ForumGarden

It's in the news that airlines are thinking of weighing passengers and charge extra for overweight people.



Let's establish right off the bat that this has nothing to do with fat people causing so much strain on the engines that they use appreciably more fuel. The airlines are losing money and are looking for a plausible excuse to charge more.



If it has to happen, why not just put a scale platform in front of the ticket agent? They can check total combined weight of passenger and bags, and charge for the extra poundage. That way there's no discrimination against overweight people. Blame it on the suitcase if you want.



What do you think?

I was just listening to that argument on Fox News, I do not think they should charge for a person's weight.

I have heard they are going to charge for each piece of baggage, that will make me pack one big large bag. But it will still probably weigh the same as two.

It is discrimination no matter how you word it. Once it's made about people, be it combined weight of them and luggage its discrimination. If it is a charge for and extra bag or the weight of the BAG then its not.

[QUOTE]It's in the news that airlines are thinking of weighing passengers and charge extra for overweight people.[/QUOTE]

I think it's completely wrong and discriminating. In this PC age, fat people are the only ones left to take the brunt. It's an ill-conceived idea by ill-mannered bigwigs.

What if the over large people require 2 seats, should that be an extra charge?

oh let me add to this... is it discrimination when you check in at the airport and the staff looks at you and sizes you up and utters "good, we can seat her here" (yes I heard it out loud). And when I get to my seat I am set next to a person who took up his entire seat and about 1/3 of mine.

Incidentally I took the same flight again another year and yet again was placed next to an over large person, and I have to wonder if my seating arrangements are due to the fact I am ... under large.

Don't worry I am not taking an angry stance here it's just a curiosity there on my part.

chonsigirl;883684 wrote: I was just listening to that argument on Fox News, I do not think they should charge for a person's weight.

I have heard they are going to charge for each piece of baggage, that will make me pack one big large bag. But it will still probably weigh the same as two.


When I flew to florida earlier this year we had to wait while a group in front of us repacked their bags. Apparently not only was there a charge for extra bags, but each checked bag could only weigh so much.

The rest of us were not very amused as 4 girls redistributed 12 lbs between them..:rolleyes:

minks;883767 wrote: What if the over large people require 2 seats, should that be an extra charge?

oh let me add to this... is it discrimination when you check in at the airport and the staff looks at you and sizes you up and utters "good, we can seat her here" (yes I heard it out loud). And when I get to my seat I am set next to a person who took up his entire seat and about 1/3 of mine.

Incidentally I took the same flight again another year and yet again was placed next to an over large person, and I have to wonder if my seating arrangements are due to the fact I am ... under large.

Don't worry I am not taking an angry stance here it's just a curiosity there on my part.


Absolutely you should pay for two seats if you are using two seats. Optionally you can buy a ticket in the front of the plane for one of those larger seats. It's absolutely NOT discriminating to be limited to the seating you have paid for, IMO.

minks;883767 wrote: What if the over large people require 2 seats, should that be an extra charge?

oh let me add to this... is it discrimination when you check in at the airport and the staff looks at you and sizes you up and utters "good, we can seat her here" (yes I heard it out loud). And when I get to my seat I am set next to a person who took up his entire seat and about 1/3 of mine.

Incidentally I took the same flight again another year and yet again was placed next to an over large person, and I have to wonder if my seating arrangements are due to the fact I am ... under large.

Don't worry I am not taking an angry stance here it's just a curiosity there on my part.


My personal opinion? No, I don't think they should have to buy more seating. I do understand the other side to that, however it's a natural fact that our society loathes fat people. What may look to you as fair to the heavy person is going to feel like punishment.

As for where they place you, I wouldn't know if that was planned or coincidental. I understand the seats are already cramped (especially on Southwest Airlines, boo hiss!) but so what? It's just another thing the unfortunate person has to tolerate in the same vein you tolerate a loud person who talks too much sitting next to you or someone wearing too much perfume or someone's screaming baby.We don't discriminate against any of those examples so if it's not a matter of the plane carrying too much weight, then why is it okay to essentially punish a person for being big?

Two seats should cost two tickets.

Accountable;883681 wrote: It's in the news that airlines are thinking of weighing passengers and charge extra for overweight people.



Let's establish right off the bat that this has nothing to do with fat people causing so much strain on the engines that they use appreciably more fuel. The airlines are losing money and are looking for a plausible excuse to charge more.



If it has to happen, why not just put a scale platform in front of the ticket agent? They can check total combined weight of passenger and bags, and charge for the extra poundage. That way there's no discrimination against overweight people. Blame it on the suitcase if you want.



What do you think?


About time!

Well sort of, I support the concept not so much because of the weight factor, but because I am tired of sitting next to a person with a body mass index of 200 and being squeezed into the aisle or pressed together in the middle seat. Discrimination, right, against me. :wah:

but because I am tired of sitting next to a person with a body mass index of 200 and being squeezed into the aisle or pressed together in the middle seat. Discrimination, right, against me. :wah:


Perhaps the problem iies with the fact that their regulation seats are too small and less with the size of the unfortunate person sitting next to you.

RedGlitter;883796 wrote: My personal opinion? No, I don't think they should have to buy more seating. I do understand the other side to that, however it's a natural fact that our society loathes fat people. What may look to you as fair to the heavy person is going to feel like punishment.

As for where they place you, I wouldn't know if that was planned or coincidental. I understand the seats are already cramped (especially on Southwest Airlines, boo hiss!) but so what? It's just another thing the unfortunate person has to tolerate in the same vein you tolerate a loud person who talks too much sitting next to you or someone wearing too much perfume or someone's screaming baby.We don't discriminate against any of those examples so if it's not a matter of the plane carrying too much weight, then why is it okay to essentially punish a person for being big?


No I don't think that is so, and not quite right to say it's a natural fact. You can't lump everybody together and say we all loath fat people. There are people who loath skinny people too Glitter but not all of society.

Yes airline seats are cramped we get what we pay for. If I had issues with the cramped general seating I would have upped my class of seating. I was just a little put off 2 times when it felt like they sized me up and put me into a 2/3's of a seat, my own seat a seat I paid for, for me 100% of the seat... hmmmm felt a little like punishment for being skinny. Please understand something too in saying this Glitter... life isn't always kind to stick people either...

Minks, I'm not sure why you took personally what I said. It wasn't meant personally but was meant as my own view on how I see things. If you were to look around American society, you would see that in the collective eye, the worst thing anyone could be is fat. We are bombarded with ads for diet pills, skads of exercise devices, gym memberships, Nutrisystem, Jenny Craig, blablabla, be anything but don't be fat! To be fat according to society is to be slothful, lazy and weak. Loathsome. I find that attitude unacceptable and as for the airline seats, I see it as just another way to stick it to the fat people.

I never said thin people had it easy, however they are not vilified by society nearly as much as heavy people are.

You sound like a helpless victim.

Accountable;883949 wrote: You sound like a helpless victim.


Not at all Accountable. Just tired of seeing heavy people treated as if they were second class.

RedGlitter;883959 wrote: Not at all Accountable. Just tired of seeing heavy people treated as if they were second class.
Heavy people aren't a class at all. I'll continue in this on the condition that we all understand we're talking generically.

How do you mean? If we're targeting a specific group of people how can that be generic?

Accountable;883969 wrote: Heavy people aren't a class at all. I'll continue in this on the condition that we all understand we're talking generically.


Sure they are. Or are you saying we aren't classy???:wah:

http://www.yourdictionary.com/class

...........Gram. in some languages, the formal classification by which nouns are grouped according to animateness, sex, shape, and other criteria

RedGlitter;883971 wrote: How do you mean? If we're targeting a specific group of people how can that be generic?
Mentally speaking, keep it at that group level. If I continue I expect to be, well, somewhat unvarnished. I don't want to damage friendships over a conversation because someone took it personally. It just ain't that important.

Accountable;883984 wrote: Mentally speaking, keep it at that group level. If I continue I expect to be, well, somewhat unvarnished. I don't want to damage friendships over a conversation because someone took it personally. It just ain't that important.


Oh ok. No problems here.....

Why not charge for total weight of passenger AND luggage. If your traveling light you could auction off your underweight allowance and travel cheaper . The whole weight thing is bit of a con really anyway, if it was that serious for the airline they would only allow a set weight allowance for each passenger with no exceptions. By letting you pay for excess baggage they are admitting it is only a cash raising scheme nothing else.

RedGlitter;883796 wrote: My personal opinion? No, I don't think they should have to buy more seating. I do understand the other side to that, however it's a natural fact that our society loathes fat people. What may look to you as fair to the heavy person is going to feel like punishment.At what point would it become unreasonable to expect accommodation?

Accountable;883995 wrote: At what point would it become unreasonable to expect accommodation?


*Duh* Sorry Acc, my brain is only halfway working today. Could you rephrase the question please?

If you require two seats then you should pay for two seats...Other than that NO larger people shouldnt have to pay anymore than anyone else.

Here is Southwest Airline's policy:

http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/cos_qa.html

I always fly with them and I'm nowhere big enough that I require even a seat and a half but I'll tell you what, their seats are a damned joke!

So is this policy because it pretends to care about the comfort of the passengers the fat person is intruding upon, however where's their policy for other comforts? I flew from Seattle to Vegas with a sloppy drunk sitting next to me and they still brought him MORE drinks. He reeked of stale booze. Shouldn't they put him in a seat by himself and charge him for encroaching upon my comfort? Does anyone see where I'm going with this?:o

RedGlitter;883997 wrote: *Duh* Sorry Acc, my brain is only halfway working today. Could you rephrase the question please?
You insinuated that airlines charge overweight people for two seats is because the airlines loathe them. At what point, if any, would it be reasonable to charge a passenger extra? Three seats? And if a wide person can have extra room for free, why can't, say, a claustrophobe?



How much expense should an airline suck up for a customer's convenience?

Accountable;884016 wrote: You insinuated that airlines charge overweight people for two seats is because the airlines loathe them. At what point, if any, would it be reasonable to charge a passenger extra? Three seats? And if a wide person can have extra room for free, why can't, say, a claustrophobe?



How much expense should an airline suck up for a customer's convenience?


Thanks for clarifying your Q, Acc.

It's not specifically the airlines who loathe heavy people, I was saying it is our society in general. Insurance companies, doctors, clothing retailers, those are just a few who either charge more for heavy people or treat them differently. That may be for a different thread though.

If I were business minded I would see it the way you're presenting it, size=money but I'm not business minded in this. I am tempted to say there is no point in which extra seating should be paid for, but then if you have one of those 900 pound people flying out to talk about their problems on Oprah, that might would be an exception because that person would displace a lot of others. Most people are probably not going to require more than a seat and a half or two tops, so I think the airline should turn a blind eye to that. If hardpressed, I'd say if you require three seats, even though it's still discrimination, that you should probably expect to pay extra.

RedGlitter;884026 wrote: Thanks for clarifying your Q, Acc.

It's not specifically the airlines who loathe heavy people, I was saying it is our society in general. Insurance companies, doctors, clothing retailers, those are just a few who either charge more for heavy people or treat them differently. That may be for a different thread though.



If I were business minded I would see it the way you're presenting it, size=money but I'm not business minded in this. I am tempted to say there is no point in which extra seating should be paid for, but then if you have one of those 900 pound people flying out to talk about their problems on Oprah, that might would be an exception because that person would displace a lot of others. Most people are probably not going to require more than a seat and a half or two tops, so I think the airline should turn a blind eye to that. If hardpressed, I'd say if you require three seats, even though it's still discrimination, that you should probably expect to pay extra.
That results in saying that fat people should be rewarded by half-price seating. Hell if I was the least bit snug in an airline seat I'd swell up for that!

Accountable;884034 wrote: That results in saying that fat people should be rewarded by half-price seating. Hell if I was the least bit snug in an airline seat I'd swell up for that!


:wah:

So if you have a disabled person, say in a wheelchair and/or attached to some equipmentthat requires more room, do they have to pay extra? Or are they covered under the disabilities act? There are some very heavy people who are disabled due to their weight. Are we just going to tell them it's their fault for eating too much?

RedGlitter;884041 wrote: So if you have a disabled person, say in a wheelchair and/or attached to some equipmentthat requires more room, do they have to pay extra? Or are they covered under the disabilities act? There are some very heavy people who are disabled due to their weight. Are we just going to tell them it's their fault for eating too much?
Isn't it, usually?

Accountable;884045 wrote: Isn't it, usually?


That opens a whole new can of worms because that's exactly what most people would think. That a person who is fat does nothing but sit at home gulping down cookies and Big Macs. I won't blame it on a glandular problem although that does apply to some, but I will credit a large portion to preservatives, chemicals, improper metabolism and medication. Take diabetics for instance. Some of them who are taking insulin are overweight. The insulin will put weight on but they have to have it. That doesn't exactly fall under disability but should they be punished for it? See, I think you're getting at what most people would say: a fat person is fat and it's their own fault because they obviously eat too much, so they should be punished.I don't go for discrimination either way- eitther make the disabled buy extra seating when they need it or don't charge anyone extra. Unless you're going to determine how the person got fat to start with and make sure it meets your criteria of acceptable reasons, you really have no idea why that person is heavy. Maybe they have an amputated leg and can't go jogging to lose the weight, are we going to make them explain that to us? Do we have any business doing so? yet I see many disabled people who are overweight and they get special treatment without having to pay for it. I don't think that's right at all. Make it fair across the board, cut your losses and move on.

RedGlitter;884055 wrote: That opens a whole new can of worms because that's exactly what most people would think. That a person who is fat does nothing but sit at home gulping down cookies and Big Macs. I won't blame it on a glandular problem although that does apply to some, but I will credit a large portion to preservatives, chemicals, improper metabolism and medication. Take diabetics for instance. Some of them who are taking insulin are overweight. The insulin will put weight on but they have to have it. That doesn't exactly fall under disability but should they be punished for it? See, I think you're getting at what most people would say: a fat person is fat and it's their own fault because they obviously eat too much, so they should be punished.I don't go for discrimination either way- eitther make the disabled buy extra seating when they need it or don't charge anyone extra. Unless you're going to determine how the person got fat to start with and make sure it meets your criteria of acceptable reasons, you really have no idea why that person is heavy. Maybe they have an amputated leg and can't go jogging to lose the weight, are we going to make them explain that to us? Do we have any business doing so? yet I see many disabled people who are overweight and they get special treatment without having to pay for it. I don't think that's right at all. Make it fair across the board, cut your losses and move on.
Yes, I think so. If a person is overweight because of choices they made, why shouldn't they pay the consequences? If it's a medical condition then it's arguably not of their doing. Showing a doctor's note or some kind of certificate is not too much to ask to save the price of a second seat.



Why is it punishment to have someone who chose behavior that made them too large for a single seat to pay for the extra one? If they did that to a bodybuilder no one would bat an eye. It is simply consequences of choices made.

Well I can answer that quite simply. That an adult needs to provide another adult with a permission slip from the doctor is absurd. This isn't grade school. Who is the airline to say "You made bad choices Fatso!" And that to me is the crux. They want to make more money so they pin it on the last group of people that political correctness hasn't yet touched. Fat people are the new pariahs and that's just wrong.

RedGlitter;884069 wrote: Well I can answer that quite simply. That an adult needs to provide another adult with a permission slip from the doctor is absurd. This isn't grade school. Who is the airline to say "You made bad choices Fatso!" And that to me is the crux. They want to make more money so they pin it on the last group of people that political correctness hasn't yet touched. Fat people are the new pariahs and that's just wrong.
Okay that's it for me. G'night!

Accountable;883681 wrote: It's in the news that airlines are thinking of weighing passengers and charge extra for overweight people.



Let's establish right off the bat that this has nothing to do with fat people causing so much strain on the engines that they use appreciably more fuel. The airlines are losing money and are looking for a plausible excuse to charge more.



If it has to happen, why not just put a scale platform in front of the ticket agent? They can check total combined weight of passenger and bags, and charge for the extra poundage. That way there's no discrimination against overweight people. Blame it on the suitcase if you want.



What do you think?If they are going to charge extra for overweight people I would think they have to have accomodation for them. Can't very well ask me to give up part of my paid for seat if you've made money again off of the other fellas extra cheek. If you know someone weighs a ton walking in the door of the plane, you no longer have the excuse of the 'unknown'.

I'm kinda curious how this idea is affected by HIPPA regulations?

RedGlitter;883939 wrote: Minks, I'm not sure why you took personally what I said. It wasn't meant personally but was meant as my own view on how I see things. If you were to look around American society, you would see that in the collective eye, the worst thing anyone could be is fat. We are bombarded with ads for diet pills, skads of exercise devices, gym memberships, Nutrisystem, Jenny Craig, blablabla, be anything but don't be fat! To be fat according to society is to be slothful, lazy and weak. Loathsome. I find that attitude unacceptable and as for the airline seats, I see it as just another way to stick it to the fat people.

I never said thin people had it easy, however they are not vilified by society nearly as much as heavy people are.


No I didn't take it personally hun. I am sorry it sounded that way. I think charging a person by the pound for flight is assinine. I mean if a large person has to pay more then god dam it I wanna pay less... and just who are the dam airlines to say what the ideal weight of anyone is.... truth hun that is my stand.

I was getting a little off topic about body size because for me for most of my life I have had people tell me to my face I make them sick because was always so skinny. I was always made fun of because I was built like a boy, and now my oldest daughter endures taunts of anoexia and bulemia where she is just a string bean. I took the body shape and size thing off on the wrong tangent Red Glitter So sorry.

CARLA;883687 wrote: It is discrimination no matter how you word it. Once it's made about people, be it combined weight of them and luggage its discrimination. If it is a charge for and extra bag or the weight of the BAG then its not.


How so?

If the cost of the trip consists of a fixed value (to cover take of and landing charges, fuel used by an empty aircraft maintenance and depreciation of the aircraft, etc) plus a cost per tonne by way of the additional fuel used then, as long as the charges map the costs, how can it be defined as discrimination?

RedGlitter;883796 wrote: My personal opinion? No, I don't think they should have to buy more seating. I do understand the other side to that, however it's a natural fact that our society loathes fat people. What may look to you as fair to the heavy person is going to feel like punishment.




If the airline charges by the seat (and you appear to be against charging according to their costs by including a weight component to the charge) and if a passenger requires two seats thus denying them the possibility of selling the seat to another passenger, then why do you suggest that the airline should not have the right to charge the passenger who is using the seat?

Jester;885536 wrote: I dont know what they are thinking it wont 'fly', folks will simply niche up so to speak and fly an ailline that doesnt have the regulations, unless they all adopt them, it s abad Idea and americans will just avoid flying unless its 'must go no other way destination'.

If my wife has to weigh in to fly and be charged by weight she will NEVER fly again unless its a major emergency.


I totally agree, it's a marketing nightmare and it will never become reality without a substantial change of mindset that I cannot see happening.

As it is, the cost of flying has climbed to the extent that I can see many airline collapsing and many people changing the lifestyles.

How much more do those wider seats cost in first class, or business class or whatever class thos wider seats are in? Surely they're not as much as a seat and 1/2 in coach. Besides, there's no hump in the middle.



I just flew from San Antonio to San Francisco, then transferred to Tokyo, then to Okinawa. The first two legs I had my petite beloved on one side and a wide guy on the other. The first guy said not one word the whole 3 hour flight. He tried to make himself as, well, "narrow" as possible by keeping his arms crossed in front of him. That worked for most of the trip, but he eventually fell asleep and relaxed. I skootched over a bit and everybody was okay, except his arm hairs tickled sometimes. I have no idea what he thought or how he felt, but this thread did come to mind.



The second guy was a high school teacher and football coach, so we yacked so much we didn't notice the close quarters -- and the seats were much narrower. Go figure.



Got nothing to do with charging or not, just coping vs enjoying a flight.