UA Charging Obese People for Extra Seat

Sounds like a good market-based solution to America's obesity problem.

...
...
...

Erm... not sure if that is :sarcasm: or not.
 
Quick question guys...Do you think that if they make you purchase the extra seat that the airline will try to put someone in it anyway? Like if the flights full maybe they think they can get one by you and put someone there anyway?

"Disclaimer" I fit good in an airplane seat but was just wondering if airlines would try this.

matt
 
Good. The person sitting next to them didn't pay for a half a seat because Shamu over there is taking up the other half. Is it fair that the normal sized person only get half of what they pay for? No. If you take up 2 seats, you buy two seats. I actually didn't know UA never did this before until an announcement was made at work. I figured every airline does it.
 
I find it weird that Southwest doesn't allow one person to buy more then one seat (in the case of a non-obese person). If someone is willing to buy six tickets, so be it. They would actually make more money by not ferrying around 5 more peoples worth of fat.
 
Doug Taylor said:
Come on folks, you mean if you went to Outback and ate two steaks, that you'd actually expect to pay for them both?

Oh...

Wait.

Nevermind! ;)
Click to expand...
You know what, here's the apples-to-apples comparison I just thought of:

Say you went to Outback steakhouse with a party of five, and when you got there, the only seating they have available are two four-top tables that they'll have to slide together to accommodate the size of your party. Based on the logic some of you have proffered here, Outback would be well within its rights to charge your party double for your meals to compensate them for the loss of revenue you caused them by using up that second table they could've otherwise sat another party of four at.

But just as Outback is in the business of selling food, not seating space, the airlines are in the business of transporting people on a per-person basis--not a per-pound or per-cubic-foot one. Lost revenue due to accommodation of passengers of varying sizes is--and should be--simply a cost of doing business. Why? Because the size of airline seats is an arbitrary decision on the part of the airlines and the aircraft manufacturers, designed to maximize use of space, not accommodate all possible passengers--and even then, there is variance. The seats in the first row of a CRJ are narrower than the seats in subsequent rows to accommodate storage of tray tables in the armrests. The seats in the first three rows of most single-class 737s are slightly narrower than those further aft to accommodate the taper of the cabin toward the nose. (And where's the discount for sitting in those seats, if you're really contracting for cubic feet of space?) Do they make wider seats? Sure they do--but they're usually up in first or business class.

But what about that per-pound model? What if the airlines adopted that? A half-price ticket for a small child sounds about right, right? Not so fast. Just as in the case of the two tables above, selling a seat for half just because of the weight of the person sitting in it comes with an opportunity cost--lost revenue that could've been had by selling that seat to a heavier person. Therefore, the airlines would inevitably charge lighter people a higher per-pound rate than heavier people in order to make up for that lost revenue. It's simply how the bean counters think, gang.

Just as some airlines have started to charge extra for additional leg room for tall people, they might have a case for charging extra for wider seats. And when the airlines don't offer seats with extra legroom, both the 7-footer and the schmuck sitting in front of them suffer for it...just as with fat people. Now, I've seen compassionate flight attendants and gate agents work seat trades to provide very tall people with exit-row seats, but I've never seen anyone make a similar accommodation for a fat person by putting them into an empty first/business class seat. And that's shameful.

But just as the airlines can't get away with charging extra-tall people double their fare for extra legroom, even though they are reducing total capacity by increasing seat pitch, charging an extra-wide person double the fare won't fly either.
 
aloft said:
But just as the airlines can't get away with charging extra-tall people double their fare for extra legroom, even though they are reducing total capacity by increasing seat pitch, charging an extra-wide person double the fare won't fly either.
Click to expand...

Oh contraire. It will fly even better, unless you seat all the lardy shutins in the back for aft CG purposes. If you can't fit in an airline seat, you either need to go on a diet, or be forcibly "opted out" of all state-sponsored medical coverage for life. Hey, fatties, bad news. You have diabetes because you eat too much and don't move enough. It's pretty simple. Go for a walk.
 
I've been holding onto this ... seems as good a time as any to use it ...

motivation_no_fat_chicks.jpg
 
Aloft, so what are the people that fit in their seat supposed to do when the fat from the obese people protrudes into their space?

I can tell you, it sucks. If I buy a ticket, I expect to be able to have 1 seat to myself, not 3/4 of one so a big person can use part of mine while making me extremely uncomfortable.
 
Do you think it sucks any less for the fat person? Here's a hint: it doesn't.

All the more reason for the airlines to adopt reasonable accommodation requirements.
 
When it comes down to it, the airlines have the freedom to set their sales and seating policies. Don't like it? Fly another airline.
 
stuckingfk said:
Aloft, so what are the people that fit in their seat supposed to do when the fat from the obese people protrudes into their space?

I can tell you, it sucks. If I buy a ticket, I expect to be able to have 1 seat to myself, not 3/4 of one so a big person can use part of mine while making me extremely uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

Amen....I had to endure a Lufthansa flight from MCO-FRA (with obscene headwinds it seemed...9 hrs 45 min) a few weeks ago seated next to the one guy on the plane everyone tried to avoid. If he wants to eat himself to oblivion that is his problem, not mine, and I will not judge him for that. But when his legs are too big to even sit under the seat in front of him and his arm is nearly on my crotch that's when I say he should have to pay for two seats.
 
CN94559 said:
wow. way to go fatass.

I would feel bad in case of a water landing. :D



That is disgusting. I would've introduced him to this new game called dodge the traffic on a busy highway :bandit::sarcasm:

but really, if your that obese, don't offend people more by doing stuff like that.

so back to my water landing point, what happens in that case? Do they get two cushions? That just doesn't seem fair. That wont keep them afloat :D

also, loss of cabin pressure, do they get two oxygen masks? What makes them deserve extra oxygen, it should be shared. :p
Click to expand...

I have never seen a post as stupid as this on jetcareers.. I would honestly expect something like this on a kidz bop forum
 
pullup said:
I find it weird that Southwest doesn't allow one person to buy more then one seat (in the case of a non-obese person). If someone is willing to buy six tickets, so be it. They would actually make more money by not ferrying around 5 more peoples worth of fat.
Click to expand...
I find it offensive.

So a fat person can buy two seats so they can fit and everyone can be comfy, but I can't buy 6 seats so I can be comfy by stretching out after a long week at work? WTF-O?

-mini
 
400A said:
Any man under 200 pounds is a woman....




just throwing it out there




:p
Click to expand...

*Phew*

But seriously, the larger problem here is the lacksadaisical (sp) attitude towards obesity in America. According to Aloft the airlines should cater to fat people by giving them free upgrades, or wider seats. Howz about we turn off the TV's/computers/ipods/cell phones and go out and run around all day? And when that day is done, eat a wholesome meal without the half-gallon of ice cream after. What a novel concept! When I was a kid there wasn't a day that went by that me and every kid in the neighborhood wasn't outside every chance we got. Now you will be hard pressed to find a kid outside except to be walking to the car so their mom can drive them to the bus stop.

It absolutely sickens me the shape and attitude that America is taking on. Go to the mall and look around. Go to a sporting event and look around. See all the fat people? They're everywhere and they're eating Cinnabons while sitting. The fact that this sort of lifestyle isn't aggresively combated does not speak well for our country. I really fear for our future because of the immense strain the PREVENTABLE disease and conditions being put upon individuals, familys, and our healthcare system. It's only going to get worse folks....
 
pullup said:
*Phew*

But seriously, the larger problem here is the lacksadaisical (sp) attitude towards obesity in America. According to Aloft the airlines should cater to fat people by giving them free upgrades, or wider seats. Howz about we turn off the TV's/computers/ipods/cell phones and go out and run around all day? And when that day is done, eat a wholesome meal without the half-gallon of ice cream after. What a novel concept! When I was a kid there wasn't a day that went by that me and every kid in the neighborhood wasn't outside every chance we got. Now you will be hard pressed to find a kid outside except to be walking to the car so their mom can drive them to the bus stop.

It absolutely sickens me the shape and attitude that America is taking on. Go to the mall and look around. Go to a sporting event and look around. See all the fat people? They're everywhere and they're eating Cinnabons while sitting. The fact that this sort of lifestyle isn't aggresively combated does not speak well for our country. I really fear for our future because of the immense strain the PREVENTABLE disease and conditions being put upon individuals, familys, and our healthcare system. It's only going to get worse folks....
Click to expand...


I couldn't agree more. BUTTT these kinds of rules effect people like me too. 5'9" at 280, but butt fits in the seat just fine, my shoulders don't (you should see me get in and out of BeechJet, its funny).
 
aloft said:
You know what, here's the apples-to-apples comparison I just thought of:

Say you went to Outback steakhouse with a party of five, and when you got there, the only seating they have available are two four-top tables that they'll have to slide together to accommodate the size of your party. Based on the logic some of you have proffered here, Outback would be well within its rights to charge your party double for your meals to compensate them for the loss of revenue you caused them by using up that second table they could've otherwise sat another party of four at.

But just as Outback is in the business of selling food, not seating space, the airlines are in the business of transporting people on a per-person basis--not a per-pound or per-cubic-foot one. Lost revenue due to accommodation of passengers of varying sizes is--and should be--simply a cost of doing business. Why? Because the size of airline seats is an arbitrary decision on the part of the airlines and the aircraft manufacturers, designed to maximize use of space, not accommodate all possible passengers--and even then, there is variance. The seats in the first row of a CRJ are narrower than the seats in subsequent rows to accommodate storage of tray tables in the armrests. The seats in the first three rows of most single-class 737s are slightly narrower than those further aft to accommodate the taper of the cabin toward the nose. (And where's the discount for sitting in those seats, if you're really contracting for cubic feet of space?) Do they make wider seats? Sure they do--but they're usually up in first or business class.

But what about that per-pound model? What if the airlines adopted that? A half-price ticket for a small child sounds about right, right? Not so fast. Just as in the case of the two tables above, selling a seat for half just because of the weight of the person sitting in it comes with an opportunity cost--lost revenue that could've been had by selling that seat to a heavier person. Therefore, the airlines would inevitably charge lighter people a higher per-pound rate than heavier people in order to make up for that lost revenue. It's simply how the bean counters think, gang.

Just as some airlines have started to charge extra for additional leg room for tall people, they might have a case for charging extra for wider seats. And when the airlines don't offer seats with extra legroom, both the 7-footer and the schmuck sitting in front of them suffer for it...just as with fat people. Now, I've seen compassionate flight attendants and gate agents work seat trades to provide very tall people with exit-row seats, but I've never seen anyone make a similar accommodation for a fat person by putting them into an empty first/business class seat. And that's shameful.

But just as the airlines can't get away with charging extra-tall people double their fare for extra legroom, even though they are reducing total capacity by increasing seat pitch, charging an extra-wide person double the fare won't fly either.
Click to expand...


This is an excellent, well thought out post. I agree with many of your points, but ultimately side in favor of charging two fares - primarily for my own selfish comfort.

The part I highlighted interests me. For some reason fat people are ok to make fun of and show derision for. I have never understood this.
 
Boris Badenov said:
Oh contraire. It will fly even better, unless you seat all the lardy shutins in the back for aft CG purposes. If you can't fit in an airline seat, you either need to go on a diet, or be forcibly "opted out" of all state-sponsored medical coverage for life. Hey, fatties, bad news. You have diabetes because you eat too much and don't move enough. It's pretty simple. Go for a walk.
Click to expand...

After my tender and sensitive response to Alofts post...I see this. And agree with this as well.

I am bipolar.
 
WacoFan said:
The part I highlighted interests me. For some reason fat people are ok to make fun of and show derision for. I have never understood this.
Click to expand...

Probably because the tall person has no say in being tall. The fatty can lose some weight. No sympathy. When I don't fit in seats and spaces meant for normal people anymore it's time for my fat ass to lose some weight (which its slowly getting to that point for me, thank God for warmer weather to start running outside again). None of this BS about big is beautiful and catering to the lard asses among us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top