Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics)

[arkieb1]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Cut and pasted from the above link;

"Safety regulations from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) mandate that passengers must be able to lower their armrests and sufficiently buckle and fasten their seat belts. However, the average seat width for a domestic economy flight ranges from 17 to 19 inches between the armrests. So what happens when you can’t fit in the seat? According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), airlines are not required by law to provide additional seating or an upgrade in the event additional space is required for a passenger.

There is no industry-wide policy, and each airline handles the situation differently. So, while we often get questions about passengers of size, it’s not a straightforward answer. Knowing the airlines’ policies can help you save money and avoid embarrassment while boarding."

The truth is that airlines have been making up their own rules for years. At the moment they might not weigh anyone, and it might be so unpopular that they may never actually weigh anyone, but if you go to check in and the check in person sees the person is what they deem "obese" they can insist they pay either an excess tax or they buy another seat, that is what already happens in the US and around the world....

 

[kenny]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Fair, guys, but you are the exception to the rule. You've accepted something. The rest of the population still has to provide their input in the form of their dollars (demand.)

Yup.
They're free to take a train or a ship.
IMO, all airlines will eventually just charge per pound. Period.
We are cargo.

Zillions will be pissed, and the airlines will say fluffy things carefully phrased by the marketing weenies on Madison Avenue.
But in the end the airlines really don't care about your feelings.
It's all about 'shareholder value' and executive bonuses.

Protesters will be free to take a train or a ship ... or ... uhm ... well ... Oh ... we can't even go there, can we?

 

[jordyonbass]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

And I gave it to you.

If a person cannot fit into the space designated for one seat, he should be required to buy two.

And (as you put it), I "gave it to you". ........ Seat prices: small, medium, and large.

... and shouldn't you write he OR she?

I can see some kind of discrimination flag being waved with that; someone who should have bought a large seat but thinks they fit a medium or even a small. Could you imagine the argument at the airport when someone is told they need to pay extra for a ticket on the spot because the airline deemed them to big for the seat they bought?

Airlines could just price by weight.

X dollars per pound.

If I think I weight 230 pounds I pay that price online.
But if I weight only 220 at the airport they'd refund a few bucks to my credit card.
If I weigh 240 they charge more to my CC.

Nothing personal.
Just charge per pound.

They could call it fair fares.

What happens when everyone diets and loses weight between buying their tickets and flying? The airlines might go broke! Although world obesity levels may fall, so that's a plus!!

Hmm....if I paid for a plane ticket by the pound 6 months ago and flew tomorrow, I would be getting a 30 pound discount upon checking in. Does that sound right?

 

[jordyonbass]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

So airlines would be potentially refunding hundreds of partial transactions a day? This seems like a rather half baked idea, that can actually freeze up your credit card sometimes. Not to mention making people get on a scale in public is sizeist and potentially rather degrading. And that's not me "not facing reality", part of the reality of being human is that sometimes you might have to squeeze next to someone on a plane or pay $22 more in fuel than your weight demands. Life goes on.

Sizeist?
Isn't it 'locationist' that another person can't share your seat?

Seriously, this is about how much fuel your weight gobbles up.
We are not equal.
Fuel is expensive.

Honestly Kenny; I would think that the nuances of the ways a pilot flies a plane would have more impact on the economy than the nuances in weight difference between groups flying. I know that it applies for cars and boats, my mate and I have virtually identical trucks and he only gets about 600 miles from a tank while I get up to 800. Even the additional weight in the trucks is nearly identical; I carry more weight in my truck in the form of items, he carries more weight in his truck in the form of his stomach

 

[missy]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

This is a tough issue and I don't know the best answer. It is interesting reading other perspectives here and thank you all for sharing your thoughts.

I will share what happened to us on a flight over 12 years ago. My dh and I were returning from Italy after a 3 week vacation and we had gained a few (8 lbs for me and 10 lbs for my dh LOL) pounds. Though we were walking everywhere and really active during the whole trip we were enjoying that delicious Italian food and well what can I say. Anyway, it seems we were not the only ones to enjoy the food there and mid flight there was an announcement that we had to land and refuel because the plane was heavier than originally anticipated and we needed more fuel to get back to the USA.

True story I swear and just sharing it here because something has got to give. So if the plane has more weight it stands to reason that it takes more fuel which is more expensive. Who pays for that?

Do we split the costs evenly or do the heavier passengers have to pay?

IDK and IDK which is fairer because it sort of sucks either way. For an obese person who probably already wishes they were not obese it is to add insult upon injury to make them pay for being obese and seems very mean and unkind. And I won't go into how the people who are least likely to be able to pay are those most likely to be more overweight and it gives me pause.


OTOH someone has to pay so do we just divide it amongst everyone regardless of their weight? Perhaps that is the most fair/democratic and "American" way....

Again I really don't know the "best" solution but just thinking aloud.

 

[missy]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Just asked my dh and he said that he doesn't think it makes sense to charge more for those who weigh more because then what about kids etc. Instead he thinks it makes more sense to charge for the seat you are taking up so if you can fit into a regular seat then you pay the regular fare. If you are larger and need a larger seat (and I am not sure how the airlines can do this besides first class/business class) then you have to pay for that larger seat. And it probably should be on the honor system and if they get to the airport and cannot fit they either have to upgrade to a larger seat if necessary and if there are no larger seats available that flight take a different flight where there are larger seats available.

 

[momhappy]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

As seat is a seat and that's essentially what paying for. Sure, some people overlap. I've had it happen to me. They guy next to me requested a seatbelt extender and yes, he didn't exactly fit into the seat space either... I saw an episode of my 600 pound life and the woman had to purchase 2 seats to fit (she weighed in the 500-pound range though). Kid ticket prices (discounted) don't exist unless you are a lap infant and then you fly free because you are not taking up a seat.
Actually, what's more concerning to me is these "emotional support" travel companions that are allowed on flights (in many cases, without a fee). I know this is something that they are currently looking into because they need to come up with some sort of regulations. Virtually all species are allowed - dogs, cats, geese, pigs, turtles, chickens - pretty much anything except snakes. All you need is some paperwork from a doctor and they have found that some doctors that are eager to sign off for a fee of course You can buy "service animal" vests on Amazon and they even come with a stack of business cards that you can hand out if someone questions why you have an animal (the card basically states that it's illegal to question someone about a service animal). I know this because I know someone who did this just to take their dog into places where dogs normal aren't allowed. I understand that there are people in this world that actually do need emotional support animals and it's unfortunate that those who don't, are ruining it for them

 

[arkieb1]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Just asked my dh and he said that he doesn't think it makes sense to charge more for those who weigh more because then what about kids etc. Instead he thinks it makes more sense to charge for the seat you are taking up so if you can fit into a regular seat then you pay the regular fare. If you are larger and need a larger seat (and I am not sure how the airlines can do this besides first class/business class) then you have to pay for that larger seat. And it probably should be on the honor system and if they get to the airport and cannot fit they either have to upgrade to a larger seat if necessary and if there are no larger seats available that flight take a different flight where there are larger seats available.

This is what happens now with the larger airlines already. I asked my husband, he said with some smaller airlines when you arrive at the check in they weigh every passenger now for safety reasons, and have the legal right to do it and calculate how much the baggage and the fuel weighs to make sure they are not over max take off and landing weight, so if you fly on a small plane to somewhere they already can and do ask every passenger to get weighed, including in the US.

He said a couple of weeks ago a well known Aussie airline weighed all it's passengers, he will find out who it was.

At the moment he said most passengers that take up the width of two or three seats are usually honest people who don't want to cause a scene so those that are seasoned or regular travellers mostly pay for and take up two seats, they do it honestly without fuss.

The US was the first place in the world that started charging passengers extra if they are obese or take up two seats, or they ask them to pay an extra fee.

 

[missy]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Interesting info.

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/time-weigh-airline-puts-passengers-scale-boarding/story?id=33037061

Time to Weigh In: Airline Puts Passengers on Scale Before Boarding
By GENEVIEVE SHAW BROWN Aug 12, 2015, 11:45 AM ET

It's not quite "pay-what-you-weigh," but one airline is putting its passengers on the scale before they board their flight.

"Please be informed that Uzbekistan Airways airline carries out the procedure of preflight weighing for determination of the average weight of passenger with hand baggage,” company officials posted to their website Friday.

They're not the first airline to enact the controversial policy. In 2013, Samoa Air became the first airline to weigh passengers at the airport before boarding. Unlike Uzbekistan Airways, however, Samoa Air ticket prices are directly related to a passenger’s weight.


It's unclear why the airline adopted this policy, and company officials have not responded to ABC News' request for comment.

Uzbekistan Airways cites International Air Transport Association (IATA) rules in its policy. "Airlines are obliged to carry out the regular procedures of preflight control passengers weighing with hand baggage to observe requirements for ensuring flight safety," the airline said.

IATA, a trade association representing the airline industry worldwide, told ABC News they were "not aware" of an IATA rule about weighing passengers and hand luggage prior to flight.

"All airlines have policies in place for load calculations, weight and balance of their aircraft," IATA spokesman Perry Flint told ABC News. "These policies in turn are subject to the rules and regulations of their national aviation regulator."

But not to worry: No one besides you and the machine weighing you will know about last night's burger binge.

"After passing check-in on flight and prior to boarding into the aircraft, we will suggest you to pass the procedure of weighing with the special weighing machine placed in the departure gate zone," the website reads.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/02/samoa-air-pay-what-you-weigh

Tuesday 2 April 2013 12.33 EDT

Samoa Air says charging passengers by weight is 'concept of the future'
Airline defends 'pay what you weigh' ticket policy, saying families have been particularly pleased by cheaper child tickets

'You are the master of how much (or little!) your air ticket will cost', says Samoa Air. Photograph: Stephen Swintek/Getty Images
A Samoan airline that has become the world's first carrier to charge passengers according to their weight has defended its policy. People wishing to travel with Samoa Air have to submit their weight, including their luggage, when booking to calculate their fare.

Proclaiming the "pay only for what you weigh" scheme, the company's website says: "Booking a flight with us is as easy as inputting your approximate weight into our online booking engine (don't worry, we will weigh you again at the airport) – you then can prepay your 'guesstimate', guaranteeing you that much weight is allocated to you for that flight … with Samoa Air, you are the master of how much (or little!) your air ticket will cost."

Samoa Air, which was launched last year, serves domestic routes as well as other Pacific islands. The statistics on obesity in the region suggest that many passengers could be forking out for a lot of kilos: Samoa appears regularly in lists of the top 10 fattest countries with more than 80% of the population aged 15 and over overweight.

Among the airline's other destinations, American Samoa, the Cook Islands, Tonga and Niue also feature in lists of the top 10 countries by percentage of overweight people.

Samoa Air's chief executive, Chris Langton, said charging by weight was the fairest method. "People have always travelled on the basis of their seat but, as many airline operators know, airlines don't run on seats; they run on weight and particularly the smaller the aircraft you are in the less variance you can accept in terms of the difference in weight between passengers," he told ABC News.

"There is no doubt in my mind that this is the concept of the future because anybody who travels has travelled at times when they feel like they have been paying for half of the passenger next to them … People are generally a little bit bigger, wider and taller than they were 40-50 years ago."

He said families had been "pleasantly surprised" by the pricing policy, introduced in January, as they could end up paying less because children were also charged by weight and not on their seat requirement.

Other airlines have previously attracted controversy by charging obese passengers for two seats.

“The weighing record will only contain the corresponding passenger category (i.e. male/ female/ children). As for the rest, the full confidentiality of results is guaranteed."

 

[OreoRosies86]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

So airlines would be potentially refunding hundreds of partial transactions a day? This seems like a rather half baked idea, that can actually freeze up your credit card sometimes. Not to mention making people get on a scale in public is sizeist and potentially rather degrading. And that's not me "not facing reality", part of the reality of being human is that sometimes you might have to squeeze next to someone on a plane or pay $22 more in fuel than your weight demands. Life goes on.

Sizeist?
Isn't it 'locationist' that another person can't share your seat?

Seriously, this is about how much fuel your weight gobbles up.
We are not equal.
Fuel is expensive.

If you feel like paying your weight in the name of fairness, have at it!

 

[AGBF]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

I am surprised that no one brought this up before, but this is a philosophical issue and it does not apply only to airlines. What is really being asked here is whether benefits should be applied universally or should be applied selectively. I will grant you that in this case the "means test" is not economic, but it is, none the less, a test.

Scholars of how social benefits are distributed have long disputed whether it is better to distribute them universally (like social security in the United States) or according to a means test (the way Aid to Families with Dependent Children-AFDC-known as "welfare"). Usually programs with universal benefits are more accepted than programs with a means test.

A definition from an Internet site, Encyclopedia.com, is below.

© A Dictionary of Sociology 1998, originally published by Oxford University Press 1998.

"selective versus universal benefits A major dispute concerning the organization of welfare regimes, addressing the issue of whether welfare should be delivered selectively to those in need, or universally as claims that individuals make of each other as members of a community. Advocates of the former strategy argue that selective benefits are targeted towards those in greatest need and therefore do most to relieve suffering. The advantage of the latter approach is claimed to be that it obviates the need for means testing: that is, provision of the benefit only after a bureaucratic (by implication demeaning) investigation and assessment of income and wealth which demonstrates need (usually in the form of inability to pay). Communitarians also argue that the universal approach has the effect of promoting social solidarity as against the individualistic sentiments of selective entitlement. However, making certain welfare goods and services universally available can have some unintended consequences, as for example when placing a ceiling on property rents simply discourages landlords from letting, or where security of tenure and rent subsidies in public-sector housing encourage people to stay in these properties irrespective of need. See also COLLECTIVISM."

AGBF

 

[ksinger]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

I am surprised that no one brought this up before, but this is a philosophical issue and it does not apply only to airlines. What is really being asked here is whether benefits should be applied universally or should be applied selectively. I will grant you that in this case the "means test" is not economic, but it is, none the less, a test.

Scholars of how social benefits are distributed have long disputed whether it is better to distribute them universally (like social security in the United States) or according to a means test (the way Aid to Families with Dependent Children-AFDC-known as "welfare"). Usually programs with universal benefits are more accepted than programs with a means test.

A definition from an Internet site, Encyclopedia.com, is below.

© A Dictionary of Sociology 1998, originally published by Oxford University Press 1998.

"selective versus universal benefits A major dispute concerning the organization of welfare regimes, addressing the issue of whether welfare should be delivered selectively to those in need, or universally as claims that individuals make of each other as members of a community. Advocates of the former strategy argue that selective benefits are targeted towards those in greatest need and therefore do most to relieve suffering. The advantage of the latter approach is claimed to be that it obviates the need for means testing: that is, provision of the benefit only after a bureaucratic (by implication demeaning) investigation and assessment of income and wealth which demonstrates need (usually in the form of inability to pay). Communitarians also argue that the universal approach has the effect of promoting social solidarity as against the individualistic sentiments of selective entitlement. However, making certain welfare goods and services universally available can have some unintended consequences, as for example when placing a ceiling on property rents simply discourages landlords from letting, or where security of tenure and rent subsidies in public-sector housing encourage people to stay in these properties irrespective of need. See also COLLECTIVISM."

AGBF

Ah, the deeper issue. I thought of this issue in the same terms, but you beat me to it. Or just picked up the slack for my lazy posterior that likely wouldn't have gotten around to it anyway. Excellent post Deb.

 

[telephone89]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

I've been weighed before a flight in the US. I went to Hawaii and took a small airplane tour around Kauai. They weigh every passenger before the trip to figure out where to place them so as to not unbalance the plane. So if there was 1 very large person, and 3 very small people, the large person would be on the left, the 3 smaller to the right one behind another.

I see the appeal of a pay per pound system, but it seems difficult to execute. I HATE having my space encroached on a flight, but I don't think this is the best scenario.

 

[maccers]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

But what if you're not fat but really tall and therefore heavier than most? You can't help how tall you are.

Or what if you're heavier/obese for reason that can't be helped? Medical or otherwise?

What if, what if, what if?

 

[kenny]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

But what if you're not fat but really tall and therefore heavier than most? You can't help how tall you are.

Or what if you're heavier/obese for reason that can't be helped? Medical or otherwise?

What if, what if, what if?

It's not about why it takes more fuel to lift me 7 miles into the sky.
It's just that it does take more fuel.

There is no guilt, shame, or blame.
To the airlines we are just cargo paying to be transported.

Do SUV owners complain they have to pay more for fuel than hybrid drivers, arguing that we all have the right to drive the same distance for the same fuel price?
They argue, "But it's not fair because we're all equal."
Sorry. Use more, pay more.

When you mail a 10 pound package at the post office do you complain they charge you more than the previous customer who mailed a 5 pound package?

IMO it's inevitable that all the airlines will weight each of us.
Personally it won't bother me a bit because it makes sense.
They aren't judging me or guilting me for what I weigh; they are just buying fuel.

But I understand many people are very sensitive about their weight ... then there is what I call 'equality creep'.
I'm much like that Spock character on Star Trek.
Logic looms large in my mind.

 

[YadaYadaYada]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

I could honestly see them charging an additional weight tax or something and coming from one of the most heavily taxed states I can tell you people would whine and complain but would probably eventually accept it.

My husband knows this struggle as he is at least 60lbs overweight and I know his feeling would be that if his weight encroached on someone else's space that they paid for then he should pay for an additional seat. I don't really know if that is the answer or not but he has accepted that part of being overweight is that things cost more whether others would accept that same perspective idk.

 

[december-fire]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Kenny,

An interesting question from a theoretical point of view.

This issue will, no doubt, be addressed by some future generation once technology advances to the point that accurate weighting devices are a reality.

 

[ChristineRose]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

There are tons of things that are at some level not fairly charged for. For example me and my neighbor might have the same Internet plan because that's all that's available to us, and I might use ten times what he does. Sometimes they charge more for people like me; sometimes they don't.

Or they could charge for one checked bag, or two checked bags, or charge for more than 50 pounds of bags. I've seen all of these. Or they could charge more for flights on popular routes where there isn't a lot of competition.

Get away from the airlines--some people use their gym membership twice a day, some people are lucky if they get there twice a month. But some gyms charge for every visit. Parking is free at night, $10 in the daytime, and $50 before a football game.

The way things are charged for is a combination of what's conventional, what the vendor thinks they can get away with, and how the vendor's actual costs are affected by the circumstances.

I only see this happening because everyone hates flying, and having a very large person impinging on your space doesn't make it any easier. Airlines think they can get away with it, fuel costs aside.

 

[AGBF]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

To the airlines we are just cargo paying to be transported.

My question was is it better to have a benefit (like an airplane seat price) shared between people of all sizes (as was the past practice) or to price it out based on something like weight. One could start charging a certain class more for benefits in many arenas where it is not, yet, done, but would it be wise?

We would always be charging bigger people more for transportation if this policy were instituted. Bigger people would become a class that was charged more by airplanes (and, then, perhaps by buses and trains which also use fuel) and would become an underclass due to their size. They would be more financially burdened in society. Do we want that?

I have more...but unfortunately I have bills to pay.

Deb

 

[maccers]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Well, if your vision becomes reality, it'll really suck to be a tall person. You have to pay more and be more uncomfortable with your knees in the back of someone's seat. And I guess I won't flying if I'm pregnant as I tend to gain a crazy amount of water weight - I don't feel like paying for that.

 

[telephone89]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

monnie - as a note about your supply and demand, this could be an interesting aspect to it.

Imagine two airlines. One airline does the weigh thing. So very large people have to buy 2 tix (or however it works out), one doesn't. Eventually, the larger people would likely start going to the airline that doesn't do the weigh thing, because they'll save money. That would mean when smaller people fly on the weighing airline, they notice how roomy it is, because there are less large people on the flight. They might choose this airline over the other because of this.

However, now that the other airline has soo many large people wanting to book it, they might start to raise prices. Then who knows. But in the interim, it could be a pretty even situation. Supply and demand also yields to choice.

 

[kenny]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

FWIW difference in price wouldn't be much, certainly not like having to buy a ticket for an extra seat.
Here's a snip from the BBC article linked in my OP:

“On the surface level, a heavier passenger does increase the overall weight onboard an aircraft — therefore increasing fuel burn and cost to the airline,” says Luke Jensen, a researcher at MIT International Center for Air Transportation.
“The actual difference in fuel cost varies by flight, but rough order of magnitude, the difference is relatively small.
On a typical 737 flight from Boston to Denver for example, a 50-pound weight increase would increase fuel consumption by about $3 to $5.”

He says that it might be “fair” to weigh each passenger and his or her bag, and then charge them accordingly — he says it could be less than a $10 difference between smaller and larger passengers on most domestic flights.

 

[telephone89]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

If its that little its almost worse imo. Nickel and diming feeling. You'll save $5 but still be crammed in next to someone.

So your view isn't about passenger comfort, it's about airline profitability. I don't think the airlines are hurting, so I would discourage an additional charge for that purpose only.

 

[kenny]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

If its that little its almost worse imo. Nickel and diming feeling. You'll save $5 but still be crammed in next to someone.

So your view isn't about passenger comfort, it's about airline profitability. I don't think the airlines are hurting, so I would discourage an additional charge for that purpose only.

It's not my view.
It's the airline's.
I just don't object to fares that are more fair.

And, in essence, each of paying more fairly for what we each get isn't changing profitability.
That said, companies usually DO use any change to increase profitability.

This equality thing really has gotten out of control.

 

[Madam Bijoux]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Charging a person for anything based on weight is just one more form of discrimination.

 

[ruby59]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

And I gave it to you.

If a person cannot fit into the space designated for one seat, he should be required to buy two.

And (as you put it), I "gave it to you". ........ Seat prices: small, medium, and large.

... and shouldn't you write he OR she?

I can see some kind of discrimination flag being waved with that; someone who should have bought a large seat but thinks they fit a medium or even a small. Could you imagine the argument at the airport when someone is told they need to pay extra for a ticket on the spot because the airline deemed them to big for the seat they bought?

It sure would save the embarrassment afterwards when I could not put down the armrest as they need that extra space.

 

[ruby59]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

And I gave it to you.

If a person cannot fit into the space designated for one seat, he should be required to buy two.

And (as you put it), I "gave it to you". ........ Seats prices: small, medium, and large.

... and shouldn't you write he OR she?

I guess I am just old. I learned to use "he" when you did not know the sex of the person.

And who would determine whether I am small, medium, or large? Would he have a tape measure and a scale?

What about people who buy and print their tickets on line, sight unseen.

It would be the honor system, and you should know and be honest when ordering your tickets to avoid an uncomfortable situation later on.

Ruby, don't you ever step outside or think outside of what you've been taught, or what's outside your comfort zone? Maybe you don't have to, and maybe it IS because you're old...I don't know. I'm sincerely not trying to badger you or even bother you on this website, but the things you say here are so archaic to me that I just really want to know where you're coming from.

For me, until a person was overlapping their own paid-for seat and infringing on MY space that I'd paid for, I wouldn't say anything. Coach is not easy travel. First class is way easier if you've flown that way or been bumped up--and then you're completely spoiled/ruined! But coach...yeah, you have to put up or shut up, really. To pay by weight? ugh. Nope. What a shitty can of worms to open.

My "boss" (I use that term loosely because I am mostly an indie contractor) could stand to lose 200 lbs. But he could also afford (and often does) to charter his own private plane. There are countless others though, who don't have that kind of money and need to fly coach and "inflict" their flesh upon the rest of us. Well, guess what? Flights continentally are relatively short. I'm sure we'll all make it through having to be crammed in like sardines, same as we do every other form of public transpo. Subway? El? Taxi? Jeez.

here's what would better humanity: a bit of compassion and a lot less selfishness.

You try it on a flight from Rhode Island to California.

And what about people who do not like being touched by strangers? Or have physical health problems or anxiety? His legs were so far apart one was touching mine. I have diabetic neuropathy. I need to move my legs, but could not, I was so wedged in.

6 hours of that is beyond comfort zone.

Where does his rights end and mine start.

I can understand a person in a little denial, but this man was morbidly obese, probably over 400. He should have known and taken the appropriate steps.

We are all entitled to our personal space.

 

[monarch64]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

And I gave it to you.

If a person cannot fit into the space designated for one seat, he should be required to buy two.

And (as you put it), I "gave it to you". ........ Seats prices: small, medium, and large.

... and shouldn't you write he OR she?

I guess I am just old. I learned to use "he" when you did not know the sex of the person.

And who would determine whether I am small, medium, or large? Would he have a tape measure and a scale?

What about people who buy and print their tickets on line, sight unseen.

It would be the honor system, and you should know and be honest when ordering your tickets to avoid an uncomfortable situation later on.

Ruby, don't you ever step outside or think outside of what you've been taught, or what's outside your comfort zone? Maybe you don't have to, and maybe it IS because you're old...I don't know. I'm sincerely not trying to badger you or even bother you on this website, but the things you say here are so archaic to me that I just really want to know where you're coming from.

For me, until a person was overlapping their own paid-for seat and infringing on MY space that I'd paid for, I wouldn't say anything. Coach is not easy travel. First class is way easier if you've flown that way or been bumped up--and then you're completely spoiled/ruined! But coach...yeah, you have to put up or shut up, really. To pay by weight? ugh. Nope. What a shitty can of worms to open.

My "boss" (I use that term loosely because I am mostly an indie contractor) could stand to lose 200 lbs. But he could also afford (and often does) to charter his own private plane. There are countless others though, who don't have that kind of money and need to fly coach and "inflict" their flesh upon the rest of us. Well, guess what? Flights continentally are relatively short. I'm sure we'll all make it through having to be crammed in like sardines, same as we do every other form of public transpo. Subway? El? Taxi? Jeez.

here's what would better humanity: a bit of compassion and a lot less selfishness.

You try it on a flight from Rhode Island to California.

And what about people who do not like being touched by strangers? Or have physical health problems or anxiety? His legs were so far apart one was touching mine. I have diabetic neuropathy. I need to move my legs, but could not, I was so wedged in.

6 hours of that is beyond comfort zone.

Where does his rights end and mine start.

I can understand a person in a little denial, but this man was morbidly obese, probably over 400. He should have known and taken the appropriate steps.

We are all entitled to our personal space.

Yes, you're entitled to your personal space! So, since you have a health issue and need to be able to move your legs, prepare for your flight by booking one with an airline who offers seating choice and sit exit row or bulkhead so you can have room to shift around as needed. I have a similar issue because I am tall; I try to always get bulkhead or exit row seating so my knees aren't someone's back in front of me! If I can't get either one of those, I go for an aisle seat next so I have the option of easily getting up and moving around when possible. When you're flying more than 4 hours, I also suggest (if time permits or you're able to plan ahead this way) booking an indirect flight so you can stop and walk around on a layover. I know that's not the most realistic suggestion, but it would be an alternative to flying 6 or more consecutive hours with your health needs. Is it FAIR that fat people take up more space than thinner people do? No. Is it something that happens from time to time? Yup. You can only control your reactions to things and try to better prepare for ridiculous circumstances no matter how unfair they are to you. I guess your other option is to only fly airlines that force bigger people to buy an extra seat. Telephone made a great point about supply and demand. I could see an airline like that existing and doing well. They can call it "Into Thin Air."

 

[AGBF]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

Another issue not touched on: the shrinking size of seats and rage of passengers and attendant nonsense all ensued when government ceased regulation of the airlines. It has become like Lord of The Flies. If humans cannot behave themselves because they are overcome with greed, perhaps they need to be regulated. You believe in law and order? Having police? Well re-institute regulation of the airlines. Stop the nonsense already.

AGBF

 

[arkieb1]

Re: Should lighter airline passengers pay less? (no politics

I think it depends on the airline, but part of it is FAA rules state that passengers should be able to lower armrests for safety reasons, so a really tall person who is heavy can still do that, a person who is wide across who literally takes up 2 or in some cases 3 seats cannot. Most planes, even some of the smaller ones are configured that you can put a larger person into a section in the plane and they can take up two seats have the middle armrest raised and still have an arm rest on either side or them.

With really big planes the cost of fuel for a heavy person is minimal, in the beginning they used the FAA rule to make money out of larger people, however on small planes it IS important to know the weight of the cargo and everyone on board for a safe take off and landing, so if you have someone who doesn't declare it and an overly full plane it's not just about the cost of fuel it can become a safety issue.

Me I'd rather they weigh everyone and take off safely, land safely and know they have enough fuel on board to get to the destination than argue about it.... and on larger planes I think if someone really does take up two or three seats and there are no spare seats on the plane then why shouldn't they have to pay to occupy them, particularly when you could have other paying passengers that want those seats.

And there is a big difference between someone who is just overweight that spills a bit onto the next seat and some who is morbidly obese that actually takes up the whole of two or three seats.