in line to get out of anywhere, not just planes.

[JonQ]

124. It just seems like a BS excuse

we need to mandate bigger seats for obese people to be more comfortable (and thus raising the costs for everyone) so that in the event that the plane crashes in to a mountain and by some miracle there are survivors we would be able to save about 30 seconds in evacuating people.

If that makes sense to you, well, there's nothing to discuss really.

[nadinbrzezinski]

128. Who's talking about mountains sparky

since most plane rescues of large passenger planes happen on take off or landing... and are FAIRLY COMMON.

We call the latter emergency landings. And good pilots bring them birds down safely where most folks slide down a slide WEEEE!!!!!! and usually all they have is a fast beating heart and a bruised ankle, worst case. By the way, those are my kind of rescues, where all I had to do was... fill an EMS form and call base and go AVAILABLE.

And people who have a clue and have done rescue, realize this little fact... the more people you jam pack in, the longer it takes to evac. Oh and sparky this does not just go for planes... the same goes for trains (they do need to be evac from time to time) buses, more often than you think, theaters... yep, been there too. Restaurants... I remember a particular tragedy where there were more folks in there than the fire marshal allowed... you get the picture?

Damn I raised a real safety concern and all you can think is MEEEEE... it is all about MEEEEE... and the fact that I may have to pay an extra twenty if they don't get five more passengers in... WHAAmbulance what is your emergency?

How typical.

[JonQ]

130. I'm sure you have stats

on how many are killed due to not accommodating obese people?

I wonder how many lives could be saved if they put in an all you can eat buffet?

:rofl:

[HuckleB]

94. Actually, there is more leg room on most airlines than there was 20 years ago.

[nadinbrzezinski]

104. Raelly I have not noticed

It's gotten to the point that I ONLY fly if there is absolutely no other choice.

And for god sakes I used to enjoy it

[HuckleB]

106. Well, I don't think it's because the leg room is worse.

It's as bad as it ever was on some airlines, but not worse. On many, it's much better.

[paulsby]

34. it;'s their frigging decision

how many standard deviations from the norm should they accomodate. they could just replace individual seats with seats two times the size. but then we'd have to pay twice as much. they have to balance seat size in regards to these factors. the larger you make the seats, the more you have to charge, ceteris paribus. that's just reality.

[Mimosa]

50. Exactly right, Sebastian!

I'm not fat at all and I have no room to shift positions in those itsy bitsy seats or cross my legs.

[dysfunctional press]

59. then use a different airline or don't fly.

they are all businesses, and have a right to charge what they want for the size seats they want.

[Sebastian Doyle]

64. More "centrist" wisdom.

Corporations can continue to abuse their customers in whatever way they see fit. Praise Supply Side Je$u$!!

Maybe we should nationalize the airlines, along with health care, energy, and the banks.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

nevermind

i'm sure this would have brought out the fake outrage committee in droves,

[dysfunctional press]

75. until they ARE nationalized- quit'cher bitchin' and take amtrak.

corporations exist to make money for their shareholders.
if you feel that you are being "abused" as a customer of a corporation- there is an EXTREMELY easy first step- DON'T be a customer to that corporation.

[Sebastian Doyle]

83. Amtrak should be upgraded to a high speed rail system

But aside from that, it works pretty well. Just ask Joe Biden. He's a big fan.

[HuckleB]

96. Yup.

Although, it struggles with some on time issues on the run from California to Portland, OR, because it must use "private" freight train track, and the freight trains get priority.

[dysfunctional press]

110. i go back and forth on that one...

as a nation, most of us generally prefer the freedom and mobility afforded us by private vehicles, so in a way, i'd prefer to see the resources going into electric and/or ultra-high mileage vehicles and the infrastructure to support them, although building a nationwide network of regional high-speed rail hubs using american labor, engineering, and parts could also be a good way to put masses back to work. but it would be wildly expensive, especially obtaining the land and rights-of-way...and it may ultimately end up being about as popular as amtrak currently is. also- in a nod to the political shiny toy of the day- security against terrorism would be a nightmare. as it is, we only have to keep terrorists out of the airports, and hope that they don't pick up any serious anti-bigstuff firepower at the local gun show. with a network of high-speed rail, we'd have to secure/patrol every inch of track through LONG stretches of uninhabited wilderness, as well as in cities and towns and everywhere else. everyone would know exactly when and where the trains would be, and they'd be fully within reach. one or two spectacular derailments/crashes/explosions/what-have-you, and people would abandon using it in droves.

i say we first concentrate on personal vehicles, as that's what the vast majority of americans really prefer, but also consider starting the process of building regional high speed corridors where the demand might already exist, using the hub-and-spoke system employed by airlines- using cities like chicago, dallas, atlanta, etc. as regional hubs. land aquisition could be a fairly complex/long ordeal in itself.

one possible scenario that could be very good for high-speed rail in the u.s. would be if global climate change makes it necessary to cut our carbon emissions as a society even more than anyone can wants to imagine, it could even ultimately be necessary to go as far as banning air travel, except in things like solar-powered dirigibles. in a case like that, if society was able to survive the effects of runaway global warming, a high-speed rail network over the remaining landmass(sorry florida, sorry manhattan, sorry boston, sorry etc...) might get a lot of use.

personally, tho- i think that over the course of the next several decades, the environment, the cratereding economy, and peak oil, are going to be (starting to) have combined effects(including wars and pandemics) to leave us utterly fucked and defeated as a society, and things like a nationwide high-speed rail system are merely pipe-dreams and distractions that none of us will ever see come to fruition.
or not. :shrug:

[pipoman]

132. Everyone shops for those $100 tickets from DC to LA

Everyone wants the cheapest fares then to bitch about the comfort level. If they have less seats they will necessarily need to charge more, some people will not fly, prices will need to increase to make up for 60% capacity flights.... I want the cheapest flight when I fly, it is often the difference between flying and driving (or not being able to travel at all). Maybe those who want to bitch should simply charter a plane.

[DURHAM D]

27. I totally agree with you.

I fly on a regular basis and just this past Saturday the passenger next to me took up at least a third of my seat. I was jammed against the window and the arm rest could not be lowered.

The attendant noticed my situation and went to look for another seat but the plane was full - including first class. It was a 4 hour flight and I arrived with a sore back. It was a Delta flight as they are pretty much the only airline that goes where I need to go.

[JonQ]

29. You should bill that guy

he used 1/3 of your seat, he can cover 1/3 of your ticket price.

Heh.

I'm all in favor of letting people do as they wish with their own bodies, but when that starts to affect others then there are problems.

[Warpy]

6. If you weigh as much as two men

then you need to buy two seats. Weight regulations on airlines should say that up front. The line should be at about 350 pounds, + or - 20 pounds depending on how "fluffy" the person is.

While I feel sorry for this man and his family, it seems he should have known enough to get the two seats upfront. An airline regulation posted on their site would have told him as much, had they thought to do it.

Maybe they will now.

[HuckleB]

98. Maybe it should be based on dimensions, rather than weight.

[Auggie]

7. I wish airlines would install a few a coach seats for the tall/overweight passenger

One or two, and reserve them for to the person most in need. I'm 6' 3" -- often the tallest on the plane -- and would sit anywhere if it meant I had a tad more leg room. It's not always a given an emergency exit row is available.

[Lance_Boyle]

10. Sure - if they pay more for it.

Airlines should just start charging by the pound, ship us all as freight and be done with it. Bonus points for sedated shipment.

[paulsby]

37. the question is...

should the average size people pay the same price as the people using those larger seats (iow, subsidize them) or not?

i would argue... not

[Auggie]

40. So you want me to pay more because I'm tall?

Thanks a lot!

For some people, it's not an option. Genetics, illness, disability...

[paulsby]

44. i don't want you to do anything

and i'm well aware it's not an option. here's a hint. life isn't fair.

the airlines have to make a profit. that's how they stay in business. consumers are very cost conscious when it comes to flying. airlines (generally) make their economy class seats small enough so they can charge competitive rates with the other airlines. you want a bigger seat, you choose business or 1st class and pay extra.

you are getting more 'product' by paying extra. when you buy an airline seat, you are basically buying space in that airplane, both for your luggage (where you pay more with more or oversized luggage), and your person.

there are advantages and disadvantages to being larger. i, fwiw, am a competitive strength athlete. if i shaved 20 lbs of muscle, the seats would be more comfortable for me. oh well.

it comes down to this reality. if the airline charges everybody the same , even people who need two seats, then the smaller people subsidize the larger people. that isn't fair either.

[marshall]

52. Don't most clothing clost more for the big and tall sizes?

That has been my observation. It takes more fabric to produce, and the price is adjusted accordingly.

[Auggie]

63. Not necessarily

It's not a matter of just being uncomfortable, BTW -- I can't even use the tray because my knees are in the way.

But hey, it sure doesn't sound like your issue. So don't bother worrying about it.

[marshall]

76. The cost of an airline ticket is everyone's issue who flies

My big issue with airlines now is it's just a cattle call to get on the plane, whereas when I was growing up they pre-boarded people with small children. Now that I have a three year old I have to fight my way on board with the masses, get my child in his seat before the person behind us knocks us down, and get my bag and his bag into the overhead bi with no assistance and just angry glares from my fellow passengers.

But I do pay a full fare for a passenger who is one tenth the size of many others on the plane. Go figure.

[Truth2Tell]

109. Couldn't the airline

incorporate the reality that their customers come in a variety of sizes and include a row or two of both smaller and larger seats, for a net gain/loss of zero seats?

Couldn't they then just continue to charge everyone the same for their tickets and simply select a handful of the smallest and largest passengers to seat appropriately?

Of course smaller people would be denied equal space under such a proposal. But everyone would know going in that the business proposition is no longer X number of Dollars for X square inches of space, but instead, X number of Dollars for whatever room is required to get you safely and without great discomfort to your destination.

:shrug:

[marshall]

118. If only the post office would follow such a plan

I sell lots of stuff on ebay--the biggest pain is having to pay so much to ship the heavy stuff. They do have a "if it fits, it ships" price, but that is not always efficient and it is far more expensive than the regular rate.

[Truth2Tell]

119. But I promise, some customers still subsidize

others to a substantial degree, just like in most businesses. Even on a plane now a larger person is subsidized by smaller people in areas like cost of fuel. But it doesn't make sense to individually price to that degree, so prices are made uniform. The difference in cost of inches on a row of seats is no more significant than other minor cost-per-customer differences, like some passengers making messes, requiring extra agent time or carrying more luggage.

[dysfunctional press]

60. united airlines does.

or at least they did the last time i flew- pay a little extra, get a roomier seat toward the front of the coach cabin.

[bluestateguy]

8. Having once been squished by a fat passenger sitting next to me.

I couldn't move and the guy had bad B.O.

Southwest has had this policy for a few years now, while other airlines do not. People who have a problem with that policy are free to consider those other options.

[paulsby]

39. exactly. free choice, marketplace, etc.

i like southwest, but i accept their foibles when i fly there (like the way they do seating assignments vs. most other airlines)

[Vincardog]

9. This would not be a problem if the greedy airlines had adult sized seats in the first place

I dare anyone over 5'11" to sit in the average coach seat without bruising their legs.

[walldude]

35. Try Frontier... more leg room, and they treat you like you are human.

If I can avoid it I fly no one else.

[paulsby]

42. ooooh. those EVIL GREEDY AIRLINES

god forbid a company should actually make a ... PROFIT

fwiw, many airlines have failed, and many others are failing. it is an extremely competitive industry and their margins are often razor thin.

[Vincardog]

45. god forbid a company should actually make a ... PROFIT. Any company that can not keep its' customer

happy does not deserve to make a profit. Some people seem to have swallowed the "free market" BS that the only reason for a company to exist is for the sole and exclusive end of PROFIT.
That is a load of BS.

The purpose of a company is to provide a good or service of benefit to society and in the process attempt to create a profit.

That is why we the people allow them to be created.
If they do not provide a good or service of benefit to society we should force them to cease to exist.

[paulsby]

47. if they do not provide a good or service of benefit

then the marketplace takes care of that. nobody is forcing you to buy a company's product. if you don't like the way SW prices their tickets and runs their airline, then FLY ANOTHER AIRLINE.

the only BS is the idea that a company is evil and greedy because they want to make a profit. have you ever run a company? if you want to run one that takes a loss by design, knock yerself out. the vast majority of businesses DO cease to exist. iirc, the # is about 80%. the ones that survive (and moreso the ones that thrive) necessarily provide a product that people want, at prices they think are fair.

it's really that simple.

[Codeine]

65. They do provide a service.

They take thousands of people every day up into the air in magical metal boxes and move them enormous distances in short periods of time in an incredibly safe manner. It's not always super-comfortable, but you'll live.

[hack89]

53. Would you be willing to pay more for "adult sized seats" ?

considering the airlines are losing money like crazy it is hard to characterize them as greedy.

[Vincardog]

105. Did you ever consider that the way they treat customers is the reason they are losing money?

[hack89]

122. High capital costs, labor costs and high fuel costs

are the reasons. Even when the number of people flying skyrocketed the airlines were losing money. Southwest is the only profitable airline and that is only because they gambled on long term fuel futures that have kept their fuel prices well below their competitors.

[Gwendolyn]

12. That's sad and must have been distressing. But there are downsides and glitches

to every policy and system, and sometimes people get shafted. That doesn't mean the policy is bad overall.

[FarCenter]

14. Guidelines for Customers of Size

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/cos_guidelines.html

Your "bags fly free", but if your ass is over 17" wide, it doesn't.

[lpbk2713]

15. I wonder if some airlines design their seats for twelve year olds.

Just so that they can do just this. The idea of selling extra seats just
for the comfort factor must have originated from the airlines' CFO's.

[Retrograde]

31. with no shoulders

I'm not thin, but I can fit into a standard airline seat. However, most of my height is in my torso, so while I'm short while standing I'm tall when seated. Getting 3 average-sized humans with shoulders all at the same level in one row of coach seats makes for an uncomfortable flight.

[paulsby]

41. it originated in part from consumer demand

customers want better rates. there are only so many ways to cut costs (and lets not forget many airlines are seriously hemorrhaging money), and one of them is making seats smaller.

many airlines have larger seats with more legspace. they call this "first class". hth

[Codeine]

66. I'm a grown man.

I fit just fine.

[NYC_SKP]

18. Airlines Exempt from ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act, in case anyone is wondering.

"Interstate airline travel is specifically excluded from Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by Section 12141(2). Airline travel is instead covered by the Air Carrier Access Act, 49 U.S.C. 1374(c) and the regulations implementing the Act issued by the Department of Transportation as 14 CFR Part 382, et seq. The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) preceded the ADA, and Congress excluded air carriers and other air transportation services from the scope of ADA. As regulated under 14 CFR §382.38 Seating accommodations (i) "Carriers are not required to furnish more than one seat per ticket or to provide a seat in a class of service other than the one the passenger has purchased.""

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/cos_qa.html

:Patriot:

[Lance_Boyle]

20. What does this have to do with a disability or the ADA?

The math on this is quite simple. Can't fit into one seat? Buy two seats. End of problem.

[NYC_SKP]

25. Because I'm quite certain some would make the argument that their size is a disability.

That's why.

Not me.

But I've seen it come up before, that some medical, genetic, or other condition qualifies one's obesity as a disability.

Have you never heard this?

:shrug:

[JonQ]

56. I've heard others claim that

it seems to be catching on.

Of course the main difference between that and real disabilities is choice. You choose to be fat, you don't choose to be crippled. You can't work really really hard to no longer be blind. You can put down the cheeseburger.

[montanto]

19. Am I the only one thinking, , ,

no offense to this large person, but am I the only one thinking that a person that size should really have to buy two seats. I mean, I'm 6'2," 200 pounds, and I'm crammed into one of those seats. Sitting next to another guy my size is "cozy" to say the least. If I have to sit next to someone TWICE my size I'm the one who pays in extra discomfort. I mean, I'm seeing some of the silly jump-to-conclusions-putting-words-in-people's-mouths posts up-thread. I'm not insensitive. I don't have an issue with overweight people, but when I have overpaid for a seat that I already have to squeeze into and then have to bend over sideways to make room for someone who is half sitting in the airspace that I paid for, I'm pissed. Tell me how that means I'm automatically "anti-fat people." Explain why a person who is taking up the space of two seats should get to have half of the space that I paid for at the expense of my meager comfort.

[Javaman]

22. One question: how did his uncle die? nt

[KamaAina]

43. Ouch.

Was that really necessary?

[madamesilverspurs]

23. No sympathy for the airline from me.

Especially since getting stuck in one of those 'average' seats for several hours as we waited on the tarmac for a replacement lightbulb in the cockpit. A year later I was 120 pounds heavier thanks to the heavy doses of steroids following a near-fatal DVT that might well have originated from the lack of movement imposed by that airline seat. I wasn't obese before that event, I sure as hell am still overweight now. Flying has become an unpleasant experience, thanks in no small part to the industry that used to advertise comfort.


---

[pansypoo53219]

32. maybe they need to charge per pound.

i might be able to fly.

[paulsby]

33. this would also apply to very large people, regardless of whether they were

overfat or overweight (muscled) etc.

for example, a heavily muscled 6'8" man would probably have to buy an extra seat too

i have no problem with this. they are a private carrier, and they have a right to charge via unit of space. iow, if he can't fit in one seat, he should pay for two. that's common sense.

of course it's sad that he wasn't able to join his family etc. but the policy is reasonable.

there are really only two optins. southwest widens all its seats to fit the largest among us, and thus individual seats cost more because there are less of them per flight

or they make seats able to fit an average person, and people who are outliers pay for the extra space.

either method is perfectly within their discretion imo

[CTyankee]

55. I think there should be extra wide seats at perhaps 1 1/2 times the single seat charge.

They would be limited in number for each plane. It would be first come first served. Those who are larger for whatever reason might feel that is a good compromise. I realize that this might not have worked in this particular instance but for other, non-emergency flight needs, it could. Someone over a certain weight would necessarily be forced to buy one of those, of course, but it would be cheaper than two while still being larger than the single seat.

[paulsby]

58. that;s certainly an option too

i think the reality of SW's situation is that they are trying to maximize the # of seats (and thus passengers) per flight.

fwiw, many airlines (but not SW iirc) have business and first class. they generally have larger seats for a larger price.

plus, you get free drinks!

[CTyankee]

62. Business and first class could be just unaffordable. I'm talking about a middle option

to accommodate both price point and size of passenger. I can't imagine an obese person being comfortable him/herself in a small seat, even with the armrest down.

And lots of people don't drink or at least don't drink on longer flights due to dehydration. Even so, a glass of wine is only $7. You'd have to drink an awful lot to make a business/first class ticket worth it...

[paulsby]

68. i've upgraded a couple of times to 1st class

sometimes it's reasonable, sometimes it's not

like i said, considering the # of obese people in this country, it might be a viable business model to offer a few of these "seat and a 1/2" seats per plane. otoh, people might feel these seats stigmatize them, but who knows?

i'm not hyooge but i'm 5'10 and around 215 to 220 (unless i am dieting for competition), and i find the seats pretty uncomfortable. i usually take the window seat and my wife takes the middle or i take the aisle and my wife takes the middle. the middle seat is pretty gruesome. i can't imagine what it's like for an obese person

[CTyankee]

77. I really think there are folks who would get the 1 1/2 seat just for comfort alone, not

necessarily because they are fat. So I'll bet it wouldn't become such a stigma for obese folks...

[paulsby]

79. i certainly think it's possible

that this would work as a business model. iirc, business class is often within that range, although the seats certainly aren't 1 1/2 times as big. it sounds like the idea is sound in that (theoretically) seats 1 1/2 times the size would be paid for by 1 1/2 the ticket price, and the airlines would make the same profit per flight (assuming utilization) and would win over many more passengers (theoretcially) and thus improve their competitiveness

[CTyankee]

85. I pay more now for my fare to Burbank to visit my grandson. This is because

I can't stand the whole deal with SW. I pay more to get a better seat that is reserved and a nonstop out of JFK. This is for me an opportunity cost thing. I'll spend the extra money on my comfort...

[spinbaby]

126. Exactly

If I could pay twice the price for a decent amount of room, I would. But on the long overseas flights where room matters, it's not twice the price to upgrade to first class, it's like 12 times the price.

[slackmaster]

36. Please, DearAbby, uh, overweight is not the preferred, uh, Person of Size, please

:hi:

[gmoney]

51. Is that a joke?

I'm obese/fat, euphemistically refer to myself as "overweight" or "heavy" but the day I refer to myself as a "Person of Size" please shoot me in the head.

[Codeine]

67. Hopefully that's sarcasm.

Fat is fat.

[Missy Vixen]

70. Gosh, that's funny

What other "PC" terms do you eschew as well?

I really don't mind being called "fat". Do you mind that I call you "gun fetishist", for instance? Hope not!

:hi:

[Prism]

49. A simple solution

Given the circumstances, it would have been a thought to have the airline ask passengers if they would like to leave on a later flight or alternative flight and receive vouchers for their trouble. Airlines do this all the time. If you have a guaranteed seat on an oversold flight but agree to give it up for someone else, the airline will often compensate you in some way.

Don't see why they couldn't have made a simple announcement with the offer in an attempt to accommodate a man trying to get to a funeral.

[flvegan]

57. I just measured my total width, shoulder to shoulder.

Airline seat is roughly 17" wide. Guess I won't be flying anytime soon.

[NYC_SKP]

71. If you can put the armrest down, you're probably good to go.

Of course if your ass is 37 inches wide, you're in trouble. :P

If a Customer has broad shoulders, will he/she have to buy a second seat?

Again, if a Customer cannot lower the armrests, the additional purchase is necessary. Simply having broad shoulders would not necessarily prevent another Customer from occupying adjoining seat. The upper body can be adjusted, but the portion of the body in the actual seating and armrest area doesn’t have this flexibility.

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/cos_qa.html

[flvegan]

72. Ah, interesting.

Yeah, no problem with the armrests. I'm just wide through the lats and shoulders. I usually try to get the window seat so I can lean into that extra 2-3".

[NYC_SKP]

86. Yep, and window seats board sooner, better chance to have space in the overhead for your 1 carry-on.

I prefer an aisle seat but these board last and too often assholes with multiple carry-ons take up the available space.

Makes me soooo :mad:

[Scout]

114. hm, i've never seen window seats board sooner....

whenever i fly they just call you by rows.

:shrug:

[NYC_SKP]

120. United, many others, print numbers on the passes, groups 1,2,3, and 4.

After first class, group 1 goes in, then 2, etc.

These are for larger, not regional, aircraft.

Other times it's done in groups by row number, true.

[Scout]

129. i've never flown anything OTHER than large aircraft....

Northwest, Delta, etc.

:shrug:

YMMV

[dmallind]

78. People never seem to get that idea

ANY person with a chest over 36" - which includes the vast majority of adult males even if underweight, let alone normal or overweight - will overflow the seat space and "intrude" on the next. I'm 5'11 and 275 - my butt fits in just fine, and I don't even need one seat extender let alone two, but my upper torso - with very little fat on it in a lateral vector - is approximately 26-27" wide. (Your width is generally very close to half your chest measurement as arm thickness usually equals very close to chest depth). Anybody my height over 135 or so will also overspill those seats. If intrusion is the metric then anyone not anorexic or tiny will need to buy two. If fitting your ass in between the dividers is the metric then you have to put up with my 4.5-5" overspill on either side at my widest point. Take your pick folks.

[flvegan]

80. See, that's what I was thinking.

So now what if you and I are seated next to each other? That's roughly 1' of overflow that meets at roughly the same height between us. That's 2/3 of a whole additional seat!

[LeftyMom]

89. Knowing my luck, I'd get stuck in the middle seat.

:eyes:

Luckily, I have pointy elbows and mean streak.

[flvegan]

111. Considering your height...

that just might work out.

:rofl:

[LeftyMom]

112. It's like people Tetris.

Maybe they need to put my car packing skills to use loading planes. :rofl:

[Withywindle]

115. A 36" chest? Really?

I'm not male, but....um, yeah, I have that. :blush:

[npk]

117. My nephew who is 13 years old has a bigger chest than 36 inches

And he is not what I would consider a big kid.

[dmallind]

123. Pretty much yep

Airline seats are 17-18" wide. Men are roughly (some variation of course) half as wide as their chest measurement. Pretty easy deduction then that men with chests over 36" - which is most healthy adults who are not painfully skinny - will overspill an airline seat.

[Honeycombe8]

69. I agree with that policy. It is unfortunate, but it is just a factual thing.

Either you can fit in a single seat, or you can't. It is not right to expect the person sitting next to the overweight passenger to make do with partial space because the oversized passenger spills over into his space.

I have some members of my family who are very large. My mother was unable to attend my youngest sister's high schoo graduation because she couldn't fit in the seats.

It is sad, but true, that some people are too large to fit into a normal sized seat. So they need special accommodations. On a plane, one of the only things available is to buy the seat next to you.

Also consider that the plane has a weight limit, and the passenger who doesn't fit into one seat is actually accommodating the weight-limit of two passengers. There is talk of some airlines wanting to start weighing passengers. I don't agree with that policy. For one thing, some people weigh more because they are more muscular, but since muscle takes up less space than fat, a smaller man might end up paying more than a fatter man, even though the fatter man can't fit into the seat!

[rucky]

74. I knew it was Southworst Airlines from the headline. n/t

[spoony]

84. The compassion in this thread is overwhelming.

I guess people are cool with the way airlines nowadays treat their cattle, er, passengers.

[Missy Vixen]

87. Actually, it's just the fat

I could predict who was making an appearance in this thread before I even opened it. After all, they revel in the fact they can bash, demean and shame the fat with impunity once more.

I can't even imagine dealing with some of these people IRL. I'm grateful I don't have to.

[Withywindle]

88. Whatever happened to standby and asking if people are willing to be bumped?

When I was younger and had more free time, I used to accumulate kind of a shocking amount of vouchers for free flights by being willing to stay where I was for a few hours or another night so someone else in more urgent need to get somewhere at a certain time could take my seat on full or overbooked flights. Hell, sometimes I PRAYED to get this chance! Another day of vacation plus vouchers? Yes, transit gods, please!

If I could, if I were guaranteed a seat on another flight soon, I'd give up my spot for this guy. I can't be alone in this, can I?

[varelse]

90. You're not

what happened to acting like human beings?

[Withywindle]

99. I see SO many levels of resentment being acted out.

EVERYONE likes to think their need to be on this flight RIGHT NOW is of major historical significance.

No. It really isn't. There is nothing wrong with sitting in a cushy airport chair, with a Starbucks frappuccino by your side, devouring a good book (And if you're me, you have 2 or 3 more paperbacks in your carryon just in case you wind up finishing the one in your hand) for a few hours. If you're a student or vacationer. IF you see there is a guy in obvious distress trying to get to the funeral of a loved one. (Lord knows, these arguments with airline employees are often embarrassingly public!)

I don't know if they offer the incentives to be chivalrous anymore. My hunch is that they don't.

[Missy Vixen]

134. I was waiting for a flight two years ago in Chicago

A guy actually walked into the waiting area and started flashing cash. The flight was sold out, and he needed to get home for his daughter's birthday party. He found a taker -- for $200 -- but the airline wouldn't let them exchange the tickets...

:eyes:

[Gwendolyn]

91. That was sort of the point of the article. The economy sucks so bad they've canceled flights.

That's why they're over booked and for the first time this guy couldn't get an extra seat.

[HuckleB]

97. They did that, starting 2002.

They'd rather have a surplus of passengers than get people where they want to go.

[Withywindle]

100. It's still so fucking brutal.

I think both sides of the dichotomy going on in this thread are bogus.

"Oh, the airlines get to do what they want, because they're a corporation and we're a free market!" :puke:

"Oh, we're an egalitarian democracy, so 400-lb people have a right to plant their asses wherever they want!" Well no, that's not cool either--I've had the experience of paying for a full seat and actually getting to use only a third of it, for five hours.

Flights have been overbooked for DECADES. In the '90s, I fuelled a lot of my travel fantasies just by always being the person who was willing to be bumped.

I have no idea how to resolve this fairly. I just think people need to understand that the air travel of the '00s is comparable to the Greyhound bus system of the 80s (OMG, I could write a book, I did it SO MUCH between ages 17-20!), and NONE of this is halfway near as good (for continental travel) as the train system of the '30s.

[tonysam]

93. Southwest Airlines is the WORST

You can be a size 0 and have to cram into those jokes for seats.

[HughMoran]

101. Worst flight experience I ever had was being "tilted" for 4 hours

Not only would the armrest not go down, but I was forced to sit at an angle for the entire flight. My back hurts just thinking about it. I feel for this guy and I think they were jerks for not making an exception under the circumstances, but I also understand why this policy exists. If I pay full price for a ticket, I expect to get the full seat I paid (never mind the pain and suffering.)

[Odin2005]

116. The bigotry in this thread is disgusting.

[JonQ]

127. Physics

not bigotry. If the seat alotted to you has a volume of X, but the passenger has a volume of 1.5X, how can he fit in his seat and his seat only?

Answer: he can't, he will have to take over part of someone elses seat. Which is not fair to that person, and impossible if they happen to fill out a volume = X.

So if you take up more than one seat you pay for more than one seat. If there is not enough room for you to fly then you can't fly on that plane. Simple.

[mentalsolstice]

131. Some of it isn't bigotry, but just being reasonable

I'm short and thin, so I don't have a problem fitting into airline seats, I have several inches to spare on either side. However, I have a disability that makes it uncomfortable for me to sit in one position for long periods of time (otherwise I do not need special accommodations when flying). I have been squished by overweight people on flights, so that I have no room whatsoever to shift around in my seat. In such a circumstance, by the end of a short flight I'm in extreme pain. If someone is big up top, no problem, but if their bottom or midsection is spilling over so that I can't shift my hips, then it's a problem. So who trumps who?

Maybe thin people should have to pay more for not having to sit next to an overweight person! Do I really need to use a sarcasm tag here?

Best case scenario would be if airlines had a row or two of seats that have extra inches for both body width and leg length for no extra cost...with a first come, first serve basis, and not to be used by people who don't need it...after that the large person should have to pay extra.


eta

[lib2DaBone]

133. Over-Weight, Liberal, Smokers, Anti-war, Atheist., Muslim, ......

Who is next in the cross hairs?