Posted on 04/15/2009 6:17:41 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
Chicago, IL (AHN) - United Airlines has announced it will implement a new policy charging heavier passengers double the standard airfare.
Under the new rules, United will charge passengers who "are unable to fit into a single seat in the ticketed cabin; are unable to properly buckle the seatbelt using a single seatbelt extender; and/or are unable to put the seat's armrests down when seated."
Those who fall into these categories will be denied boarding unless they purchase an extra seat, and if no empty seat exists, the passenger will be forced to take a later flight.
According to the airline, the policy applies to tickets bought on or after March 4, with United's website saying, "Please understand that we care a great deal about all of our customers' well-being, and we have implemented this policy to help ensure that everyone's travel experiences with United are comfortable and pleasant."
Wake up, Fatties. You. Are. Next. Even if you're not 'fat.'
REMINDER: This IS NOT about being 'fat.' This is about your personal rights being STOLEN from you. We warned you about Smoker's Rights; and most of us don't even smoke!
Now you're going to be confined to your home and not allowed to travel freely because you're fat.
And then it will be because you're deemed 'too old' to travel. And then it will be because you have a 'handicap' of some sort and will inconvenience 'The Perfect German' next to you in some way. *Rolleyes*
And then...
Nanny State Ping.
Well, it IS a private company...but you get my drift.
Poor, poor Hillary...
LOL! Don’t cry for her. She’ll ALWAYS be living on OUR dime until the day she dies. And then we’ll have Chelsea to support. *BARF*
Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but this has nothing to do with personal rights or ‘Nanny State’ as another poster commented, this is a private business making business decisions that is best for their company. If someone’s fat butt take two seats, what is wrong with a private business charging for two seats?
If another carrier doesn’t charge this, the two seat consumer has a choice to do business with that airline, thus, it will guide the market.. that’s how business works.. this isn’t about rights or nanny state.. it is about private businesses doing business.
One can see how this new rule will be abused, which is my point.
What happens if the passenger next to me falls asleep and then leans over to my side? Will he or she get charged double?
The world of aviation has gone completely bonkers. Thank goodness I have wifey to protect me during most flights.
Couldn’t you arrive at the airport pillowed-up and buy the extra seat? It’s cheaper than First or Business.
You’re right about that. I’m a big guy, not fat but lots of muscle from years in the gym. Those airline seats feel like they were made for grade schoolers.
When are they going to put a Coach seat at the Check-in counter with the sign that says; “If you don’t fit in this you must buy a second seat!”?
My original flight had been canceled and the agent said. "Don't worry, I can squeeze onto another flight." If she only knew that is literally what she did.
This isn't about fat people. It is about the rest of us.
Look, if someone cannot confine themselves to one seat, it means they are spilling over and stealing space from a seat that someone else paid for and now cannot use.
Use more than one seat, pay for more than one seat. Seems fair.
... and better than making people get on a scale before boarding
Yep. That’s where I’m a little bit torn. But not very much.
‘Incremental Socialism’ seems to work best, as the past 50 years have proven time and again, whether it’s in the Public OR Private sector. Gotta keep the proletariat in line!
Private company making a private decision. I have no problem with it. Fliers can vote yay or nay with their dollars.
It’s a private business. I’m sure you agree that businesses ought to be free to make decisions that behoove them.
United I am sure is doing this not for the extra seat revenue but rather to improve the flyer satisfaction levels of the non-fat passengers. If fat passengers have to pay more they will fly other airlines, and that is what United wants. United focuses on the frequent flyer business travelers the most (hence the proliferation of frequent flyer levels like “Premier Executive” and “Global Services” not to mention “1k” ). Not as many severely overweight people are business air travelers.
If it’s private sector making decisions in the private sector, it has nothing to do with socialism, it is the antithesis of socialism. There is not ‘incremental’... they offer a service, seats.. if one takes more than one seat, it seems only fair they charge for the number of seats one uses.
Incremental socialism would be the government telling this private business they can’t charge for two seats for folks who take two seats.
“This isn’t about fat people. It is about the rest of us.”
No, it really isn’t. You’ll figure it out one day. Others have.
I don’t smoke, and smoking bans, ruining businesses and moving money from one county to another wasn’t about smoking. It was about control.
I agree with you, it is a business decision, not a "stealing rights/Personal rights" thing.
That's because essentially, they are. I can see alot of pushback from this because of that. The world isn't 5'6, 150 lbs anymore.
And as you say, you don't have to be fat, just big. In fact, I once noticed a tall, thin guy, skinny as a rail but lanky, and it was like being in a straight-jacket for him to keep his arms and elbows out of the next seat.
Smoking bans where the exact opposite of what this is.. in smoking bans, it is the government telling the business what to do.. if a private business wants to not allow smoking, just like a private airline wants to charge for two seats if one uses two seats, that is about that private business having control over their private property. If an individual chooses not to deal with that, they are free... You do believe in private property don't you? If this where analogous to smoking bans, the government would tell the private airlines how to deal with their business and who they can/can't serve.
“Incremental socialism would be the government telling this private business they can’t charge for two seats for folks who take two seats.”
Keep an eye on it. Government is telling the car companies what to do these days. The airlines have been bailed out by the Government before. I’m betting they’ll be going belly-up in this 0bamaconomy and asking for a Government (Taxpayer) handout before long. Then what? You can bet your bottom dollar Government will have a say in running the airlines!
Today? No cars for Fatties. Next, no travel of any kind for Fatties. That’s not that far afield.
The story isn’t about smoking. It is about large people encroaching into a space that was purchased by someone else. The story also has nothing to do with control, government or otherwise.
hillary’s okay-its her huge ass that’s going to be a problem.
So, what is this private business to do? What would you recommend? Maybe big brother stop them and say, no, you can’t charge for two seats?
See my post above.
Are you a fan of smoking bans? Encroaching of ‘air’ supposedly ‘owned’ by others? Even in their OWN HOMES?
I get tired of explaining this to people. See me in a few years when your ability to travel freely is directly impacting you because you can’t fit into a tiny airline seat or you’re not driving an eco-car and are stopped at the border or are only allowed a certain ration of gas each month because you CHOOSE to drive an SUV or you need a truck for your business.
THEN you can come back and tell me I was correct ‘way back when,’ LOL! You won’t ‘see’ it until then.
I think Bill will still only require one seat. ;^)
Since it is a private company, those who would be charged for an extra seat will simply chose another airline. If enough people vote with their wallets, United will get the message and change the policy.
Of course I haven’t flown in years, too much hassle from the minimum wage powerheads at the TSA, so the airlines haven’t gotten my money since before 9-11.
he doesn’t sit during the flights-he’s in the back trying to talk the flight attendants into joining the “mile high club”.
...or it Bill’s case, its the oval office sink club.
I’m for smokers rights but I’m also for property rights. I support the airline on this one. Their planes, their policy. All another airline has to do is offer “two-for-one” seating for anyone who is overweight, and take their business.
If you need to be right, then I am not going to stop you from trying.
But you might try to realize what most of the freepers on this thread are saying to you.
BTW, if a business wants to, say, ban smoking in the premises, I fully support them. They should be able to allow or disallow smoking or whatever they want. People can vote with their wallets.
“making people get on a scale before boarding”
Like that scene in Twilight Zone, “To Serve Man”?
“It’s a cookbook, it’s a cookbook!!”
;^)
Anyway, I say weigh their fat @sses! I’m sixty, I work my @ss off staying trim (still in the Army Reserve, for the curious) and all these lardbutts do is run up the cost of avgas for the rest of us!
You can travel freely. You just have to pay more to ensure you don’t inconvenience other paying passengers. Way over due.
I think the other airlines should follow suite.
The seats are tight enough; its not fair to have to endure being so close to someone who spills over into my space.
And if you’re just too tall to be comfortable in a coach seat, you should ante up for an upgrade or pay for a business class seat.
Air travel has been really reasonable the last few years, many more people have benefited from cheap tickets. This is a business decision. I’m sure someone may be able to come up with some money making venture to accommodate our larger fellow travelers.
I always try to get an aisle seat so I’m not squeezed and trapped during an 8 hr flight. The airlines have arranged seating so that you have NO ROOM. If you’re flying with a spouse, at least you can lean up against that person. It’s more than uncomfortable having a stranger invading your space for hours. I don’t know how the airlines get away with small seats and no leg room.
That same thing happened to my daughter, who was sitting in the row behind us practically trapped in the middle seat. It was not a good flight.
The truth is this: If the airline won’t MAKE certain seats to accommodate larger people then they NEED to do this. I have had a few uncomfortable experiences but none worse than one poor soul flying with me on a long oversease flight to Athens, Greece. She was in tears. The plane was completely filled to capacity - no empty seats - and she was next to a woman that was basically a human Jabba the Hut. Jabba flowed over to this lady’s seat and was literally crushing her - Jabba couldn’t help it but didn’t hardly realize the weight of her arms was crushing the lady. She couldn’t rest or sleep or anything. A flight attendant gave up her seat to the woman.
Yes.
Exactly.
Let me straighten you out. The people this article is referring to are not the 250 lb men or tall people either - it’s the HUGE people who weigh 350 plus pounds and it’s all gathered within a frame of 5’6”.
I have witnessed this on airline flights many, many times. Don’t confuse TALL with ENORMOUS ELEPHANT SIZE.
But, you know, that isn’t how it works. Many airlines tried to ban smoking on certain routes, and they all had to back off. Nobody would fly those routes.
Of course, they wanted to ban smoking, because it saves fuel. You land in the same can of air you took off in. If the guy next to you has ebola, so do you, so sorry, we saved a nickel.
So they bought a few congresscritters, and made smoking on airlines illegal.
Huh. Congrescritters acting in the “public good”, in a way that will harm us all, and getting paid to do it. Who would have thunk it.
BTW, if you pay for two seats, there is no certainty you will get them - the flight crew can, and does, move people around to balance the airplane,
Boy you aren’t kidding. Like I said on an earlier post, the people who are writing all this stuff about the rights of the obese have never spent 11 plus hours on a flight being crushed by the hamhock hands and treetrunk arms of someone literally spilling over on top of them. Rumor has it someone was once suffocated this way (yes, I’m being sarcastic).
I don’t have a problem charging lard butts for 2 seats. Now on the same note, what about people with small kids that can share a seat. Do the airlines cut the price in half for these kids. I didn’t think so. And the safety argument about 2 per seat will not work here as people with infants fly with the kid in their laps.
I flew back from Italy with my spouse and was overjoyed because the right and left sections had only two seats. Luckily, we were on the right and didn't have anyone invading our space.
“This is about your personal rights being STOLEN from you.”
No it isn’t. United is a private airline and can do whatever they want. Unless you have sat next to someone whose ass takes up their own seat and half of yours you might not understand. Why should I be forced to pay for a full seat then only get half of one because someone with a big ass can’t put the arm rest down?
You were very fortunate. I haven’t had good luck like that since 2001. All my overseas flights since then were pretty crammed but hubby and I are both small so it’s bearable. I do feel for the taller folks.
People like that should be up in first class. It's a nightmare being trapped in your seat for hours with no space. You can't eat properly or get any rest. Forget about going to the restroom...
Seems reasonable to me; but then why do they charge so much for little kids who don’t even weigh a quarter of what a grown man weighs. I would be happy if the airlines charged everybody and every thing in the passenger compartment strictly by the pound, but if they are going to charge the morbidly fat extra, they ought to be able to give the skinnies a little price break too.
Which in this case is going broke from passenger dissatisfaction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.