LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 11928 times:
What are the criteria? In my case, I'm 260 lbs and 5'9", but I can still easily squeeze myself on an aircraft seat because despite being fat, my body is somewhat more compact for someone my weight and height. There are many levels of obesity and I've seen people much fatter than myself, who'd probably have major trouble to fit on the driver's seat or the seat next to the driver in a car. So once again, what are the criteria? What if a bodybuilder has problems fitting on an aircraft seat, would he or she also be considered obese and be charged those 75% of an extra seat?
It's written in the article: People who can't fit in one seat and need another one will have to pay 75% of the price of the second one. If you can fit in the seat, no matter your weight, then you won't have to pay anything.
I suppose it will only be charged if the pax requests the extra seat.
If you ask me, 75% is a good deal...
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
Peanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1375 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11774 times:
The time of "political correctness" has arrived in the airline industry. AF/KL, of course, have the right and obligation to conduct a fair and safe business operation. However, lawyers are already salivating in the starting blocks, over this one.
This is how it will all play out, eventually:
1) I expect law suits from the "obese". What are the "obese" criteria? Is it some sort of height/width formula? Armrest up and down formula? Who qualifies? What if the plane is 100% full and the "obese" doesn't pass the squeeze test. Chaos before departure? Embarrassment?
2) Judges will say it is "unfair". Airlines will be "forced" by judges to make accommodations for the "obese" without extra charge (just like wheelchair bound people are accommodated).
3) Airlines will be "forced" to offer the extra needed seat "free of charge", for safety reasons.
4) Passengers are all trying to fatten up before their trip because they are trying to "qualify" for the free extra seat.
5) At the check-in counter, Airlines will have to offer a sample seat for passengers to sit in, to make sure they "fit", kind of like the carry-on size checker. (or the rollercoaster 'test seat", at the Theme Park).
5) Tall people will go to their lawyers next and demand free upgrades so they can "accommodate" their legs.
6) Short people will follow this trek to the courtroom to demand footrests so their legs don't dangle on 11 hour flights.
7) The end is near
Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
TWA902fly From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 3083 posts, RR: 4 Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11710 times:
Quoting Peanuts (Reply 5): The time of "political correctness" has arrived in the airline industry. AF/KL, of course, have the right and obligation to conduct a fair and safe business operation. However, lawyers are already salivating in the starting blocks, over this one.
As a private company... do they have the right to refuse service for any reason?
Can't fat people then sue designer clothing companies that don't make XXL size clothes?
Vegans sue steakhouses for not making veggie burgers, etc?
Can someone please explain to me whether or not, and how, and in what countries, this would have (if any) legal standing to be sued?
Thanks ahead of time
life wasn't worth the balance, or the crumpled paper it was written on
Varig md-11 From France, joined Jul 2000, 1578 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 11674 times:
Quoting TWA902fly (Reply 6): Can someone please explain to me whether or not, and how, and in what countries, this would have (if any) legal standing to be sued?
Just now on french TV a lady member of a anti-discrimination movement explained discrimination starts from AF website where you' ll have to identify yourself as fat (self discrimination?) to buy a 2nd seat
I think AF will have to be very cautious in the phrasing like " if you feel our eco seat is to narrow for your comfort and /or your security in case of evac, please tick here to be billed 75% of the neighboring seat"
Quoting MH017 (Reply 2): personally, I think it's for generating more money though !
Probably....but also remember there were many scandals with overweight pax recently.
Some of them being demanding they were given biz seats for the price of eco because it's not their faulf if eco seats are so narrow....
AF TW AA NW BA U2 TP UX LH SK AZ MP KL SN VY HV LS SS TK SQ RG
Ushermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2932 posts, RR: 17 Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 11409 times:
I also think that this a good idea. Personally, if you are too large to fit into one seat, why should other pax suffer? You also have to pay, if you check more baggage than allowed. Sucks for the fatties but one has to consider the comfort of the other PAYING passengers, too.
Levent From France, joined Sep 2004, 1718 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 11404 times:
Quoting MH017 (Reply 2): According KLM, criteria is safety: in case of evacuation, the arm-rests should freely move (and passengers should not be stuck)
When the flight was NOT full, the extra-charge will be refunded to the passenger(s), according KLM !!!
This statement contradicts itself:
On one hand they say it's for safety, and on the other they clearly state it has to do with the comfort of other passengers. Whether the plane is full or not, the obese passenger would still be stuck in the seat, no?
Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 18 Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 11338 times:
Quoting Levent (Reply 13): Whether the plane is full or not, the obese passenger would still be stuck in the seat, no?
I see no contradiction. If you don't fit in your seat, you need two. If the plane is not full, you get the second seat for free. That's quite reasonable IMHO. They said it's mainly for safety, but also to provide some extra comfort. While it's PR talk, it has some truth in it. After all, it's more comfortable for the obese person as well as for the pax sitting next to them.
I'm overweight myself and I support this policy. Thankfully, I still fit comfortably in any Y seat, but I still work my ass off to get thinner (and it's working thankfully). Maybe more people should do that.
BAStew From Australia, joined Sep 2006, 1017 posts, RR: 2 Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 11291 times:
Forget the offence caused......
It is an absolute ray of sunshine for many a poor person i've seen squashed up against the window while the obese person sat next to them is taking up so much more room. I find it really, really unfair and can totally ruin a persons journey.
RwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3046 posts, RR: 2 Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 4 days ago) and read 11288 times:
I am of the opinion that it is not the fault of the airline when passengers cannot fit into a standard coach seat. Of course, there is debate as to whether KL's 3x4x3 seating in the 773 is standard, but that's an argument for another day.
People make the choice to be obese, and I don't think the airline should lose revenue because the passenger makes this choice. I also don't think nearby passengers should have to suffer through an even more uncomfortable experience because of it either. If people are not willing to take responsibility for controlling their weight, then they should be willing to accept the consequences (such as paying for a second seat when they cannot fit into one).
Woof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 11136 times:
Good on AF / KLM. About time too. I think they should take this further and say that a single ticket is good for a weight of up to, say 120kg. Anything over 120kg and you pay extra in the same way as you pay for excess baggage (you could even use the same term!).
The biggest single cost on a flight is fuel. Fuel cost is directly proportional to weight. The 'obese' already pay more for fuel in their car (as they use more fuel to lug themselves about), so why should air travel be any different.
That shows a misundrstanding of the causes of obesity.
People do not choose to be fat any more than they choose to be poor.
It is very often betonf their control.
If it was that simple, why would there be a multi billion dollar worldwide weight reduction industry.
If people had chosen to be obese then they would simply just stay that way.
Farmers have for years bred livestock to put on weight and become obese.
They put the cows out in the paddock and they all eat the same grass, and some get fat and some get skinny. The skinny obes are culled out and become SPAM, and the fat ones are sent to slaughter. Are the cows making a choice to be fat.?
There is a large amount of research going on which has uncovered some of the biochemistry behind obesity. A lot of it is inherited, not by choice.
And so on, and so on.
This is nothing more than revenue raising or getting everyone prepared to go 10 abreast in a 350!.
Edina From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 735 posts, RR: 9 Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 11111 times:
I'm hardly skinny myself and I really don't have a problem with this.
Economy class seating is pretty much made to similar dimensions everywhere - the main differences being seat pitch & cabin cinfiguration, so if you know you don't fit into an Economy seat then don't buy one, or buy 2, or buy a premium economy/business class seat.
75% of the fare for the second seat is a bargain in my eyes.
Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
Woof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 11096 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 1): What if a bodybuilder has problems fitting on an aircraft seat, would he or she also be considered obese and be charged those 75% of an extra seat?
Obese, no. Charged extra, oh yes. This is even more clear cut. The 'body builder' made a conscious decision to develop their body to a point well away from the norm. If they can no longer fit in a seat that the vast majority of the rest of us can they can either pay 75% of the cost of a second seat or pay extra for J/F class.
Woof From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 11066 times:
Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 18): People do not choose to be fat any more than they choose to be poor.
Oh come on, that's a really poor comparison.
I would bet that the vast majority of obese people choose to eat more calories than their daily exercise / natural metabolism allows them to burn. Yes there will be cases where disorders disturb this balance to the point of it being nigh on impossible to maintain a healthy weight, but are you telling me that the majority of obese people are not in that condition because they have a poor diet / exercise mix?
As for the "choose to be poor" argument, looking purely at developed countries with state sponsored education, people might not choose to be poor, but they might well make choices that statistically limit their chances of becoming rich. They might also be bone idle.
Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 18): If it was that simple, why would there be a multi billion dollar worldwide weight reduction industry.
Much of which is based on old wives tales and bs. This industry exists mostly because of vanity and weak willed customers. You want to lose weight while not changing your diet? Do more exercise.
Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 18 Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 10949 times:
Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 18): People do not choose to be fat any more than they choose to be poor.
Mostly, yes they do. Poor diet (way too much meat, carbs, fats and sugar) and no or hardly any exercise. Again, I take myself as an example. I used to be pretty lean, no gut. Then I stopped exercising for 7-8 years and my diet was not the best. Result, I gained over 60 pounds in this period. Over the past year I have been exercising again and minding what I eat. Result: I lost 20 pounds. It's quite simple, it just takes determination.
Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 18): II'm surprised the EU is so backward on human rights, that Govt are not breathing down the throats of AF/KLM.
Many airlines in the US are doing the same already. It has nothing to do with human rights. Flying is not a right, it's a privilege. Besides, it's not like they are forbidding you to fly, just buy an extra seat. If the flight's not full, the extra seat is free. Quite reasonable IMHO.
Quoting Woof (Reply 21): You want to lose weight while not changing your diet? Do more exercise.
Changing diet is most of the time also very important. Parts of Europe have been getting more and more obese. The Netherlands, where I live, is a prime example. People are going more and more for the "easy" but very unhealthy meals. That needs to change. Most of the time a minor adjustment is enough. Instead of a bag of chips for lunch, eat a couple of sandwiches. Skip the regular coke and go for diet coke. In fact, forget about the coke and drink tea. Don't forget about (a light) breakfast. Research has shown that breakfast is very important to your metabolism for the rest of the day. But more and more people are skipping breakfast.
Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 18): Farmers have for years bred livestock to put on weight and become obese.
I do agree that the food industry is partially to blame. The example of corn syrup has been given, but also additives given to the food of the livestock.