• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

Should Obese Passengers Pay More to Fly ?

Joined
27 November 2002
Messages
5,796
Location
NyC
passenger_1532425c-%5Bgadling-bumper%5D.jpg


A photo of an obese airplane passenger has inspired a passionate debate as to whether or not overweight fliers should pay more. Last week we said that they should and we asked you what you thought. We heard from over 2,000 of you and, overwhelmingly, you agree with us. Here, some of the comments from both sides:

The airline's position:

The photo in question is believed to have been taken from American Airlines. We spoke with American Airlines media spokesperson Tim Smith to get his take on the situation. Here's what he had to say:

"We are currently in the process of looking into this situation. We do have a policy that tries to be flexible for passengers of size. Certainly no passenger would ever be allowed to fly on American Airlines in any way that obstructs the aisles of the aircraft, and all passengers must be properly seat-belted—part of the FAA rules. It is very obvious in the photo that the aircraft is not inflight at the time the photo was taken—other passengers are still boarding and several overhead bins are still open. We can assure you that all passengers on this flight were safely and comfortably accommodated, and that no FAA rules were broken."

Tim says that they don't "routinely charge for an extra seat unless there are simply no other options. Our people are trained to work with customers to try and accommodate ALL passengers onboard. Often, pending how full the flight is, we can get everyone taken care of." Tim adds that "each situation is handled individually on a case-by-case basis with utmost professionalism and discretion." He also cites FAA rules on the matter, which state that "all passengers must use FAA required restraint devices" and that "no aisle may be blocked by any passenger or bags in case of emergency."

Larger passengers should pay larger fees:

This man violates FAA standards for safety.
As an airline captain I can tell you that passenger depicted in your article does not meet FAA standards for safety. More important than passenger comfort or even emergency egress issues, in the event of a crash sequence, the overweight passenger could cause death to surrounding passengers as he is not safely secured. At our airline, and I know at Southwest, obese passengers must pay for two seats. It has nothing to do with fair treatment; it has to do with total passenger weight which is limited to 190 per passenger for weight and balance, on average. They certainly would be considered handicapped as they could not exit as normal passengers would. There is absolutely no discrimination here. Weight is weight; if your bag exceeds 50 pounds, prepare to pay extra, same for passengers.

People need to pay their share.
It fits right in with the 100-pound. traveler toting 3-4 pieces of gigantic luggage, it's about time people people pay their share.

They should pay more and board last.
I think oversized passengers should have to pay for two seats and be located where the last person(s) to exit in an emergency so as to enable able-bodied passengers to escape rapidly. An exception would be when empty seats are available after all seat requests (stand-by, etc.) are satisfied. They should also either board early or last so as not to hold up the whole boarding process.

There should be a "demo" seat at the ticket counter—don't fit? Pay more.
Perhaps the airline should put a “demo” seat at the ticket counter—if your posterior luggage does not fit into the space, then you should have to buy a bigger space. Currently the same rules apply to oversized luggage. In looking at the picture, I wonder how the stewardess could fit the beverage cart down the aisle or how any passengers could access the lavatory.

Overweight passengers put other travelers at risk.
Absolutely. Since airlines treat us (and now our luggage) as nothing more than "packages" and charge us by weight on our luggage, why not charge morbidly obese people based on their additional weight? Think of this scenario: a convention of morbidly obese people is being held in San Francisco and a group of 150 morbidly obese people get together to fly there from Philadelphia. All that additional weight makes the plane unsafe to fly and the average-weight passengers on that flight have their lives put at risk, their comfort compromised by the "overflow" from the obese passenger sitting next to them, and the safety hazard of having a morbidly obese person blocking the aisle for exits in emergencies.

If you take up more than one seat, you should pay for two.
I'm not a lightweight, but I am constantly battling to keep myself healthy at 65 years of age. However, having traveled in coach with people who are “obese”, I really feel that if you take up more than one seat, you should pay for more than one seat. I traveled across the US seated next to a severely overweight young lady. She sat by the window and I sat in the middle. The aisle seat was taken up by a huge person as well. For five hours I was in sheer misery. I could not use either armrest because they could not be put down due to the excess flesh from both sides encroaching on my seat. If there had been a crash, I would have been overwhelmed by both these people trying to get out.

I'm a flight attendant and we frequently end up re-arranging seat patterns to put children next to obese passengers.
As a 20+ year flight attendant with a major carrier, we are not to address the obesity/space issue unless another passenger expresses their concern or displeasure—which they inevitably do not until we are airborne! Our only other company directive is to "attempt to re-seat passengers in order to accommodate the larger individual"! So, in addition to stowing a ridiculous number of bags because no one is willing to "utilize the space beneath their seats" and trying to cram in the tiniest possible articles into the overhead bins, we are now expected to rearrange the entire aircraft to put children beside obese passengers.

It's only fair to charge for two seats.
I'm overweight but not obese. I can comfortably fit into any seat on the plane, but if I were over, say 300 pounds. I think I'd prefer two seats so I'm not embarrassed by squashing the person next to me. I know everyone is scared of discrimination suits and that obesity is a disease, but you are legally fitting into two seats and therefore, I think you should pay for it.


It's discrimination to charge overweight travelers more:

It is discrimination.
It is discrimination. Period. Yes, airplanes have weight limits that must be followed for physical principles of flight; however, one person, no matter how much they weigh, should only have to pay for one ticket.

There's a lot more to worry about than someone's size.
Pay more?! Safety issue?! Screw that!!! The man in the picture wouldn't be any slower to exit than the harried lady with 4 kids, or the drunk businessman who can't figure which way to move, or the diva with her mink and manicure and purse. In other words, there's a lot more to worry about than someone's size.

The concept of "two seats" is deplorable.
That picture is me. I weigh 450 pounds. I fly constantly. My position is that I am one person, and to treat me differently is nothing short of discrimination. I would gladly pay extra for a larger, more comfortable seat—should one be available. What they should do, what no one suggests, is to make a bench seat, to accomodate handicapped individuals, or those who want more comfort, and charge accordingly. But the concept of "two seats" is deplorable.

This is the airlines' fault for being greedy.
I am a large person of approximately 350 pounds and I work in the business aviation field. I can personally testify that the seats used in many commuter jets nowadays are built smaller for fuel savings and payload. Blame the interior design engineers for these sorry passenger jets and the greed that paid for it before you point fingers at larger people. It is a medical fact that all of our population is getting larger and taller. If you believe that forcing larger people to pay for two seats is the answer, good luck paying the bills in the future!

Obese people have the same rights as anyone else.
As far as I'm concerned obese people have the same rights as anyone else and shouldn't be penalized like excess baggage. We all know, except for the privileged few, that airline seats are made as tiny as possible so as to accommodate as many fliers, and thus increase revenue. On the other hand, if you're small, why shouldn't you receive a reduced fare if overweight people are charged extra? Would you, personally, be willing to sit between two NFL linemen each weighing in at 375 pounds if you could get an interview with some famous people?

If heavier people have to pay, so should those with screaming children.
The airlines keep squeezing in more and more seats—when I first started flying, there were two seats on either side of the aisle—not three. Then they added the third seat on both sides and diminished the width of the seats. Why should heavier persons have to pay the difference? It's the greed of the airlines that has caused the problem. If the heavier person has to pay more—then those people with screaming children should have to pay more for the disturbance they cause. The list can go on and on.



There is more but I didnt want to copy it all please check the link and take the poll

http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/...debate-continues?ncid=AOLCOMMtravdynlprim0709
 
my take is no matter what they will be charging more per person anyways each year if our society is okay for excepting "curves" etc etc. They need to pay for fuel and there is no way in heck that guy in the pic is going to move as fast as a mother and 4 kids.
 
I have not read the whole article. By looking at the picture, how can he feel comfortable for a long fly even if he has to pay for extra for additional seat ( he might have to buy the whole row). Not only that, the passenger who is next to him cannot be comfortable either ( I would be very mad to be the passenger sitting next to him)
 
Here is my opinion on the matter....I think they should have bench seating for obese people and they get charged for more... simply because the airline is losing money on the extra seat they would have gotten paid for a person that fits in the chair....just like if you want to eat more you pay more....you use up more material then you get charged more.....

There was a dumb comment on how if they should charge less for skinny people....of course you wouldn't because the skinny person fits in their seat and is not infringing on the other persons space......:rolleyes:

Most of the obese people out there is by choice and letting themselves go.....there a few with thyroid or physical problems that make them obese....those people should have a placard or documentation, so they don't get charged extra for a seat....those are the people I can say hey its not your fault and its really a physical problem you have there......otherwise for the people who let themselves get that big then shame on you....you get charged more for having to get bench seating for yourself or you should pay for two seats or three.....:eek:
 
There was a dumb comment on how if they should charge less for skinny people....of course you wouldn't because the skinny person fits in their seat and is not infringing on the other persons space......:rolleyes:

Ramon could fly for free!!
 
I have always wondered how an airline like Japan's JAL does with fuel usage.

Lots of small Japanese people and few sumo sized people compared to American/European airlines.
 
YES they should. The comparison to discrimination is ridiculous. Size and weight to that degree is a lifestyle choice and against regulations. It isn't discrimination when you have a choice or endangers the safety of others. Otherwise, the non-smoking is discriminating to smokers and not allowing people to talk on their cel phones is discriminating to anyone who feels they need to talk on their phone.

You are allowed one spot in a standardized seat, just like you are allowed on carryon to fit in the overhead space. If your bag doesn't fit, then you must pay to check the bag in. Same goes for people, if you don't fit in the seat, then you must pay. Conversely, even if you don't use the overhead space, you don't pay less or get a credit. So if you are a smaller person or weigh less, you don't get a credit or discount. You paid for that spot regardless of how much of it you use. However, if you use more than your allocated space, then you need to pay.
 
YES they should. The comparison to discrimination is ridiculous. Size and weight to that degree is a lifestyle choice and against regulations. It isn't discrimination when you have a choice or endangers the safety of others. Otherwise, the non-smoking is discriminating to smokers and not allowing people to talk on their cel phones is discriminating to anyone who feels they need to talk on their phone.

You are allowed one spot in a standardized seat, just like you are allowed on carryon to fit in the overhead space. If your bag doesn't fit, then you must pay to check the bag in. Same goes for people, if you don't fit in the seat, then you must pay. Conversely, even if you don't use the overhead space, you don't pay less or get a credit. So if you are a smaller person or weigh less, you don't get a credit or discount. You paid for that spot regardless of how much of it you use. However, if you use more than your allocated space, then you need to pay.
Cogent!
Steve
 
Slippery slope fellas. Be careful what you wish for.

Should they charge more tolls for NSX's because they "only" have 2 seats? Most cars have at least four, and thus can carry more people more efficiently.

How about a two seat car tax, since obviously we're wasting potential fuel?


I agree btw, that weight should be kept in check... but we do still live in the "land of the free"... so do what thy will with your body.

I guess on the flip side, we generally pay more insurance than a Prius, but that's a different industry. I've always hated to be stuck next to the "fat" guy on an airplane... maybe they could stick them all together in the back? Oh wait, that would be like segregation...
 
Last edited:
Yes. They should pay more. I'm tired of sitting next to these huge people who are half way eating in to my seat. I paid for my ticket, why should they infringe upon my comfort. Fair is fair. You are heavier, you should pay more.

And please stop with the slippery slope argument. It's a classic fallacy and assumes a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some drastic outcome. It assumes no middle ground and we're all brainless. This is simply a matter of fairness. When I send 4 wheels cross country, I should naturally pay more than sending one wheel.
 
that guys a giant like 8ft tall based on the pic, is that shopped?

It does look a bit funny. I don't think it is shopped because this pic is listed on a lot of major media sites and someone would have cried foul before now.

It looks like to me that the guy is sort-of sitting on the outboard arm rest with his leg extended to the floor on the one side. Almost like he was just visiting someone for a few minutes and BS'ing before returning to his seat. Or maybe he was uncomfortable sitting in that seat due to his bulk and was sort-of half standing to stretch out a bit.

I have a large friend who weighs about 425lbs. He hates booths in restaurants - too tight.

He has broken many chairs , including a couple of mine. :frown:
 
Slippery slope fellas. Be careful what you wish for.

Should they charge more tolls for NSX's because they "only" have 2 seats? Most cars have at least four, and thus can carry more people more efficiently.

How about a two seat car tax, since obviously we're wasting potential fuel?


I agree btw, that weight should be kept in check... but we do still live in the "land of the free"... so do what thy will with your body.

I guess on the flip side, we generally pay more insurance than a Prius, but that's a different industry. I've always hated to be stuck next to the "fat" guy on an airplane... maybe they could stick them all together in the back? Oh wait, that would be like segregation...

I see where you are going with this and I like these types of rationales. (Heck I used them all the time to make points :smile:). But there is a major fallacy in your thinking. Rights are rights and you have the right to do what you want with your body........

UNTIL.....

It infringes upon someone else's rights/freedoms/lifestyle. So if you like to walk around naked all day long in your own house (hey, a little birdie told me :biggrin::tongue:) then that's your freedom. But as soon as you step outside naked and impose your naked preference upon my eyes, then you've violated my rights. That's why smoking is all but banned in most public places. A smoker has a right to smoke, but the second his smoke then enters the lung of people around him, his right now has infringed upon other peoples' rights.

So in the case of a big/fat person, when they spill out beyond their allocated space, they then begin to infringe on other people such as nearby passengers and flight attendants. In which case they need to make concessions (such as smokers who have to take their habit outside) to accommodate the rights of others.

In the case of a car/toll, the number of seats is irrelevant because an SUV with more seats doesn't infringe upon your rights. If anything, the SUV should get a discount because they may be carrying more passengers than your NSX which is actually a better value for everyone. That's why many tolls charge by the axel; to avoid this argument.

On a bit of a tangent, let's not relegate this to fat people only. This is not discrimination against fat people at all. It's a practicality and reasoning argument. The same would apply for a very fit and trim but extremely muscular and tall bodybuilder. If they can't fit in the allocated seat without infringing upon others, then yes, they need to pay. Another example is: suppose I broke my leg and was in a cast where I couldn't bend my leg. The only way I was able to sit in a seat is if kept my leg straight. If I can't keep it stuck straight out in aisle and the only way would be to lay it across the seat next to me, would it be fair to the person in that seat that I draped my leg across his/her lap? Or would it be more fair if I bought two seats and laid my leg across the empty seat I paid for?
 
Yes... by getting the business class or first class seats.

I've seen this happened at check-ins, passenger with economy/normal class ticket demand to be upgraded as they won't fit comfortably in the seat they've bought.

Might be slightly off topic.
I remembered being told of a story about an obese passenger after boarding an aircraft was not able to sit or even fit comfortably in the normal class making passenger next to him really uncomfortable as well. The obese man demanded that he be upgraded to the business class as the seat would be bigger....
The crew did find an available business class seat .... but gave it to the passenger next to the demanding obese passenger.
 
So lets change this to: Should people who work out too much and have wide shoulders have to pay more to fly??

I mean, where do you draw the line. Then there's the argument (which was mentioned) of the people who can't help but be fat. Eating disorders play a huge role, and while some people could probably help themselves, many can not.

Perhaps the anorexic chick in seat 4b should pay less? Maybe we could stick her next to the huge fat guy and even things out.

Again, as a person who works out regularly, and tries to take care of my body, I understand the frustration that people feel when it comes to others that don't. Kinda like when you work really hard to keep your lawn/yard looking good and your neighbor parks his broken down VW bug next to his rusty snowmobile in his tall savannah grass that he calls his "yard".

They do charge more for overweight suit cases... so shall we all raise our hands and get "weighed" in ourselves when we start flying now?

Anyone over 200lbs pays an extra $10 per 5lbs over per flight. I would like to see how that would go over.
 
I see where you are going with this and I like these types of rationales. (Heck I used them all the time to make points :smile:). But there is a major fallacy in your thinking. Rights are rights and you have the right to do what you want with your body........

UNTIL.....

It infringes upon someone else's rights/freedoms/lifestyle. So if you like to walk around naked all day long in your own house (hey, a little birdie told me :biggrin::tongue:) then that's your freedom. But as soon as you step outside naked and impose your naked preference upon my eyes, then you've violated my rights. That's why smoking is all but banned in most public places. A smoker has a right to smoke, but the second his smoke then enters the lung of people around him, his right now has infringed upon other peoples' rights.

So in the case of a big/fat person, when they spill out beyond their allocated space, they then begin to infringe on other people such as nearby passengers and flight attendants. In which case they need to make concessions (such as smokers who have to take their habit outside) to accommodate the rights of others.

In the case of a car/toll, the number of seats is irrelevant because an SUV with more seats doesn't infringe upon your rights. If anything, the SUV should get a discount because they may be carrying more passengers than your NSX which is actually a better value for everyone. That's why many tolls charge by the axel; to avoid this argument.

On a bit of a tangent, let's not relegate this to fat people only. This is not discrimination against fat people at all. It's a practicality and reasoning argument. The same would apply for a very fit and trim but extremely muscular and tall bodybuilder. If they can't fit in the allocated seat without infringing upon others, then yes, they need to pay. Another example is: suppose I broke my leg and was in a cast where I couldn't bend my leg. The only way I was able to sit in a seat is if kept my leg straight. If I can't keep it stuck straight out in aisle and the only way would be to lay it across the seat next to me, would it be fair to the person in that seat that I draped my leg across his/her lap? Or would it be more fair if I bought two seats and laid my leg across the empty seat I paid for?

I agree with you 100%.
 
An SUV doesn't infringe on your rights until it plows into you.
:smile:

Agreed. But neither does a mini cooper. And both can hurt ya pretty good. :biggrin:
 
An SUV doesn't infringe on your rights until it plows into you.
:smile:

Yup and a gun can hurt and kill too. But last I checked guns are still legal too (fingers crossed! :biggrin:). The way our laws are set up we can't penalize people for the "potential" of infringing on other peoples rights. An SUV has the ability to hurt/kill you, but no different than you have the potential to get very fat. However, until you do, you can't be penalized. So until you actually get to 600 lbs or you plow your SUV through a farmers market, you can't be penalized for something you haven't done yet. Unfortately, the guy in the picture is already big and is already infringing on other peoples rights. So in that case, I think he should most definitely be penalized. :smile:
 
They do charge more for overweight suit cases... so shall we all raise our hands and get "weighed" in ourselves when we start flying now?

Anyone over 200lbs pays an extra $10 per 5lbs over per flight. I would like to see how that would go over.

You're argument is skewed again.....200lbs doesnt mean you're going to spill into another persons seat.....depends on your height.....and we are talking infringing on another persons area and or having to take up two seats or more......wide shoulders the guy can always lean to the left a little without making it bad.....I never seen anyone on a plane that has shoulders so wide that they can't fit in the seat......that is rare.....and usually those guys I would assume get business or first class because they know they would need it.

and as far as charging per lb over weight.....why? we are talking if the person needs two or more seats or not....not based on per pound....its black and white.....

u need more than one seat....you pay more.....has nothing to do with being against obese people......its only fair to the airlines....you should not be getting two seats for the price of one if you need it.....

and I am sorry we should not be accepting that its ok to be obese or fat.......
I am not saying treat big people bad...I am simply saying it should not be okay to say hey little timmy your 200lbs and border line diabetic, but hey its ok!

Look at all the programs for school for kids pushing better nutrition because our kids are getting fat, eating all that junkfood.

Not everyone needs to be a model, but its good to be healthy and in shape for your own sake.
 
So lets change this to: Should people who work out too much and have wide shoulders have to pay more to fly??

Yes. See my post above, where I actually give this exact example. Again, that's a lifestyle choice. Race, gender, height, those are things we shouldn't discriminate against. But size, whether it is fat or muscle, or choices, such as smoking etc. should be contained and limited if it infringes upon other people's rights.
 
Regardless of the reason you're "big", whether it's fat or broad shoulders (really?) if you take up more than one seat, then you pay for more than one. It's simple.

Is it discrimination? Yes it is. And I don't care. If you want two steaks, you pay for two. If you need two seats, then you pay for two. Suppose that guy has to go out an overwing emergency exit. And doesn't fit. I don't care how "discriminatory" it is, just because he has the "right" to fly with the rest of us doesn't mean it's safe. So people die because he (or she) can't fit out the exit? Bullshit. Maybe the metal detectors at security should be the size of emergency exits. Don't get through? Then I guess you're driving.
 
Back
Top