Is airlines charging by weight fair or discriminatory?

[kenny]

Samoa Air has changed their ticket policy.
Your ticket price is calculated on the weight of yourself and your baggage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

I can see both sides.
On one hand a kilo is a kilo and more fuel is needed to carry a heavier passenger.
On the other hand we all love this equality thing.

 

[kenny]

I expect some passengers of very high or low weight will be humiliated stepping onto the scale at the airport.
A SNL skit could have a field day with this.

 

[chrono]

Will an underweight person with just a single overnight carry-on bag get a discount? I think not.

 

[kenny]

Will an underweight person with just a single overnight carry-on bag get a discount? I think not.

It just goes by weight.
There is no 'discount'.
It's not personal or judgmental - a pound is a pound.

If you and your bags add up to 150 pounds and I and my bags add up to 300 pounds my ticket will cost twice what yours costs.

The reason I think this is fair is jet fuel is very expensive and accounts for a huge percentage of ticket price.
This way each passenger pays for exactly what they get and lighter ones no longer subsidize heavier ones.

When I ship a package they charge by weight too.
Should we argue that all packages of all weights are entitled to fair and equal pricing?
I realize humans are more important than packages, but jet fuel doesn't care and is very expensive for businesses.

 

[Laila619]

I think it's discriminatory. As if overweight people already don't feel bad and self-conscious enough...

 

[iheartscience]

Hmmm interesting. It seems somewhat discriminatory in general (not just to overweight people) because an average-sized woman who is 5'2" is going to weigh less than an average-sized woman who is 5'10", so you're being charged more because of genetics. But on the other hand it seems the most fair way of all.

I wonder if it's all a publicity stunt...April Fool's perhaps? It just seems super out there.

 

[ame]

Samoa Air has changed their ticket policy.
Your ticket price is calculated on the weight of yourself and your baggage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

I can see both sides.
On one hand a kilo is a kilo and more fuel is needed to carry a heavier passenger.
On the other hand we all love this equality thing.

I think it's BS because the seat doesn't get any bigger or smaller either way. If I weigh more, I should get more space than the littler person that takes up less space and pays less.

 

[kenny]

Samoa Air has changed their ticket policy.
Your ticket price is calculated on the weight of yourself and your baggage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

I can see both sides.
On one hand a kilo is a kilo and more fuel is needed to carry a heavier passenger.
On the other hand we all love this equality thing.

I think it's BS because the seat doesn't get any bigger or smaller either way. If I weigh more, I should get more space than the littler person that takes up less space and pays less.

Ideally seats would be of adjustable width.
Perhaps someday they'll develop that.
But then the slender people will complain ... " I PAID FOR THAT SPACE AND I WANT IT BACK!"

BTW, I heard that when you check in they make a note if you are small, so they know where to seat the next large person.
This can seem kinda fair, but kinda discriminatory too.
Since they have to seat the large person somewhere, should they put them between two small, average, or large people? Small of course.

People may be equal, but their bodies are not and the airline must squeeze us all of us into their sardine cans.
This whole thing is a mess; no solution will make everyone happy.



But that is a totally different topic from the debate of whether we should be charged per seat or per pound.

 

[qtiekiki]

Samoa Air has changed their ticket policy.
Your ticket price is calculated on the weight of yourself and your baggage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

I can see both sides.
On one hand a kilo is a kilo and more fuel is needed to carry a heavier passenger.
On the other hand we all love this equality thing.

I think it's BS because the seat doesn't get any bigger or smaller either way. If I weigh more, I should get more space than the littler person that takes up less space and pays less.

A lot of time, people are taking up my arm rest space.

 

[kenny]

Samoa Air has changed their ticket policy.
Your ticket price is calculated on the weight of yourself and your baggage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

I can see both sides.
On one hand a kilo is a kilo and more fuel is needed to carry a heavier passenger.
On the other hand we all love this equality thing.

I think it's BS because the seat doesn't get any bigger or smaller either way. If I weigh more, I should get more space than the littler person that takes up less space and pays less.

A lot of time, people are taking up my arm rest space.

Yours?
With only one armrest between seats, how did you determine the arm rest belonged to you, not for both of you to share after a polite discussion on its use?

 

[missy]

That's a tough one because where does it stop? On the subway larger people take up more than one seat and that always means others cannot sit down. Is it fair that they pay more for riding and taking more space? What about the bus? Heavier people cause the bus to use more gas too and sure it is less than airline fuel but still, same principle. I don't know. I don't feel comfortable with this though I do see its merit.

So while it technically is more fair it is also discriminatory IMO. And not so nice for the heavier people. Life should be civilized and respectful and I feel that this will cause a lot of pain and embarrassment and I am not comfortable with that. Sometimes life isn't fair and this should perhaps just remain one of those times.

One can analyze legal discrimination based on what the courts consider protected classes. Like race, gender, age etc.
Overweight people are not a protected class are they? And to what extent should they be a protected class?

 

[qtiekiki]

Samoa Air has changed their ticket policy.
Your ticket price is calculated on the weight of yourself and your baggage.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

I can see both sides.
On one hand a kilo is a kilo and more fuel is needed to carry a heavier passenger.
On the other hand we all love this equality thing.

I think it's BS because the seat doesn't get any bigger or smaller either way. If I weigh more, I should get more space than the littler person that takes up less space and pays less.

A lot of time, people are taking up my arm rest space.

Yours?
With only one armrest between seats, how did you determine the arm rest belonged to you, not for both of you to share after a polite discussion on its use?

Well, half of the arm rest should be mine to use, no?. So if you are taking the whole arm rest, then you are taking my space. And I know I said arm rest, but most of the time, the other passenger's arm and shoulder are on my seat. Mind you, I never complained and it actually doesn't bother me unless they are actually touching me. I was just bringing it up because the space thing was mentioned. Because if you say that you pay for your space, then "my" space should not be "taken".

ETA: I don't necessarily think it's fair to charge by weight. But with a lot of things in life, there may not be a completely fair solution. As consumers, we can agree or disagree and choose to or not to use the airline. The policy is the business to make.

 

[kenny]

Mind you, I never complained and it actually doesn't bother me unless they are actually touching me.

Well, you remembered it well enough to complain here, so I see that as indicating that it actually did bother you.
I recommend you stop pretending to be nice and polite and speak up immediately.
Be authentic to yourself.
Get it off your chest.

You'll then truly let it go then and there, instead of it simmering bubbling up later as an unresolved thing.

 

[kenny]

Well, half of the arm rest should be mine to use, no?.

I don't know.
You'd have to have an actual discussion with your neighbor to compare expectations and assumptions.
Perhaps 2 hours of your full use and 2 hours of her full use would be the result.
Perhaps a, "I got it all first so you don't get anything" was his expectation, and it's time to negotiate.

Without a discussion or psychic powers there's now way to know what's in the mind of another person.
There's nothing in the Bible or the constitution about commercial jet arm rest use.

Certainly assuming YOUR perspective is shared by all is problematic, since people vary.
Discussions is a good thing.
Unfortunately we are increasingly reluctant to talk to others.

 

[qtiekiki]

Mind you, I never complained and it actually doesn't bother me unless they are actually touching me.

Well, you remembered it well enough to complain here, so I see that as indicating that it actually did bother you.
I recommend you stop pretending to be nice and polite and speak up immediately.
Be authentic to yourself.
Get it off your chest.

You'll then truly let it go then and there, instead of it simmering bubbling up later as an unresolved thing.

You are taking it out of context. It was in response to the poster who said "if I weigh more, then I should get more space." Because in reality, the person, in most cases, do. That's all I am saying. But whatever.

 

[kenny]

Okay.

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

Coming from an understanding that you are paying more for the fuel than the space and they include the luggage in the weight I don't have any issues with it. I also happen to be very overweight and I still don't have any issues with it, it is what it is. That's the pricing model they want to use and people have a choice to fly with them or not, whatever. They'll know soon enough if it was a good business decision or not. I'm def in the 'people vary" camp on this one.

 

[kenny]

I weight MUCH more than the average so I'd pay much more, but still I feel paying by weight is fair.
I should and could lose weight.

It's not right of me to expect lighter people to pay part of my fare.

 

[Asscherhalo_lover]

I weight MUCH more than the average so I'd pay much more, but still I feel paying by weight is fair.
I should and could lose weight.

It's not right of me to expect lighter people to pay part of my fare.

Ditto

 

[cm366]

Logical, without a doubt. On the other hand, statistically you could justify declining to employ young african-american males because they're more likely to be arrested and disrupt your business, or young women because they're more likely to take time off work for pregnancy. We've decided that those are discriminatory despite their pure logic because there's no choice involved in ethnicity or gender - they're intrinsic qualities. I think to adequately decide whether Samoa Air's policy is discriminatory requires us to apply the same standard, which is not as clear-cut. I'd compare "weight, nature or nurture" more to "homosexuality, nature or nurture" in terms of its political and social sensitivity. There are, clearly and unequivocally, people who are much heavier than the average and not by choice. There are also, and equally clearly, people whose weight is largely the result of their own choices. By the precedent of 'protected classes', it would seem discriminatory to charge people for weight they've developed genetically, and at least potentially ethical to charge them for weight derived from their own choices. Separating the two could be, ah.... problematic.

It's also worth bearing in mind that "discriminatory" is a cultural standard applied very differently in parts of the world like Samoa. Forming and applying a policy like this would be a legal nightmare for, say, United.

As far as whether it's a good business decision for them - this is not relevant to the ethical question of whether it's discriminatory. Like it or not, business is not a true free market, and we regulate all kinds of practices for all kinds of reasons. It's true that people can choose to fly with them or not (although many of the places they serve are single-airline islands), but that's easily said about Atlanta's bus system or housing developments.

 

[missy]

cm, It's only legal discrimination if the courts (USA) consider it a protected class. Until the law evolves to do that it technically isn't considered discrimination. I just don't know if it is a protected class.

 

[cm366]

I understand that, missy, but how long do you think it'd take for the first suit for emotional damages to be filed after the gate agents required people to hop on a scale or miss their honeymoon? It's a legal and branding nightmare even before protected classes come into play....

 

[kenny]

This will be a very very interesting thing to watch as it rolls out, or not.

 

[texaskj]

The smaller the plane, the more the pilot has to take the weight of everything into account. When my ex-husband was getting his pilot's license he would always have me sit in the middle of the back seat when his instructor was with us to balance things out.

 

[Guilty Pleasure]

How do they collect payment in advance if it's a strictly per unit price? Do you prepay with an estimate and then pay or refund the difference? Or is there a base price, and then you pay the overage...

One upside of this pricing is that there wouldn't be a price change based on when you buy the flight. You could book a week in advance and get the same price as booking a month in advance. That give more flexibility in planning.

 

[justginger]

I can see both sides very easily. When they started charging for all luggage, I got a bit annoyed. If airlines couldn't absorb the increased costs of fuel used on luggage, why do they absorb the increased fuel usage for a larger and larger population?

I'd be interested to see it happen on a trust system (no scales unless you're obviously lying big time), and in ranges.

Weigh the least, you can either get a slight discount (maybe a free drink?) or bring more luggage without charge.
Weigh in the middle, bring average luggage.
Weigh the most, pay for your luggage.

Although the international flights I've taken over he last few years have definitely highlighted that 'average luggage' is no longer average. The amount of carry-on that people are trying to bring on board is absurd. Leave the sink at home, thanks.

 

[Circe]

Logical, without a doubt. On the other hand, statistically you could justify declining to employ young african-american males because they're more likely to be arrested and disrupt your business, or young women because they're more likely to take time off work for pregnancy. We've decided that those are discriminatory despite their pure logic because there's no choice involved in ethnicity or gender - they're intrinsic qualities. I think to adequately decide whether Samoa Air's policy is discriminatory requires us to apply the same standard, which is not as clear-cut. I'd compare "weight, nature or nurture" more to "homosexuality, nature or nurture" in terms of its political and social sensitivity. There are, clearly and unequivocally, people who are much heavier than the average and not by choice. There are also, and equally clearly, people whose weight is largely the result of their own choices. By the precedent of 'protected classes', it would seem discriminatory to charge people for weight they've developed genetically, and at least potentially ethical to charge them for weight derived from their own choices. Separating the two could be, ah.... problematic.

It's also worth bearing in mind that "discriminatory" is a cultural standard applied very differently in parts of the world like Samoa. Forming and applying a policy like this would be a legal nightmare for, say, United.

As far as whether it's a good business decision for them - this is not relevant to the ethical question of whether it's discriminatory. Like it or not, business is not a true free market, and we regulate all kinds of practices for all kinds of reasons. It's true that people can choose to fly with them or not (although many of the places they serve are single-airline islands), but that's easily said about Atlanta's bus system or housing developments.

Another day, another post I wish I could +1. GuiltyPleasures, you, too.

It's one of those things that seems rational in theory ... until you take the irrational element of emotion into account. I read a number of blogs where even the concrete mention of weight is deemed anathema, because it might trigger people with eating disorders. In fact, I'm pretty sure I'm personally acquainted with at least a few people who'd choose to forgo flying if it meant having to get on a scale. I don't see that growing less common, only more.

In some ways, this is capitalism raised by a factor. Generally, we assume there's a baseline, and things level out. We all get the same serving sizes, even if some people devour theirs and others send half the plate back ... the hungrier customers absorb the cost, because the alternative of serving portions which would satisfy the less-hungry is untenable. Likewise, we err on the side of generosity when it comes to seating: the alternative isn't functional, so we just distribute the cost (though, having flown recently, I'm wondering what "average" is meant to be - as an average-height, average-weight woman, I was squashed into my seat with my knees into my sternum: pity the 6' man in the same set-up).

I feel like airlines are cutting corners in every conceivable fashion, because what with rising gas prices ... they've got to do something. Samoa Air might have a sufficiently monopolized customer base so as to get away with it. On the basis of my knowledge of most competitive airlines, though? Betcha they'll do better nickel-and-diming like RyanAir, because most people would rather pay 4 euros for a cup of tea and 60 for that third bag and god knows how much to go to the bathroom than mount a scale in public.

 

[JaneSmith]

Pay by kilo for the luggage and carry-on. Pay by seat for the person. If the person is wider than the seat, buy two seats.
It is discriminatory to charge more for one person who is 6ft 200lbs than another person who is 5ft 100lbs. The larger person is being penalized for their genetics. Humans come in all shapes and sizes, and this is just another damn thing to give preference and privilege to a societal ideal 'normal'.
The airline already averages out the fuel costs per seat, this is simply a cash grab by Air Samoa because a great percentage of Samoans are overweight and this pay-by-kilo BS is a way to charge even more per seat.

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

All serious discriminatory issues aside, I had to laugh when I read it was a Samoan airline who was doing this.

On our trip back from Samoa (direct flight from Apia to Sydney) we had to divert to Fiji and refuel becasue the plane was overweight. Some of the people on that plane were HUGE and I am not talking overweight huge, I'm talking hands the size of dinner plates and bodies that would easily be 3 rugby players in one. As I said, they were not overweight, they were just big compared to what I consider 'big' in a western population. Perhaps that is why they are doing it? because they can make more money knowing that a large amount of their clientelle would be Samoan?

Just a thought!

 

[CharmyPoo]

I don't know how I feel about the specific example. All I know is that I feel it is unfair when I lose part of my seat because the person beside me needs more room. Why should I suffer when I paid for a full seat?

A real example:
Arm rest is down and the passenger beside me puts it up when he sits down. I proceed to put it down.
Person: "Can we leave it up so I can get a more comfortable ride?"
Me: "I understand but I am sorry. I don't feel comfortable with the arm rest up."
Person: "You are tiny and have so much room."
He then proceeds to sit blocking the arm rest. I am no longer able to lower the arm rest and I am sitting beside the window.

What would you do in this situation?