Seated next to a really overweight person - what to do?
#346
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 394
I can't find it now, but I read a blog where a person of size was discussing tactics that might be used to avoid having to pay for two seats. So, while many here are viewing a person of size buying two seats as the solution, others are viewing this as the problem.
#349
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: LHR, HKG
Programs: gate lice
Posts: 315
It's not entirely about the room, I suppose. In F, you don't have to physically touch your seatmate the way that you do in Y. Those few inches of personal space really matters.
#350
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: ORD, MKE
Programs: UA, AA, Hilton and regular member of everything else
Posts: 1,332
Agreed! This is more of an issue these days because of the airlines trying to pack more people in so they could make more money. They shouldn't expect my charity when half their customers don't fit in those seats. If I lose half of what I paid for, I expect compensation.
#352
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: EMA (how boring) but BHX is more convenient.
Posts: 2,398
There is more here: http://www.ravishly.com/2015/09/17/t...ying-while-fat
Tips for what to say are:
Note: I'm not taking sides in this debate. I can see both sides. I'm just pointing out the strategies and motivations of people of size to balance the debate as a lot of the posts seem to be from the viewpoint of the skinnier person sitting next to a person of size.
Tips for what to say are:
Acknowledge the elephant: The one in the room. Or, rather, plane. Sitting down next to someone and it’s super tight? Don’t pretend like it’s not happening. Say, “Looks like we get to share a personal space bubble today!” Jennifer McLellan of Plus Size Birth has said, “Hope you like cuddling!” Laugh about it. Say what you need to in order take the edge off.
#353
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oxford, Mississippi
Programs: Delta Silver thanks to Million Miles; Choice Plat., point scrounger everywhere
Posts: 1,596
Most of us on this forum are programmed to assert our rights. We've read various scenarios and have thought over in advance what we will do if faced with the prospect of a seat poacher, a demand for seat swap, or a super-obese adjacent passenger. And so having mentally practiced our lines and considered the ethics of the situation, we don't feel bad about saying, "No, I won't move," or "No, I won't agree to raise the armrest." And we really don't care if the other passenger gets angry about it.
But a substantial percentage of flyers can't stand the thought of publicly "fat shaming" someone, so they will in many cases suffer mightily in silence. My wife is one of these, although I think she may have learned her lesson after being pressed up against a cabin wall for four hours by a gigantic woman on a Delta flight. The COS who knows they need two seats but refuses to buy them relies on people not wanting to hurt their feelings. The airlines who know of the problem but refuse to address it rely on this, too. And it's not right.
The flight attendants spend a great deal of time and effort making sure every seat back and tray table is upright during takeoff and landing, although I really don't think it makes much difference. Surely they are able as they walk up and down the aisles to look and make sure every armrest is in the "down" position, and if not, politely ask if the passengers are traveling together. If not, the airline rule should simply be that the armrest may not be raised between two passengers not traveling together.
I believe the government should mandate minimum seat sizes; doing so would increase fares only slightly. The purpose of government is to protect the citizenry, and if mandating a minimum seat width doesn't protect the public, I don't know what does. My personal opinion is that the airlines are intentionally making the coach product as miserable and stress-filled as possible to force people to pay a huge premium for upgraded seating that has far too much room and/or service than most people want, and I don't think they should be allowed to get away with it.
But a substantial percentage of flyers can't stand the thought of publicly "fat shaming" someone, so they will in many cases suffer mightily in silence. My wife is one of these, although I think she may have learned her lesson after being pressed up against a cabin wall for four hours by a gigantic woman on a Delta flight. The COS who knows they need two seats but refuses to buy them relies on people not wanting to hurt their feelings. The airlines who know of the problem but refuse to address it rely on this, too. And it's not right.
The flight attendants spend a great deal of time and effort making sure every seat back and tray table is upright during takeoff and landing, although I really don't think it makes much difference. Surely they are able as they walk up and down the aisles to look and make sure every armrest is in the "down" position, and if not, politely ask if the passengers are traveling together. If not, the airline rule should simply be that the armrest may not be raised between two passengers not traveling together.
I believe the government should mandate minimum seat sizes; doing so would increase fares only slightly. The purpose of government is to protect the citizenry, and if mandating a minimum seat width doesn't protect the public, I don't know what does. My personal opinion is that the airlines are intentionally making the coach product as miserable and stress-filled as possible to force people to pay a huge premium for upgraded seating that has far too much room and/or service than most people want, and I don't think they should be allowed to get away with it.
#354
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 394
Someone who knows they need two seats but doesn't buy them is relying on the staff (airport and airplane) not doing their jobs. It's not right, but it's not right regardless of whether they're fat or not - so "fat shaming" shouldn't enter the picture. The problem isn't fat, it's size & shape - I can't imagine FT posters would be wiling to "size shame" a basketball player or a nightclub bouncer who doesn't fit in a coach seat but didn't buy two. And they shouldn't "fat shame" someone either.
Oh, and I agree with you about airlines purposely making the coach seats as miserable in size and service as they can.
#355
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: OSL/IAH/ZRH (time, not preference)
Programs: UA1K, LH GM, AA EXP->GM
Posts: 38,266
..Surely they are able as they walk up and down the aisles to look and make sure every armrest is in the "down" position, and if not, politely ask if the passengers are traveling together. If not, the airline rule should simply be that the armrest may not be raised between two passengers not traveling together.
I believe the government should mandate minimum seat sizes; doing so would increase fares only slightly...
#356
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,417
I believe the government should mandate minimum seat sizes; doing so would increase fares only slightly. The purpose of government is to protect the citizenry, and if mandating a minimum seat width doesn't protect the public, I don't know what does. My personal opinion is that the airlines are intentionally making the coach product as miserable and stress-filled as possible to force people to pay a huge premium for upgraded seating that has far too much room and/or service than most people want, and I don't think they should be allowed to get away with it.
#357
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Between BDL and PVD
Programs: RapidRewards, SkyPesos, whatever flies where I want to go.
Posts: 270
Since I only fly Southwest, I'm accustomed to their model for COS (Customers of Size, their term, which I prefer to POS since that one has another highly insulting meaning in the US). As a COS myself, I have always acknowledged my responsibility to those around me.
I'm 6'-3" tall and my weight has fluctuated over the years between 250lb and 290lb. My shoulders have always been very wide - I measured them at 25" - so I've always had trouble keeping my shoulder out of someone else's face. I usually spent entire flights leaning uncomfortably, even painfully, against the wall.
A few years ago, with my weight climbing and my butt getting wider and wider, I started booking two seats, and suddenly flying became comfortable again. No more leaning against the wall, no more pain and discomfort, and no worries that I might ruin someone else's flight.
I'm 6'-3" tall and my weight has fluctuated over the years between 250lb and 290lb. My shoulders have always been very wide - I measured them at 25" - so I've always had trouble keeping my shoulder out of someone else's face. I usually spent entire flights leaning uncomfortably, even painfully, against the wall.
A few years ago, with my weight climbing and my butt getting wider and wider, I started booking two seats, and suddenly flying became comfortable again. No more leaning against the wall, no more pain and discomfort, and no worries that I might ruin someone else's flight.
I'm not too broad shouldered, but not small either, so I generally try to get one of the empty middle seats when the LF is below 1 (I have gotten it on LF .99 flights). If it is going to be full, when there are a dozen or two empty seats left, I spot a normal-ish sized person and ask if they would like the middle seat, as it's OK for both of us, to try and avoid a large-ish person like myself, or someone with very broad shoulders, as then it's uncomfortable for both of us.
Part of the problem is that the B737 airframe was derived from the B727, which was designed around 1959. People were a tad bit skinnier in 1959 than they are today, and airlines doesn't really want a wider airframe, since it will just cost more to operate. The B737 is one of my favorite aircraft to fly on, I find them quite comfortable, but someone designing a new plane today probably wouldn't pick the 3-3 arrangement with that narrow of an airframe cross-section.
#358
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Between BDL and PVD
Programs: RapidRewards, SkyPesos, whatever flies where I want to go.
Posts: 270
And higher CO2 emissions, less capacity at airports, etc, etc. I don't think the FAA should be involved with seat width. I do think that they should be involved in seat pitch. I kind of like the innovation that F9 and NK have brought to the market, but I'd like to see more research done on potential safety issues with those airlines. I think they should look at emergency evacuation with that small of a seat pitch, as well as health related issues due to lack of ability to move around and circulation problems, which vary a lot person to person, but may be more dangerous with a tighter seat pitch on average.
#359
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: in the vicinity of SFO
Programs: AA 2MM (LT-PLT, PPro for this year)
Posts: 19,781
Part of the problem is that the B737 airframe was derived from the B727, which was designed around 1959. People were a tad bit skinnier in 1959 than they are today, and airlines doesn't really want a wider airframe, since it will just cost more to operate. The B737 is one of my favorite aircraft to fly on, I find them quite comfortable, but someone designing a new plane today probably wouldn't pick the 3-3 arrangement with that narrow of an airframe cross-section.
The A320 family at about 10 inches wider which translates to about an extra inch of shoulder room per seat; designed in the 1980s vs. the 1950s.
For shorter flights, I really miss the MD-80/DC-9 seating pattern. The seats were no wider than the Boeing 6-across pattern... but no middle seat on the two side with both people able to lean outward was hugely more comfortable than any 3-3 layout.
#360
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Gold. (Former) UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat
Posts: 8,201