Airline Asks 300-Pound Woman To Buy Two Seats Woman Headed To Orlando To Visit Dying Brother

Local6.Com ^ | July 3, 2002 | Jackie London

[Hot Soup]

Firstly, YES a 100 percent increase in movie tickets is relatively small. I pay a maximum of $8.25 to see a movie. How far can you fly on $8.25?
As to airline ticket prices going down since 1980, weren't you one of the people who mentioned that seats were getting smaller? I guess that could be a reason.
You say that the airline industry has been unsuccessful for the last 20 years and since I have not been keeping track I will concede the point. However, I can think of several reasons for a decline in air travel, most notably the great jumps in communications technology that we have seen over the past 20 years. Obviously the airlines have concluded that it is not economically feasible to make the seats larger. This may be because they cannot make all of their seats larger for an additional $28 dollars per seat. It may be because they believe that the people who prefer a larger seat but can fit into the ones they now have will continue to fly while others who would not fly at the higher price will do so also.
The point is that the airlines believe that they can please more people and thus make higher profits with the seats they now have. As I said, they may be wrong, but since their living depends on their being correct and neither yours nor that of the company that did the survey you quote does, I put more trust in them.

And sorry, but I still don't believe that it is an issue of public concern. With one quarter of adults in the US being obese, IF all those who fit the technical definition for obese are unable to fit into a single airline seat, we must first subtract all obese adults who never travel by air, then the number who do not travel often enough to encounter the difficulty of trying to fly on a fully booked plane, then the number who fly first class(in larger seats) then the number who are willing to be curteous to their fellow passengers and buy another seat. At this point I think we have reached a small enough number to say that the issue is not of public concern and the few people who do have a problem should setlle it privately with the private airline.
Keep in mind that even if the problem were of public concern, it would still not warrant any sort of government action since it is still an issue of private businesses and their customers.

[glorygirl]

I took the liberty of checking out your homepage, and found a thread titled, ironically, "Licenses to Exist." It includes this quote:

"I understand that, in Iraq, when Saddam Hussein decides that somebody is on his enemies list, that person's siblings, parents, spouse, children, aunts, uncles, and other various family members are also routinely rounded up and abused or killed, the better to coerce everybody into toeing the line. He arrogantly doesn't even bother to hide or disguise this practice, in fact publicizes it, and tells us liberal pinko commie weaklings who raise silly issues like "human rights," and the "rule of law," to bugger off because he'll do whatever he damn well pleases, whether we like it or not."

"Obviously, this policy exists in America, too. The difference is that no one here will acknowledge it, but instead everyone pretends that the rule of law is intact, and that people's rights are taken seriously. On this particular point, Saddam is more honest."

It is very sad to me, on the Fourth of July, that people like yourself are absolutely convinced you are in the right about the theme of this thread, and can't see the correlation.

I would be willing to bet, from your statements and your logic, that you are too young to remember a time when the government did control the airlines, too young too understand why the movie industry is more successful at winning and wooing customers than the airline industry is, too young to have learned NEVER to make assumptions (how do you know my living doesn't depend on being right about the airline industry?), too young and affluent to understand that purchasing a second seat is NOT a matter of courtesy, but of finances for most, too young to have any concept of "middle-age spread,"and too young to remember a time when people were simply kinder to each other, no matter their appearance or behavior.

I worry a great deal about what will happen to the baby-boomers in retirement, when those who are younger take over the reins of government. If we last that long. Thank God there are so many of us.

Or maybe not. After all, the baby boomers, ostensibly, are the ones who are in charge now.

[Tall_Texan]

Had to get in on this sooner or later, I work for the company, celebrated 19yrs this past weekend.

And a great company it is - the only one making money in the industry last year. Didn't even go whining to the federal government for a handout after 9-11. It's not for everybody, but I'm glad that you and Vanguard are there.

The policy sounds fair to me. It's not fat bias, it's simple supply-and-demand marketing. If you take up more than one seat, you gotta pay for more than one seat. I think they are being quite reasonable to only enforce this on full flights. Most of the time, the heavyweights are getting a bonus seat at no cost.

[Tall_Texan]

If you don't fit between the two arm rests you need to buy another seat.

What I'd really like to see is a demo seat at the ticket counter with a measurement that says

"If your ass is wider than this:

(----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------)

...you need to buy a second ticket."

Little kids would go crazy in it.

[danmar]

I just think embarassing people with a problem is rude.

How about cutting down on Mickey D's burgers for a change? What's obvious is obvious, why going around beating the bushes?

[danmar]

, even in an instance where the airline was blantantly wrong in this circumstance.

And what credentials do you have in order to criticise the said airline policy? What makes you an expert in this case?...care to elaborate?

[JudyB1938]

There IS a difference between an airline seat and a theater seat. If you don't like where you're sitting at the movies, YOU CAN MOVE or LEAVE. On an airplane, you are held "captive" in your assigned seat until the flight is over.

[peteram]

Wow, I'm glad this wasn't enforced in '95 when I flew while I was 7 months pregnant

I don't think any airline would do that to a pregnant woman, so no worry there.

On another point - maybe what airlines should do is place a row of airline seats at each gate area ticket counter. If there is a question on the agent's part, he/she could have the passenger sit in the seat. If the passenger has to flip up the arm rest to fit comfotably, then they pay for an additional seat. If not - no problem.

[Rodney King]

So the Golden Rule means that it is ok for someone to spill over in to my seat and ruin my flight, but it is not okay for me to want to fly an airline that does not allow that?
You are being selfish. You simply want something for nothing, just like a liberal. You want two seats, but you only want to pay for one.

[Rodney King]

EXCUSE ME? I am overweight, yes, you are right about that, and I have two young children, 4 and 2, both of which I would have to pay FULL PRICE for anyway. You bet I'd be blowing it up on the news if they made me pay for a FOURTH seat when we all fit adequately in the three we already purchased(again read the story, this woman is in a similar situation). What's it to you if I spill into my 2 yr olds seat that I PAID for

Well, that's a good point. I think this shows the difficulty of having a perfect rule, because I believe that the vast majority of tubby fliers do not fit into this category. Most are spilling over into the seats of others.

[waterstraat]

Restaurants have always charged more for the meals of fat people, why not charge more for the seats? 10 hamburgers, 5 fries, 3 cokes, and dessert have always cost more than 1 hamburger, 1 fry, and 1 coke. Large size dresses (the size of army tents) also cost more than petite size dresses because more material is used in making it.

[Ditter]

Again I will say, "you are mistaking anger for hate". If the obese person on the plane is not happy about sitting 'on me' in the plane, why don't they buy 2 seats? I would if I weighed 300 lbs. Instead they raise the armrest & expand into my space. Deny it, you can't, because they do it. They do it because they figure they can get away with it. I agree, the airlines have made the seats too small but everyone enjoys the low fares that are the result. It is fighting against higher fares that is the issue with the obese, not being embarrassed or uncomfortable. The airlines are selling space, what is wrong with the people who need more space paying for it? As far as BO is concerned, I sat next to a portly young woman at a sporting event over the weekend, she had attemped to fight the BO with some kind of sweet smelling perfume but nature won out. I left early because of that. BO is everywhere.

Yes, the free market will settle it & cheaper seats will win in a walk.

[Nuke'm Glowing]

Actually, it's not so bad. I quit flying Delta and American because they make their seats for everyone who is 5'8 and under 150 lbs. I love Southwest and AirTrans. I don't really care that they are the "budget" airlines, I just like getting there on time. Not to mention, I didn't see those two airlines paying their executive bonuses like the big 3 did THEN go to the .gov for the bailout loans...

[Ditter]

BTW what do my 7 ampersands have to do with the discussion? Looks like you are a little angry yourself or are you trying to distract me?

[RAT Patrol]

Not to mention, I didn't see those two airlines paying their executive bonuses like the big 3 did THEN go to the .gov for the bailout loans...

Now that's a good point!

[GUIDO]

IF THE FLIGHT IS FULL, then it doesn't matter whos seat she spills over into. If she is spilling into her cousins grandmothers father-in-law she is still taking up another seat and the flight is FULL. If there are plenty of empty seats then fine no charge.

[Sci Fi Guy]

I expect to get flamed, but all web sites that are large should pay twice as much. All owners of large suv should pay twice the fuel tax. Where do we stop?

Sorry, but it's an flawed comparison. This is not being done to punish them, but to make them pay for what they use. SUV owners do pay more because an SUV requires more gas than a smaller car.

A comparsion for what we are doing now, would be selling the SUV cheaper gas because since they require more, it will balance out. Just like bigger people demanding to only buy one ticket, when because of their size they require more space.

And I am sure that larger websites do have greater expenses than smaller sites.

[Ditter]

Excellent analogy, but my Chev Tahoe doesn't use twice the gas, it gets 18 1/2 MPG on the highway & 16 1/2 in town. Show me the car that gets 1/2 that.

[Publius6961]

I just think embarassing people with a problem is rude.

And I think that presuming to raise the armrest and making a fellow passenger experience a 5 hour flight from hell is ruder.

[RAT Patrol]

And I think that presuming to raise the armrest and making a fellow passenger experience a 5 hour flight from hell is ruder. I can't really argue with that specific point. I think that the airline should accomodate these people just like they do handicapped people. No one should get squished in their seats. (seats that are too small to begin with)

Yes, it is self-inflicted, but only to a point. Unlike with handicapped people, I don't really think it requires a government solution. It does bother me that so many people seem so comfortable making fun of fat people. I believe in personal responsibility and certainly fat people reap plenty of health problem paybacks for their overeating.

I agree with the conservative view that it isn't the government's business what a private company does (within reason). That would apply in this case. I also think that targeting fat people for double fare is unfair and I would be more proud of my conservative friends if they showed a tiny bit of compassion from time to time.