People so overweight the armrest between seats cannot go down
Oct 22nd, 2005, 04:24 PM
#21
P_M don't worry, you gave an honest response. I always worry when someone that overweight goes to those tiny toilets!!! I have a problem with an elbow that sticks out, so the flight staff are always hitting me. but- I must keep to the isle seat or it will stick in someone. Let's try to be more sympathetic. I doubt the fat person wants to travel unless necessary and is most likely discomfted than you.
Oct 22nd, 2005, 04:37 PM
#22
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 17,106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do have a solution: but the airlines would never go for it.
Each plane should have one or two rows of seats where instead of say, 3 seats across, there are only two. Thus, instead of six seats to an entire row, there are only four.
These seats should be towards the middle of the plane, but not near the exit.
Thus, if a terribly overweight person gets on board, the stewardesses should have the ability to switch this person to the "wider seat" row - for everyone's sake.
After all, this kind of seating already exist in business and first class.
As for the exit door, the airplane manufacturer can make bigger doors. Already some ambulance companies are getting wider ambulances and bigger gurneys, so I truly believe that we can adjust in other areas too.
Of course, the best thing to do is not to eat as much and get a bit slimmer.
Each plane should have one or two rows of seats where instead of say, 3 seats across, there are only two. Thus, instead of six seats to an entire row, there are only four.
These seats should be towards the middle of the plane, but not near the exit.
Thus, if a terribly overweight person gets on board, the stewardesses should have the ability to switch this person to the "wider seat" row - for everyone's sake.
After all, this kind of seating already exist in business and first class.
As for the exit door, the airplane manufacturer can make bigger doors. Already some ambulance companies are getting wider ambulances and bigger gurneys, so I truly believe that we can adjust in other areas too.
Of course, the best thing to do is not to eat as much and get a bit slimmer.
Oct 22nd, 2005, 04:45 PM
#23
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 45,322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello everyone. This is a situtation that really does not seem to have any real good answer does it?
I am slender but I contribute that to my food allergies, corn products and dairy products. However I come from a family of slender people so guess it is in the genes. But I could have been born in a family with weight problems.
I have a few "married into the family" relatives that do have weight problems and they are such beautiful people that I don't even think about it, except from the health viewpoint, heart problems, diabites (sp?) and so forth.
I have seen the program Airlines where some passengers have been told by SW they have to buy two seats. How humilitating that must be.
But to have ones seat invaded, the seat the passenger paid for is certainly a problem also. And it certainly does not seem right to me.
To have "larger seats" on planes with a higher airfare could be the solution but how many seats? Say there are six premium size seats and eight oversized passengers? And how is the airline to know when a passenger books their flight that this particular passenger is larger then the standard size seat in couch can hold.
Perhaps on all airlines websites there should be a prominent "Attention" that all arm rest must be down during flights and that if this is not possible the passenger will be required to buy two airline seats? Then I can imagine the discrimination lawsuits that will take place.
Perhaps it all boils down to IF we were all considerate of others and consequently know that we cannot fit in the standard coach seat without causing undue discomfort to the passenger next to us we, those that have this problem, would buy two airline seats.
But we all know that consideration for others is not something everyone adheres to.
I think it would take King Salamone to figure a solution to this problem.
I am slender but I contribute that to my food allergies, corn products and dairy products. However I come from a family of slender people so guess it is in the genes. But I could have been born in a family with weight problems.
I have a few "married into the family" relatives that do have weight problems and they are such beautiful people that I don't even think about it, except from the health viewpoint, heart problems, diabites (sp?) and so forth.
I have seen the program Airlines where some passengers have been told by SW they have to buy two seats. How humilitating that must be.
But to have ones seat invaded, the seat the passenger paid for is certainly a problem also. And it certainly does not seem right to me.
To have "larger seats" on planes with a higher airfare could be the solution but how many seats? Say there are six premium size seats and eight oversized passengers? And how is the airline to know when a passenger books their flight that this particular passenger is larger then the standard size seat in couch can hold.
Perhaps on all airlines websites there should be a prominent "Attention" that all arm rest must be down during flights and that if this is not possible the passenger will be required to buy two airline seats? Then I can imagine the discrimination lawsuits that will take place.
Perhaps it all boils down to IF we were all considerate of others and consequently know that we cannot fit in the standard coach seat without causing undue discomfort to the passenger next to us we, those that have this problem, would buy two airline seats.
But we all know that consideration for others is not something everyone adheres to.
I think it would take King Salamone to figure a solution to this problem.
Oct 22nd, 2005, 05:01 PM
#24
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well...the airline regulates the weight and dimensions of your baggage with a surcharge if it exceeds either. Seems to me the same could apply in regards to the mandatory extra seat purchase. Despite the elbow bashing, it sounds like you were lucky not to be in the window seat. Please see the following link: http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe...out/index.html
Oct 22nd, 2005, 05:24 PM
#25
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JBC, that was a wonderful well thought out response. People should not be expected to buy an extra seat at the airport. What if there are no extra seats? Should someone be forced to fly standby? Which person? What if they don't have enough money? Perhaps if this is such a problem, the airline should use a height/weight chart to base the cost of their tickets on. I have never had an armrest and have always felt squished by having my husband on one side and some man on the other. Perhaps they should charge men more because they hog every inch of available space. Or maybe everyone could pay more and get a reasonable amount of space.
Oct 22nd, 2005, 05:39 PM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
There really isn't an easy solution to any of this. Wider seats would help, but I'm afraid we'd all just expand to fit them. I think the fairest situation would require larger people to purchase a second seat, although I would suggest it be at a somewhat reduced price. Of course, reducing the cost of that extra seat means everyone else would pay a little extra to subsidize it, so that doesn't seem fair either.
They can't really check people before they board and require large people to buy an extra seat, because what happens when the flight is already full? Either somebody else gets bumped, the large person is denied boarding, or somebody gets squashed.
To be honest, if this is really a safety issue (if the person could not fit out an emergency exit), they should not fly or be allowed to fly, extra seat or not. Safety should trump hurt feelings or a job requirement to fly.
As for the armrest being up before Maureen got to her seat, I've seen the armrest up more often than not when I board, even when my row is empty. It makes it easier to get to and from the window/middle seats at boarding/de-boarding if the armrests are up, so I wouldn't automatically conclude the woman in Maureen's example put the armrest up herself. But, she should have been able to put it back down once she got seated, or else......
They can't really check people before they board and require large people to buy an extra seat, because what happens when the flight is already full? Either somebody else gets bumped, the large person is denied boarding, or somebody gets squashed.
To be honest, if this is really a safety issue (if the person could not fit out an emergency exit), they should not fly or be allowed to fly, extra seat or not. Safety should trump hurt feelings or a job requirement to fly.
As for the armrest being up before Maureen got to her seat, I've seen the armrest up more often than not when I board, even when my row is empty. It makes it easier to get to and from the window/middle seats at boarding/de-boarding if the armrests are up, so I wouldn't automatically conclude the woman in Maureen's example put the armrest up herself. But, she should have been able to put it back down once she got seated, or else......
Oct 22nd, 2005, 05:48 PM
#28
" They can't really check people before they board and require large people to buy an extra seat"
yes they can - Southwest does it frequently. I have seen it happen at SMF and LAX on flights I was on . . . . .
yes they can - Southwest does it frequently. I have seen it happen at SMF and LAX on flights I was on . . . . .
Oct 22nd, 2005, 06:07 PM
#29
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's an interesting story. I know two women who are both quite obese and they often travel together. They buy three seats together and "share" the middle one. One trip was overbooked and the airline seated someone in the vacant seat between them. They protested since they had paid for the seat. They were told that was too bad, and they were "voiding" or booting that "third person" and would issue that ticketholder a later flight -- which of course was a complete waste to them. So they paid for three seats and got two. So much for the theory of paying more -- someone still got stuck between them.
Oct 22nd, 2005, 06:16 PM
#30
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that OneWanderingJew justifies why s/he replied they preferred the armrest up.
I think if someone asked me, I'd say I'd prefer it up too. Yes, it would mean that I am being selfish, but I think the obese person making the request is being selfish first in asking if s/he could take up part of my seat space.
If someone asked you, what would you say?
I think if someone asked me, I'd say I'd prefer it up too. Yes, it would mean that I am being selfish, but I think the obese person making the request is being selfish first in asking if s/he could take up part of my seat space.
If someone asked you, what would you say?
Oct 22nd, 2005, 06:28 PM
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
"" They can't really check people before they board and require large people to buy an extra seat"
yes they can - Southwest does it frequently. I have seen it happen at SMF and LAX on flights I was on . . . . "
Janisj, if you're going to quote somebody (me), make sure you don't edit it and lose the point. The second part of my sentence was "because what happens when the flight is full?". Address that problem. It doesn't matter that you've seen it happen with Southwest - what do they do if the flight is already full, or as in Patrick's example, overbooked?
yes they can - Southwest does it frequently. I have seen it happen at SMF and LAX on flights I was on . . . . "
Janisj, if you're going to quote somebody (me), make sure you don't edit it and lose the point. The second part of my sentence was "because what happens when the flight is full?". Address that problem. It doesn't matter that you've seen it happen with Southwest - what do they do if the flight is already full, or as in Patrick's example, overbooked?
Oct 22nd, 2005, 06:39 PM
#33
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This really is such a troublesome dilemma. I come from a family aof very small and very large people and can see it from both viewpoints. Perhaps when booking there could be options to enter your weight (and height!!). If you are a certain size maybe a second seat could be offered at half price. Then again, if it's going to be given away due to over-booking you're up a creek.
Here's a thought travelling on a similar vein...what do you do about fellow passengers doused in perfume/collogne? Can't tell you how many pounding headached I get from said problem!
Here's a thought travelling on a similar vein...what do you do about fellow passengers doused in perfume/collogne? Can't tell you how many pounding headached I get from said problem!
Oct 22nd, 2005, 08:05 PM
#34
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This topic is actually keeping me from falling asleep tonigh (sad!). So many thoughts on this really. HEre's another...where do we draw the line in trying to accomodate everyone and not hurt feelings, yet still stay profitable (leads to other questions like should airlines really have to offer 20 different kinds of meal options)? It would be interesting to know what the travel demographics are. If the majority of travellers are large (or even reasonably uncomfortable in their seats) then as responsible businesses airlines should attempt to meet the demands of their demographics. But, if we keep allowing airlines to set the standards they will always be sub par (I travel a lot and the worst part is ALWAYS the airlines). At the extreme level, are we willing to boycot airlines until they ofer comfortable seating for people taller than 5'6" and weighing more than 160 lbs? Too tired for any more of the thoughts racing throuhg my mind. Goodnight!
Oct 22nd, 2005, 08:17 PM
#35
Weasel: I was NOT commenting on the rest of your statement - just to what you said about airlines not being able to do it. (I didn't edit it BTW - I merely copy/pasted the bit I was responding to)
Anyway - if there are not enough seats - then it is an overbooking situation and they ask for voluntary bumpees - just like any other over booking.
It happens every day of the week . . . .
Anyway - if there are not enough seats - then it is an overbooking situation and they ask for voluntary bumpees - just like any other over booking.
It happens every day of the week . . . .
Oct 22nd, 2005, 09:26 PM
#36
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can't speak out of personal experiance but I can say I do know that they can buy 2 seats. Well at least at some airlines. My half sisters mom was going to fly out to see her and she's big enough that they had her buy 2 seats so it is possible for them to do that. I'm sorry you had such a bad experiance but you know next time you'll appreciate that whole seat 
Oct 22nd, 2005, 09:52 PM
#37
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Patrick,
I'm interested! Do your friends complain to the airline? and Do they get a refund?
They appear to be considerate people and I bet the passenger between them was complaining - I do hope they pointed out that they had paid for his/her seat and without them he/she'd be on a later flight.
I've also watched Airline and the embarrassment that passengers go through when they are asked to pay for an extra seat.
Mmmmmm... I wonder if airlines only do this when the flight isn't full!!!
I'm interested! Do your friends complain to the airline? and Do they get a refund?
They appear to be considerate people and I bet the passenger between them was complaining - I do hope they pointed out that they had paid for his/her seat and without them he/she'd be on a later flight.
I've also watched Airline and the embarrassment that passengers go through when they are asked to pay for an extra seat.
Mmmmmm... I wonder if airlines only do this when the flight isn't full!!!
Oct 22nd, 2005, 09:52 PM
#38
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Patrick's anecdote above demonstrates the truth that airlines sell transportation to people--they don't sell seats, they don't sell space. When the two large women bought the seat--the space--between them, the airline voided their purchase when it could transport one more person by doing so.
It was not that the person was paying more for the space than the women were. It was that the airline knows that its business is transporting people, and it would be a far worse thing to do, from a customer relations standpoint, to have a plane take off with an empty seat, leaving behind a customer who won't get where he needs to go when he needs to be there, than to disappoint a couple of customers who wanted to buy the opportunity to have no one sitting next to them.
One of the reasons the "fat people have to buy two seats" scheme won't fly (pardon the pun) is that it will collapse when the airlines need those second seats for passengers who otherwise would be left behind fuming at the airport. Which will the airline choose: permanently alienating both passengers, the one forced to buy the extra seat and the gone who didn't get where he needed to when he needed to? Or irritating them both temporarily as they are scrunched too close together? I think you can tell me very quickly which the airlines will choose.
And, of course, if there are fewer customers wanting to travel than there are seats, then the problem is lessened beause fat people can be placed next to a vacant seat. And do you really think a policy of making some fat people pay for a vacant seat next for them while others are seated next to an unpaid, vacant seat is going to survive very long?
It is the airlines' responsibility to come up with a more creative and flexible way of serving all with comfort than they have so far. Competitive pressures will reward those who do and punish those who do not.
The eventual solution will be along the lines Easytraveler describes above (some larger, two across seating in the economy section, to be used for those who most need it at the flight attendants' discretion), despite the pessimism about its adoption that she expresses.
Already, JetBlue has introduced different sized seating in the same fare class on some flights to accommodate different needs. On these planes, seats toward the back have greater legroom, for those who place a greater value on the extra room than on getting on and off the plane quickly. Seats with less legroom are clustered towards the front, for those whose first priority is to deplane the fastest.
So far I only know legroom to have been varied in this way, but if it has, it is only a matter of time until seat width is too. Easytraveler's larger two across seating might be placed at the very rear of the plane, to keep them from being "envied" by passengers not placed in them by the flight attendants (although I doubt that people would really clamor for the "honor" of needing them the most.)
In this free American ecomomy, businesses are supposed to compete to serve the widely varying needs of different types of people. Those providers who can serve the greatest variety of needs win the greatest rewards.
We who value freedom of choice should not be beating up on our fellow citizens who are more different from others of us, and have different needs, than is convenient for the service providers.
In less free societies, people are expected to conform to fit the services the providers find it convenient to provide. Instead, we Americans who value freedom of choice should expect and demand those providers find a way to serve us all in the glory of all our differences.
People, put the responsibility for solving this very genuine problem where it belongs--on the airlines, who we pay plenty to make this process of moving people places work as well as it can. Don't turn against your fellow passengers.
It was not that the person was paying more for the space than the women were. It was that the airline knows that its business is transporting people, and it would be a far worse thing to do, from a customer relations standpoint, to have a plane take off with an empty seat, leaving behind a customer who won't get where he needs to go when he needs to be there, than to disappoint a couple of customers who wanted to buy the opportunity to have no one sitting next to them.
One of the reasons the "fat people have to buy two seats" scheme won't fly (pardon the pun) is that it will collapse when the airlines need those second seats for passengers who otherwise would be left behind fuming at the airport. Which will the airline choose: permanently alienating both passengers, the one forced to buy the extra seat and the gone who didn't get where he needed to when he needed to? Or irritating them both temporarily as they are scrunched too close together? I think you can tell me very quickly which the airlines will choose.
And, of course, if there are fewer customers wanting to travel than there are seats, then the problem is lessened beause fat people can be placed next to a vacant seat. And do you really think a policy of making some fat people pay for a vacant seat next for them while others are seated next to an unpaid, vacant seat is going to survive very long?
It is the airlines' responsibility to come up with a more creative and flexible way of serving all with comfort than they have so far. Competitive pressures will reward those who do and punish those who do not.
The eventual solution will be along the lines Easytraveler describes above (some larger, two across seating in the economy section, to be used for those who most need it at the flight attendants' discretion), despite the pessimism about its adoption that she expresses.
Already, JetBlue has introduced different sized seating in the same fare class on some flights to accommodate different needs. On these planes, seats toward the back have greater legroom, for those who place a greater value on the extra room than on getting on and off the plane quickly. Seats with less legroom are clustered towards the front, for those whose first priority is to deplane the fastest.
So far I only know legroom to have been varied in this way, but if it has, it is only a matter of time until seat width is too. Easytraveler's larger two across seating might be placed at the very rear of the plane, to keep them from being "envied" by passengers not placed in them by the flight attendants (although I doubt that people would really clamor for the "honor" of needing them the most.)
In this free American ecomomy, businesses are supposed to compete to serve the widely varying needs of different types of people. Those providers who can serve the greatest variety of needs win the greatest rewards.
We who value freedom of choice should not be beating up on our fellow citizens who are more different from others of us, and have different needs, than is convenient for the service providers.
In less free societies, people are expected to conform to fit the services the providers find it convenient to provide. Instead, we Americans who value freedom of choice should expect and demand those providers find a way to serve us all in the glory of all our differences.
People, put the responsibility for solving this very genuine problem where it belongs--on the airlines, who we pay plenty to make this process of moving people places work as well as it can. Don't turn against your fellow passengers.
Oct 23rd, 2005, 07:33 AM
#39
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The exact same thing happened to us about 2 years ago when flying SW from BWI to TPA. At the time, you couldn't go online to get your boarding passes, so even though we got to the airport 1 1/2 hrs before our return flight, we were issued "C" boarding passes.
When we boarded the plane, the only 2 available seats were with an extremely obese man....who had the armrest in the up position and was spilling halfway into the seat next to him. (This flight originated in NY)
Because the flight was full, I had no choice but to sit with this fella's sweaty body against mine. Everytime I moved closer to my husband, he seemed to expand more into my seat. To boot, his body odor was offensive.
I sent a letter to SW when I return home to complain that not only was I uncomfortable, but that I had encrouched on my husbands seat to get away from this guy.
I got a very nice letter back apologizing for our flight discomfort and they included $200 flight vouchers. This customer service rep. stated in the letter that "they" (meaning sw) had erred in issuing this passenger a single seat.
When we boarded the plane, the only 2 available seats were with an extremely obese man....who had the armrest in the up position and was spilling halfway into the seat next to him. (This flight originated in NY)
Because the flight was full, I had no choice but to sit with this fella's sweaty body against mine. Everytime I moved closer to my husband, he seemed to expand more into my seat. To boot, his body odor was offensive.
I sent a letter to SW when I return home to complain that not only was I uncomfortable, but that I had encrouched on my husbands seat to get away from this guy.
I got a very nice letter back apologizing for our flight discomfort and they included $200 flight vouchers. This customer service rep. stated in the letter that "they" (meaning sw) had erred in issuing this passenger a single seat.
Oct 23rd, 2005, 09:15 AM
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
The idea of having over-sized seats on each plane makes so much sense. The airlines could charge 150 percent for each over-sized seat. The question is, how does the airline determine in advance who is an over-sized person? The matter can't wait till boarding, where it creates a public embarassment for everyone involved.
Maybe it's like the airlines' luggage weight policy. The airlines very clearly state that policy-- how large and heavy each piece can be-- and people who ignore it pay the penalty. What if a person's weight is subject to the same type of treatment-- we are told in print on websites, on confirmation e-mails, on tickets, etc. that people over X size need to purchase appropriate seating. Then, if they don't, they would be voluntarily putting themselves in an embarassing situation at the airport. The airlines could advertise it as a plus-size seat, in a sensitive and inoffensive manner, in niche publications, etc.
Certainly this is a touchy subject, and this thread provides many thoughtful ideas. I think it goes to show that most people are kind and sensitive regarding other persons' feelings. Let's keep talking, and we'll forward the result to the FAA or whomever.
Maybe it's like the airlines' luggage weight policy. The airlines very clearly state that policy-- how large and heavy each piece can be-- and people who ignore it pay the penalty. What if a person's weight is subject to the same type of treatment-- we are told in print on websites, on confirmation e-mails, on tickets, etc. that people over X size need to purchase appropriate seating. Then, if they don't, they would be voluntarily putting themselves in an embarassing situation at the airport. The airlines could advertise it as a plus-size seat, in a sensitive and inoffensive manner, in niche publications, etc.
Certainly this is a touchy subject, and this thread provides many thoughtful ideas. I think it goes to show that most people are kind and sensitive regarding other persons' feelings. Let's keep talking, and we'll forward the result to the FAA or whomever.
