Should large people have to buy two airplane seats for themselves?

[Alex+R 0]

I'm sure she wouldn't be in this thread at all if she were thin, is all I'm sayin'.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sure she wouldn't be in this thread at all if she were thin, is all I'm sayin'.

She'd be in first class.

[britty 1]

I'm sure she wouldn't be in this thread at all if she were thin, is all I'm sayin'.

She'd be in first class.

now that is really unfair..... to pay a huge amount of money for a first class seat, and then be placed next to Rosie. Im guessing that airlines have a refund policy for that instance

[Marilyn. 340]

People don't fit in seats for all kinds of reasons besides weight though.

When/how?

Well, besides being overweight, I guess I meant. Abnormal body shapes and just being large and/or muscular could do it.

In character and temperament at least...

I'll bet...

someone who is very tall would have a hard time fitting into most of the seats...

I remember watching the show Airline and this guy was over 6 feet and he told them that he needed an aisle seat but they told him that they couldn't do that for some reason that I can't remember....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I'm sure she wouldn't be in this thread at all if she were thin, is all I'm sayin'.

She'd be in first class.

now that is really unfair..... to pay a huge amount of money for a first class seat, and then be placed next to Rosie. Im guessing that airlines have a refund policy for that instance

I'm sure she's not loud like that in public - unless she were seated next to Donald Trump.

[Jackie&Yosdani 0]

I think its so wrong to make someone pay for two seats because they are big..

definitly discrimination.. they should have seats for larger people.. Pobresitos!!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think its so wrong to make someone pay for two seats because they are big..

definitly discrimination.. they should have seats for larger people.. Pobresitos!!!

Those seats should cost more money IMO.

[Alex+R 0]

I think its so wrong to make someone pay for two seats because they are big..

definitly discrimination.. they should have seats for larger people.. Pobresitos!!!

Those seats should cost more money IMO.

That's the solution I like best. Airlines claim this is cost prohibitive, but seriously, one row? C'mon. People could buy those seats who weren't large, too. An extra row of, say, "extra comfort seats" with 23-inch-wide seats or something. If you don't fit in your seat, however, you MUST buy an extra comfort seat. If it costs less than 2 seats, but more than 1 seat, it seems pretty reasonable to me. That has passenger and airline absorbing the cost. Especially since not all flights have someone on them that don't fit, but they'd probably all have someone who'd want a maybe 50-dollar upgrade to the comfy seats.

If the consensus were that people shouldn't have to pay for their size, then those comfy seats could be extra money for the average person, but free or at a reduced cost to those who don't fit in a normal seat. But no matter what, sitting in a seat you don't fit in should definitely be prohibited for the consideration of those around you.

[john_and_marlene 162]

The law also emphasizes protecting minorities from discrimination. Not fitting in a plane seat really isn't a choice, where smoking is. And that's where I think your prejudice comes in to almost every post you make here.

It would follow from this arguement that WalMart is prejudice against large people because they charge extra for 2X and 3X sizes.

[Fandango 1,439]

I think its so wrong to make someone pay for two seats because they are big..

definitly discrimination.. they should have seats for larger people.. Pobresitos!!!

Those seats should cost more money IMO.

That's the solution I like best. Airlines claim this is cost prohibitive, but seriously, one row? C'mon. People could buy those seats who weren't large, too. An extra row of, say, "extra comfort seats" with 23-inch-wide seats or something. If you don't fit in your seat, however, you MUST buy an extra comfort seat. If it costs less than 2 seats, but more than 1 seat, it seems pretty reasonable to me. That has passenger and airline absorbing the cost. Especially since not all flights have someone on them that don't fit, but they'd probably all have someone who'd want a maybe 50-dollar upgrade to the comfy seats.

If the consensus were that people shouldn't have to pay for their size, then those comfy seats could be extra money for the average person, but free or at a reduced cost to those who don't fit in a normal seat. But no matter what, sitting in a seat you don't fit in should definitely be prohibited for the consideration of those around you.

The avg tick we've spent Orl to UK is about $750+. If the 'extra comfy' seat is 20,30,40,etc % bigger, it should be reflected in the same increase in price. I can't see it being cost efficient at a $50 surcharge.

As to the bit in red, that would actually be punishing 'average' sized people for not being fat, so I think that's uncool.

Edited June 29, 2007 by LisaD

[Alex+R 0]

I think its so wrong to make someone pay for two seats because they are big..

definitly discrimination.. they should have seats for larger people.. Pobresitos!!!

Those seats should cost more money IMO.

That's the solution I like best. Airlines claim this is cost prohibitive, but seriously, one row? C'mon. People could buy those seats who weren't large, too. An extra row of, say, "extra comfort seats" with 23-inch-wide seats or something. If you don't fit in your seat, however, you MUST buy an extra comfort seat. If it costs less than 2 seats, but more than 1 seat, it seems pretty reasonable to me. That has passenger and airline absorbing the cost. Especially since not all flights have someone on them that don't fit, but they'd probably all have someone who'd want a maybe 50-dollar upgrade to the comfy seats.

If the consensus were that people shouldn't have to pay for their size, then those comfy seats could be extra money for the average person, but free or at a reduced cost to those who don't fit in a normal seat. But no matter what, sitting in a seat you don't fit in should definitely be prohibited for the consideration of those around you.

The avg tick we've spent Orl to UK is about $750+. If the 'extra comfy' seat is 20,30,40,etc % bigger, it should be reflected in the same increase in price. I can't see it being cost efficient at a $50 surcharge.

As to the bit in red, that would actually be punishing 'average' sized people for not being fat, so I think that's uncool.

Because despite the cutbacks in airline services, the size of your seat is not the only cost involved in flying, and of course, we can't assume a proportionate extra amount of weight for fuel or anything.

I think making a row of seats that are not nominally for large people, just for comfort, and then occasionally giving large people a lower rate on them, is fair. It would keep large people from sitting in normal coach rows and inconveniencing people and wouldn't make flying cost-prohibitive for them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You have to pay more for other classes of seating with more generous seat and legroom. Stands to reason it should come at an increased charge.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think its so wrong to make someone pay for two seats because they are big..

definitly discrimination.. they should have seats for larger people.. Pobresitos!!!

Those seats should cost more money IMO.

That's the solution I like best. Airlines claim this is cost prohibitive, but seriously, one row? C'mon. People could buy those seats who weren't large, too. An extra row of, say, "extra comfort seats" with 23-inch-wide seats or something. If you don't fit in your seat, however, you MUST buy an extra comfort seat. If it costs less than 2 seats, but more than 1 seat, it seems pretty reasonable to me. That has passenger and airline absorbing the cost. Especially since not all flights have someone on them that don't fit, but they'd probably all have someone who'd want a maybe 50-dollar upgrade to the comfy seats.

If the consensus were that people shouldn't have to pay for their size, then those comfy seats could be extra money for the average person, but free or at a reduced cost to those who don't fit in a normal seat. But no matter what, sitting in a seat you don't fit in should definitely be prohibited for the consideration of those around you.

The avg tick we've spent Orl to UK is about $750+. If the 'extra comfy' seat is 20,30,40,etc % bigger, it should be reflected in the same increase in price. I can't see it being cost efficient at a $50 surcharge.

As to the bit in red, that would actually be punishing 'average' sized people for not being fat, so I think that's uncool.

Because despite the cutbacks in airline services, the size of your seat is not the only cost involved in flying, and of course, we can't assume a proportionate extra amount of weight for fuel or anything.

I think making a row of seats that are not nominally for large people, just for comfort, and then occasionally giving large people a lower rate on them, is fair. It would keep large people from sitting in normal coach rows and inconveniencing people and wouldn't make flying cost-prohibitive for them.

How would the airline charge 'large people' less? That sounds open to all sorts of legal challenges and potential abuse.

[Fandango 1,439]

Because despite the cutbacks in airline services, the size of your seat is not the only cost involved in flying, and of course, we can't assume a proportionate extra amount of weight for fuel or anything.

I think making a row of seats that are not nominally for large people, just for comfort, and then occasionally giving large people a lower rate on them, is fair. It would keep large people from sitting in normal coach rows and inconveniencing people and wouldn't make flying cost-prohibitive for them.

It may not be the only cost, but it's a big factor. There are weight restrictions on luggage for a reason. Piggybacking off the 'can't assume proportionate extra weight for fuel' is a non-issue...try bringing some oversized and overweight luggage...or even an extra piece of luggage...and see what happens. I can't say to the ticket counter...oh but it's a necessity for me...they'll say 'ok, no one's sayin you can't bring it, but you gotta pay for it'

The bit about the bigger seats not nominally for large people? That's called business class or first class. Giving larger people a break on them is not fair at all imo...Why should larger people have roomier seats at essentially the same price? It wouldn't inconvenience me physically, but financially it would become a burden on every other passenger flying coach.

Think about it...a row of these seats...let's say it eliminates 3 'normal sized' seats. That's 3 seats of revenue lost each and every time that plane flies. Sure, the law of avgs is that most planes won't be fully booked, but over time the smallest differential in cost for any business CAN add up to an exhorbitant figure. The airline will not take the hit...it will be passed on to everyone else.

Now as I said before, if the cost increased is reflected in the price adjustment, I wouldn't have a problem with that at all.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Because despite the cutbacks in airline services, the size of your seat is not the only cost involved in flying, and of course, we can't assume a proportionate extra amount of weight for fuel or anything.

I think making a row of seats that are not nominally for large people, just for comfort, and then occasionally giving large people a lower rate on them, is fair. It would keep large people from sitting in normal coach rows and inconveniencing people and wouldn't make flying cost-prohibitive for them.

It may not be the only cost, but it's a big factor. There are weight restrictions on luggage for a reason. Piggybacking off the 'can't assume proportionate extra weight for fuel' is a non-issue...try bringing some oversized and overweight luggage...or even an extra piece of luggage...and see what happens. I can't say to the ticket counter...oh but it's a necessity for me...they'll say 'ok, no one's sayin you can't bring it, but you gotta pay for it'

The bit about the bigger seats not nominally for large people? That's called business class or first class. Giving larger people a break on them is not fair at all imo...Why should larger people have roomier seats at essentially the same price? It wouldn't inconvenience me physically, but financially it would become a burden on every other passenger flying coach.

Think about it...a row of these seats...let's say it eliminates 3 'normal sized' seats. That's 3 seats of revenue lost each and every time that plane flies. Sure, the law of avgs is that most planes won't be fully booked, but over time the smallest differential in cost for any business CAN add up to an exhorbitant figure. The airline will not take the hit...it will be passed on to everyone else.

Now as I said before, if the cost increased is reflected in the price adjustment, I wouldn't have a problem with that at all.

That's it exactly. It amounts to a premium economy class (which already exists). But however you dice it - less seats = higher ticket prices. I just don't see why I should pay extra for something that's of no benefit to me.