shapscpa

Have you heard about this?

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/0...a_us_obesity_1

Does this mean double mileage? Double baggage allowances? How are they going to judge who's obese and who's not? This is quite ridiculous...

What's next? Tall people are allowed to have the seats in front of them removed?

As if the Canadian airlines weren't in enough trouble....

biggestbopper

What's so wrong about this? The airlines have been torturing coach passengers by putting their knees in their mouths for too long. This may establish a rule that would let us end, or at least cut back the torture.@:-)

I respectfully presume that the OP is not tall. Although, even short people are suffering from seat pitch squeeze.

shapscpa

Actually, I am tall...was going for the passive aggressive approach to start that revolution I would hate to suggest such a thing when *I* would benefit...

jumpdogjump

Oh well, I hear there's not a very long line at the 9th circuit

Pepperoni pizza and Ice cream, here we come!

GVA

I suppose this is an incentive to get fat now?

Wonder if the Judge doesn't work for PizzaPizza as an evening job?

pattermj

Yea I am sorry but unless you can prove you have a metabolic disorder, lose the weight. Hell I am not in great shape and I admit it, but I am in no way obese and being 6' 1" helps move it all around especially consider I am still in shape enough to play competitive rugby (forward positions at least). I say make it a requirement people have to be able to run at least a 10 minute mile (hell speed walk speed) once a year with a hungry tiger behind them. If they are too slow, darwin works.

/Hates those who flow into other seats

AAerSTL

So does that also mean they'll get two meals and beverages??

cepheid

Oh man... I can't wait until people who are "functionally impaired" by having sore behinds are legally entitled to First Class for the price of Coach. I'll be first in line for that one.

Seriously, while there are limited cases of obesity actually being outside of reasonable control (e.g. serious and untreatable metabolic disorders), obesity is by and large (pun intended) a controllable condition; just because it requires willpower and life-changing actions to control it doesn't (and shouldn't) make "voluntary" obesity anywhere near equal to medically-caused obesity, just as alcohol-induced liver cirrhosis isn't considered equal to medically-caused (e.g. hepatic) cirrhosis in consideration for treatment and/or transplants.

I'm got plenty of excess weight around the middle, but if I ever got to the point where I had to purchase 2 seats, I would still not feel even remotely entitled to getting 2 for the price of one if my condition was the result of my own actions.

Will the Canadian government provide alcoholics with free taxis anywhere they want to go because they're "functionally disabled" by drinking too much and therefore can't drive? (Addiction, while certainly biologically-based, is treatable with willpower and, when necessary, medicine.)

There are a number of FTers who post about having to buy 2 seats and most (if not all) of them do so without any apparent shred of entitlement.... major props to them.

scoow

There was a thread earlier this year about this. Not just obese passengers, but disabled who need a caregiver will not be charged for the second (caregiver's) seat.

Ah... here it is.

3544quebec

I am discriminated against too and deserve special consideration. Through no fault of my own I was born in 1962 and can't make myself be 7 years old to qualify for childrens fares. Aging surely is an equally morbid condition as obesity.

jimbosmate

Fat people are fat simply because the eat too much and dont exercise. They usaully dont smeell too sweet either. I watched 2 fat women squeeze into 3 seats in a 3-2 plane a few weeks ago and how they would get out in an emergency is beyond thought. The other thing I noticed on my 14 flights in 10 days was the huge amount of wheelchairs to wheel off the fat people who are too fat to walk. Where ever you look you see these people constantly nibbling and drinking huge drinks, they are not happy if they haver a drink under one litre in their hands. This ruling simply proves had down right stupid the legal system has become in both Canada and USA

sefrischling

The ruling by the Canadian Supreme Court, and the CTA, fails to address a significant concern, the airlines' loss of a revenue seat. Airlines run on very thin margins, and on high yield routes, the forfeiting of a revenue seat can cost the airline can be costly.

If the ruling that 'functionally obese passengers' are entitled to two seats is to be enforced, a series of guidelines must be put into place. These guidelines must dictate either a height-to-weight ratio, or some guideline stating the circumference of the passenger to qualify as 'functionally disabled by obesity.' If hard guidelines are not in place, anyone is free to state they obese, and in turn airline are free to deny this newly upheld passengers right in Canada.

The ruling by Canada's Supreme Court does not address how this ruling will affect passengers flying on connecting code-share flights.

When booking a flight, will passengers be required to declare that they are obese at the time of booking? What protocol will be established for granting a second seat to obese passengers on full and oversold flights? Will the obese passenger be bumped? Will another passenger be forced to be bumped? Airlines needs to establish a protocol for passengers flying on Embraer 135/145, or other aircraft with 1-and-2 seating when their seating rights disrupts parties traveling together, seeking the two seats together.

Additionally, this ruling does not take into account passengers who are unable to fit into business class seats. Of course the arm rests in business class seats do not go up, confining passengers to a single seat. Since this is not addressed in the CTA ruling, or the ruling upheld by Canadian Supreme Court, it is something that may still be demanded by those who qualify as 'functionally disabled by obesity."

Overall I think this ruling will eventually he heard in the courts again, despite the Court's decision to not hear the new appeal. The Canadian Federal Court of Appeal has already previously rejected by the Canadian Federal Court of Appeal.

Until concrete guidelines are set in place, this topic will come up and be challenged regularly by the airlines in Canada and by the passengers who fly to, and through, Canada.

PTravel

I'm glad Canada's court has taken a sensible approach in that it has made this an airline problem, rather than foisting it on innocent passengers who have the misfortune of being seated next to an individual who, for whatever reason, can fit in their seat and forcibly usurp the seat of the stranger next to them. I wish the U.S. would do the same. Whether or not the obese passenger should pay double or not is irrelevant. Not requiring strangers to share their already limited seating space with an obese passenger is the issue.

jascp

I agree it is good that the issue isnt being foisted on passengers but who pays is not irrelevant. If the obese passenger does not pay then the rest of the passengers pay. For this reason the airlines are glad that the government solved their problem by making the non obese passengers carry the load.

In fairness to those of us who fit in one seat the government should have required the obese to purchase two seats.

By the government's logic gasoline should be discounted to obese drivers since fuel economy declines with increasing weight.

I had to sit next to at least a 400 pounder on a prop. He couldnt drop the seat divider. Since it was a 25 minute flight and I had to keep my appointment I did not complain. I will the next time. I paid for my seat and I am not sharing it with an extra person and a half.

By the way I am obese by medical standards but I fit in one seat and I have no allusions why I am this way. Medical obesity? Not unless you are so mentally deranged that you are compelled to eat. I am fat because my intake does not equal or exceed my burn rate i.e. I pig out!

People should pay for medical care by the pound.

SouthsideJAX

Wow, so far there were a couple of postings that have some pretty insensitive comments in them. I suspect it is because you have had the pleasure of sitting next to someone who did not fit within the confines of their seat, and you were frustrated by it. I have been there too, and I won't say it is pleasant. But your comments are brutal.

If you read the article, it mentions people who are "functionally obese". I don't know the exact meaning, but I suspect it means people who can not navigate the boarding process on their own and/or fit into one seat, due to health complications brought on by morbid obesity.

As Ptravel mentioned, it is actually a good ruling. The airline will have to block out two seats for such individuals, thus eliminating the chance that someone else will be seated directly aside of them. It will be one fare for one individual, so no, they won't get double miles and two drinks.

jimbosmate, your posting was about the most insulting, generalizing posting I have seen. I sure hope that was your attempt at a joke, which turned out badly.

As for the notion that this gives an unfair value to obese people compared to what "normal" people pay for airfare, anytime you want to trade places with someone this obese, go right ahead. Enjoy the perks.

BTW, I am 6' 2" and 225 lbs. I have a bit of a beer gut (potential muscle as I call it) but I am not obese.