Although I have not yet had to deal with the overlarge seatmate problem, I have considered what I would do if the occasion arose:

1: I would not sit in the partial seat, but would remain in the aisle and seek assistance from a flight attendant. By not accepting the partial seat, I would not give the airline the chance to ignore me.

2: I would go into politeness and humility overdrive and enlist the flight attendant into an attempt to help without embarrassing the seat-encroaching large person. If there were an alternative seat available, I would insist that the large person be offered the choice of the best seat.

3: If that failed, rather than sit in the partially filled seat, I would politely request and suggest that the problem be passed to a higher authority on the plane (or off it), but I would not sit down.

4: If all else failed, I would politely but firmly insist that I be given the benefits due to an involuntary bumping, or that they ask for a bumping volunteer, but I would not sit down in a seat already occupied by the person in the next seat.

That said, I think a little creativity by the airlines would solve most of these problems. As long as the financial survival of the airlines requires narrow seating, any loss of seat numbers will not occur.

However, there are places on most planes where the seating configuration could vary to include one or two wider seats when the maximum number of narrow seats doesn't quite fill the available space. I have seen narrow seats in short rows at the ends of cabins where there are a few extra inches unused by the narrow seats where wider seats would fit nicely. These could be assigned to wider passengers at flight time, just as bulkhead and exit row seats are specially assigned.

However, would any CEO allow his airline to become known as "Fat Friendly?"

AJPeabody, you sound like a thoughtful person to have a plan in advance. BUT, when faced with it, I think it would be harder than you think to cause a scene by standing in the aisle. It would draw more attention to the overweight person than any other tactic, for one, and it would take callousness on your part to pull off. Plus, it would mark you as a belligerent passenger, possibly delay the flight, and tick off all passengers, etc. It would create a scene for the FA and pilot to deal with, not the policy-makers we need to affect.
Again, I think the problem has to be solved upfront, not in the plane when everyone is involved and inconvenienced.
Finances understood-- the airlines would charge more for over-sized seats. And, yes, I think airlines could find a way to position themselves as 'flyer friendly' to all their passengers. The over-sized seats could be marketed to other specialty groups-- people with infants, for instance. (Or, maybe a new airline could start up to address just this problem-- so many of us Americans are overweight now! Just kidding, I think.)

True, there are widebody planes that could accomodate all sizes.
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...83667803weUEQG

AJPeabody, excellent. As I do feel for the large person, at some point my feelings and comfort level must be given equal value.

So, extra wide seats for a 50% surcharge? Isn't that called Business Class? And what if I want to buy that 2nd seat for half price? Do I HAVE to be obese or can anyone take advantage of this offer?

JBC411 and JetBlue are on the right track, and the only viable track IMO. Put those wider seats at the very rear of the plane. The marketplace will sort it out pretty quickly.

We are trying Hooters Air for the first time out of Myrtle Beach to NYC and we'll see about the larger seats. Supposedly, Hooters has much larger seats and lots of leg room in every seat.

Marilyn, there is no second seat for half-price. It's one over-sized seat for 150%. It's a conundrum, because others could buy such a seat (i.e. w/ infants) yet the obese would be required to buy it. So supply and demand would be challenging. Does JetBlue charge extra for those wider seats at the rear of the plane?

JetBlue does not (to the best of my knowledge) have wider seats. What they have is seats with a bit more legroom. So when you book online and choose your seats, you have the option of choosing regular seats toward the front, or more legroom seats toward the back. No difference in price, just the option to place more value on getting off the plane sooner or having more legroom during the trip.

I think it was JBC who suggested that wider seats might be handled in the same way, i.e., a few would be available, but they would have some drawback so that everyone wasn't clamoring for them. Maybe those seats would not be assigned until check-in, or FA's could make the arbitrary decision to move someone into those seats.

My other remarks were in reply to the various suggestions made on the thread, e.g., buy a larger seat for 150% of the normal price, or buy 2 seats with the 2nd at a reduced rate. I don't know if any airline is currently doing any of these things, but they were mentioned as possibilities. The problem I see is that lots of people might want to take advantage of this, since it's more space but cheaper than Business Class.

Pardon me if I step on any toes, but a little embarrassement is what it took for me to lose the weight. When I started to feel my hips squeeze into movie theater seats/amusement parks rides/airline seats, I knew, That's it. I had to take responsibility for myself, not make it society's/ or the business's problem. These larger people should be the more sensitive people, and do something about it, lose the weight or buy 2 seats, that's their problem, not others or the airlines.
I disagree with the airline that made someone sit in the seat that the two women had responsibly purchased and they should have complained and been given a compensation of some kind. Had I been the one put in that seat I would have declined to take that seat that they had paid for and the airline would be forced to find(and pay for) someone to take another flight.

Yes, MaureenB, my advance plan would be risky if I did it wrong. Clearly, both the politeness and the humility would have to be demonstrated some distance from the compromised seat. Your point is well taken.

Perhaps a bit of bewilderedness ("Gee, Miss Flight Attendant, what am I going to do?") should also be added.

The main point is that as long as seats are sized and measured to be uncomfortable to the average sized coach flyer, and intolerable to anyone with excess width or length, there will continue to be problems, but if all seats were big enough and spaced enough to fit all possible longs or wides, there must be fewer seats per plane and higher fares for all.

Rationally, there should be different seat sizes in proportion to expected passenger sizes, assorted to allow unequally sized couples to find suitably sized seats next to each other. Of course, equity would then require size based fares, and the clear result would be both angered passengers, frazzled airline workers, and chaos. In other words, conditions would be the same as they are now, but more complicated.

So, a modest proposal (see J. Swift):

No individual seats, just long benches, seating as many or as few as the total bottom widths will allow per row.

Or: No seats at all. Let everybody stand and we won't need to worry about seat sizes.

After all, now that the plane is the bus, we could change to the plane as the subway.

JBC411: '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.'

Yours is an intelligent response, but no one is beating up on our fellow citizens, we're just 'taking up for the little guy', who's being sqeezed here in more than one way! I think the responses here have been expressed in a sensitive manner. ...What is that old quote...something like 'your rights end where my nose begins'...???:-?

I agree with AJPeabody and trypgryl's responses and I think, if more of us did this, the management would have to take notice and do something about the problem.

Belle

Someone above said that "there is no way you can avoid discrimination issues." Not true. Air services in Alaska (both helicopters and planes) ask in advance if you weigh over 250. If so, you are charged fare-and-a-half and given two seats. I definitely think there should be a surcharge for large folks and only a certain number of seats on each airplane alloted for them (as the airline would lose revenue by charging only 1.5 times the fare for 2 seats). Discrimination? Not at all. Safety and comfort, both for the other passengers and the obese traveler as well. What if such a person sat in the aisle seat and actually prevented other passengers from getting out of their row because of mobility issues? Their right to be obese doesn't "outweigh" my right to safety and comfort.

I hope my comments don't sound hostile, because I don't have any personal animosity towards any group or category of people. I have flown next to really huge people and it is a terrible experience.

This is obviously not a PC question but something just struck me.

We from time to time have threads about someone having someone larger spread over to part of their airline seat.

One large person and the smaller person is consequently not able to enjoy or use the airline seat they purchased.

What happens, if I may ask, if in a row of seats all the passengers in that row (be it two or three seats) are larger than the couch seats.
For example, three seats, three large people. It would seem that these three people would not be able to be accommodated in the three seat row. Has this ever happened? And if so, what does the airline do in that situation?

You can bet your life they'd complain!

This happened to me on a non-stop flight from San Francisco to Boston some years ago. It was a truly dreadful experience. In a row of three, I was in the center with another normal size person in the window seat. Just before the door was closed, a HUGE woman arrived, lifted the armrest and plopped down into the
aisle seat! I was initially quite astonished as I did not realize that those armrests could be lifted. This woman spread WAY into my seat. No matter how far to the right I attempted to move, she was unavoidable. Within minutes, I was soaked! Not wishing to seem inconsiderate, I endured this until I could no longer stand it, then grabbed the reading material from the pocket and stuffed it down between us. She pretended not to notice.

In my opinion, anyone who cannot fit into one seat without spreading into the one beside them should be required to purchase two seats, or a seat in business or first class if that does the job.

I vehemently disagree that I am purchasing "transportation". I have purchased a SEAT.

As everyone knows, those seats are cramped enough without anyone on either side "spreading" into yours.

Though I am not without sympathy and empathy for all those who are grossly overweight, in my observation, the overwhelming majority of them have gotten themselves that way with very poor eating habits. For sure, if I had no "restraint", I would be just as huge.

Doesn't everyone know overweight folks who say "Well, I really shouldn't..." but then go right ahead?

Those who cannot "contain" themselves in one airline seat know very well who they are. And, to spread into another seat on an airplane is just totally rude and inconsiderate.

You know, if the airlines have and enforce baggage restrictions, there's no reason why they shouldn't have and enforce height/weight restrictions in seats.

How ridiculout to suggest that this is a matter of "discrimination"!

You know, the airlines can hardly keep themselves in business these days, so this may be a significant issue.

When traveling alone (to meet my husband traveling on business), unless I can upgrade to business or first class, I don't go.

When traveling with my husband, unless we can book seats on a plane with two seats only in the row, we don't go.

Unfair! ? Welcome to real life. Why not just pat yourself on the back for being kind to the woman and move on.

djkbooks, you are totally correct regarding this problem. LoveItaly, obese passengers really should be placed next to each other. They would realize how a normal-sized person feels when half their space is taken by the huge person who sits beside them. I would never allow that arm rest to be raised. The obese person will have to live with it.

At the risk of being flamed to a crisp, here goes...

When airlines/airports started to prohibit smoking, a few smokers complained but everyone embraced the cleaner, fresher air. No one talked about discrimination. Smokers just had to adapt.

"But smokers damage my health, obese people don't", some might say. In an airplane environment, I disagree. Not only do obese people can cause extreme discomfort to the people sitting next to them, they also become a MAJOR safety hazard in the event of an emergency. I've seen people on planes whose belly touches the seat in front of them sitting in the emergency row. They are supposed to be able to open the exit and direct others... how can they direct others to the exit when they take up the row's width?

Airlines didn't get creative with the smoking situation. They didn't create a separate section for smoking. They banned it, period. If you are so overweight that you might create a safety hazard, why should you be allowed to fly? You're endangering other people's lives! Imagine a really overweight person on the Air France flight that recently crashed in Toronto... the only reason nobody died in that crash was that the plane was evacuated in time.

In most cases, obesity is self-inflicted by a combination of overeating and lack of exercise. It is also reversible.

What if the policy is... if you can't fit, you can't fly? I know it sounds extreme but, then again, forbidding smoking in airplanes and airports was an extreme idea when it was first brought up.

Jean Valjean, I guess noone has given you two candlesticks yet, and you have not learned mercy. I am sorry for you.

I know some really warm, bright and productive people who are grossly overweight. Two have struggled with depression for years. Both have recently had bypass surgery and I hope it is successful. Another is my husband's sister and she is developmentally disabled, having had some sort of brain injury at birth. She is a sweet person with a sense of fairness, but she has no sense about food. That said, when she flies, the family donates frequent flier points to make sure she goes first class so she has room on the plane.
This is a problem, but banning people from transportation is hardly the answer, or even a kind thought.

I should know better than to respond to these train wreck posts, but, whatever.

>What if the policy is... if you can't fit, you can't fly<

A flaw in your analogy is that smokers are prohibited from smoking during a flight, not prohibited from flying.

And if the criteria for allowing disallowing people to fly is that they are a potential safety hazard in an emergency, why stop at the obese? How about the folks in wheelchairs? The really old and the youngest among us? Mentally challenged?