4thplz

I do not agree it is fitting to say "the stupidist gate agents".
It is not an issue of following the policy. It is the matter of hurting someone's feelings. It is not an easy thing to do.

I agree that there has to be a way to address the problem.

DeafFlyer

There is a way. Larger seats.

lewisc

Makes sense, amusement parks have roller coaster seats available for POS to try out before they get in line.

Tino

Now THERE'S a government-friendly solution. Force companies to size their airplanes/buses/rollercoasters/cars/etc to accommodate the largest passenger.

Tino

So instead of being embarrassed in front of a few passengers because she can't cram her fat *** into a seat, Trina Blake decides to publicize her massive girth to the entire country by filing a lawsuit, telling everyone that her *** is too big for Southwest Airlines planes.

If that isn't humiliation, I don't know what is.

gregorygrady

Well said! Are you the same guy that teaches the "sensitivity training" at my company?!?!?

gregorygrady

You offer some great suggestions expert7700. Especially the suggestion regarding the instituting a policy based on a fixed waist. If you are more than <x> inches around at the waist, then you have to buy a second seat if the flight is full. Everybody knows their waist size, if you are bigger than that, you know you now have 3 options:
1) Fly another airline
2) But 2 seats on SWA and hope the flight isn't full.
3) Go on a crash diet before your flight.

This solution also would limit humiliation for large people. A simple waist measurement would determine if this person is a "COS" or not. There would be no humiliating sitting in the seat, "no, sorry you're too fat, go back to the ticket counter and purchase another seat". And SWA could have black strings or measuring tapes available for all COS passengers to take to measure themselves in the bathroom or whatever so they could do it in privacy. If they are too fat, they buy another ticket. I also really like the idea of a verification card. This would result in MUCH less humiliation so a large customer that travels alot wouldn't have to be subjected to the measurement test every time they fly. Maybe it could be good for a year or whatever and then they might need a retest. And I would think it could easily be linked to the RR #, so you wouldn't actually need to pull out your card everytime you fly. Possibly it could be a little notation on your boarding pass right after your RR #, such as RR#00000084936748NTF. Then if any SWA employee asked to measure you, you could show them your boarding card and say, Look at my RR#, I'm "Not Too Fat". This would diminish the humiliation caused, and I must say if I was fat, I would be humiliated by SWA's policy and testing as well and probably wouldn't fly them. Well, nevermind, of course I would, I could get twice the RR credits!!! Think of the possibilities, Mileage Runs in half the time because you could get double the credit!!! If you're targeted for triple credit (and you're a SWABIZ user), you could get 7 credits per seat for TWO seats for a total of 14 credits for one RT flight. Holy cow! I'm going to the all you can eat buffet right now. Soon I too will be a COS.

Anyways, great suggestions expert7700. ^ ^ ^

nsx

Litigious people can attack this even more easily than the present policy. Let me illustrate: "This new policy is clearly discriminatory against women. Everyone knows that at a given weight men tend to have smaller waists than women. A fair policy would also measure men at the shoulders." The valid part of this argument is that waist size does not correlate 100% with ability to fit into the space you have purchased.

Whatever Southwest does, the lawsuits will continue. The only policy which can prevent this is one that is never enforced against a litigious customer. That's probably why only Southwest is getting sued: the other airlines are managed by cowards.

ginandtacos.com

If someone can't fit in a seat at a restaurant maybe they shouldn't be eating out!!!!

gregorygrady

This thread just has me on the floor laughing every time I read a new post.

nd_eric_77

What a crock of ****!!! Airlines have a right to determine their own seat width and pitch. Let the market determine what is acceptible and what is not. AA did this by introducing flights with more legroom, and had mixed results. Regulation or litigation (even worse) should NOT be the way seat widths are determined.

lewisc

No one (in this thread) suggested government regulations. 4thplz posted:

and someone replied bigger seats would be a way.

May not be the best way but it certainly is a way.

QUESTION: Let's change the parameters, suppose an airline reduced seat size so exactly 49% of their customers have to buy a second seat. Probably wouldn't need regulations, the airline would lose a lot of customers. The question is how big do the seats have to be to be fair to most of the customers.

When ball parks and theaters renovate they frequently put in larger seats to accommodate the needs of their customers.

SW's policy seems fair but I don't see any reason why 2 COS couldn't just buy one extra seat. COS get to preboard and under the present policy they will get 2 seats together, getting 3 seats together isn't that much different.


edited to change POS to the correct term COS.

nsx

It's COS = customer of size. POS is something entirely different, related to that other thread on offensive odor.

lewisc

Shows what I know, I thought it was person (or passenger) of size.

expert7700

Glad someone took my ideas seriously and didn't just reply bigger seats. bigger seats=higher prices, and that isn't fair for the average traveller. Here is a quote from southwest.com. " For 2001, on average only six seats per aircraft accounted for Southwest Airlines' profit...If we were to replace just three rows of three seats with two seats, each being one and a half times wider, we would have to significantly raise our fares to maintain our profit margin or consider incorporating a First Class section-something that doesn't fit in our philosophy and something we would never consider doing..

A year is too long of a credit time to keep the NTF (almost fell out of my chair laughing when I read your term NTF). People can crash diet or gain weight quickly.. I think 3 or 6 months is fair. A designer tailor's instrument is MUCH LESS HUMILIATING than having 137 passengers, plus airport employees and TV CAMERAS watch you try to sit in 1 seat. Their web site could even have a form to mail you a free device to help you them determine this in the comfort of their own home (training, conditioning, etc), so that on the real test day you are up for the challenge.

Southwest doesn't need to bend over backwards and make extra seats available for obese passengers... Since it says the Americans with Disability act does not apply to airline travel. " The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) preceded the ADA, and Congress excluded air carriers and other air transportation services from the scope of ADA. " I for one think they already do a pretty good job, but in the public light of the Airline! tv show, some changes should be considered.

In a business sense (warning not very politically correct here) statistics show if you're obese you don't live as long, and if halfway thru a flight we have to land for a big mac attack or coronary, you are doing all the other passengers a disservice.