gregorygrady

That's a perfectly good reason not to fly SWA. If you are a FREQUENT flyer, especially since you are from PHX, it seems a better FF strategy to fly America West to get the free First Class upgrades. I recall they offer unlimited 1st Class upgrades based on availability to their highest tier members. That is why I myself don't know if I would fly SWA if I were a COS. Although again, if I were a COS they threw that triple credit offer (which actually would be a 6X offer) at me, I'd be flying in my two seats on SWA in a heartbeat and I'd have my CP within 2 days.

swag

Just catching up with this thread.

Whatever you think of the merits of this case, I think it's inappropriate to post someone's email address on this board. Even if it was not difficult for you to track down. I would request that you consider editing your message to remove it.

StSebastian

There are definately reasons I fly them or recommend them to people, but it's not the top of the option list. If you just want a simple r/t ticket, they might not be your best option. If you want a one-way, multi-stopover, or something else a little weird, then their pricing structure might be better. If you're a status flier, then obviously that airline colors your decision to continue collecting status/upgrades/drink vouchers/credits or miles but for others, they just want the best time in a safe plane, so that's the recommendation I make for them.

I met the supervisor that was working the exit row angle for the 15 y/o when I was connecting onto US in LAX a while back, and she's just as nice as the camera portrays. I'd imagine that she'd do the extra work for a COS (or as we originally thought we heard, a Customer Of Width).

Tino

To each his own, I guess. I'm a "status flyer" and value CP level on Southwest much more highly than whatever nebulous benefits I received as an elite flyer on the bankrupt airlines.

gutt22

Anything that's so severely subjective is simply bad business. And I wasn't referring to the lady on the show when I mentioned inconsistent enforcement -- I know several COS who fly on a regular basis, and it's hit-or-miss whether they're asked to buy a second ticket.

And to say that they couldn't lose a lawsuit because obesity isn't classified as a disability is ludicrous. ADA isn't the only grounds for a class action lawsuit of this type. WN can't discriminate based on age, which is not a disability, or on race, which isn't a disability, either. In cases when an older passenger seems in ill-health, WN doesn't leave the decision up to their agents: they make clear you have to have a doctor's approval -- a clear case of them having an outside, expert source (which in place of complete objectivity is the next best thing). You say having a "does it fit?" seat next to the "does it fit?" carry-on bag test box wouldn't work because there's no way it could work. I disagree. You could simply have two criteria: your seat belt must fit around you and/or your body cannot spill over the sides of the seat. At least, then, the rules would be clear.

I'm not saying WN doesn't handle this policy about as sensitively as they can. I just think it's poorly formulated, and, because of that, opens the airline to a lot of criticism. It's unlike WN to have such a fuzzy set of rules. Come up with something, make it specific as possible, and enforce it consistently.

MIKEM

Give-me-a-break.

PTravel

It may be bad business but, to be honest, as long as it keeps someone else out of my seat, I really don't care.

WN is an interstate business, which means it is subject to Title 6 (or was it 7 -- I don't recall at this point). The law prohibits discrimination against protected classes. Age is _not_ a protected class, except with respect to anyone over 40 for employment purposes. Gender, race and national origin all _are_ protected classes, and illegal discrimination is prohibited. Marital status is a protected class with respect to housing. Weight is not a protected class, as a matter of law.

I could, if I chose, run an airline that excludes overweight people, people under 5' tall (unless they had a disability), and all children, without violating any law.


The only reason they do this is to avoid incurring liability. The legal term is "assumption of risk." There is no law that requires them to do so.

I said that having a fixed standard, such as whether a seat belt extender was required, or a requiring passengers to be under a certain waist size, doesn't address the problem, since body shape is more a determinative than any other criterion, and body shape varies from person to person.

Just keep people out of my seat, and I'm happy.

hockeystl

Google. 0.17 seconds:

http://www.warmspirit.com/fam_abo_nadine.jsp

gutt22

And that's fine -- I think we're agreeing here more than it seems on the surface. I want them to keep people out of my seat, too. I just want them to do it 100% of the time. The way the policy stands now, they're not doing it. It's a crummy, vague way to do business.

LarryJ

Does any large business ever enforce any policy 100% of the time? By that standard, what policies COULD be enforced?

crhptic

Interesting no one has said this before - it appears the lawsuit is NOT attacking the policy itself, rather the fact that the policy is inconsistently applied.

This is in keeping with what others have posted that the policy, on its face, is legal.

Probably a good move by her lawyer since by doing his research he would know that that argument has been tested in court before and has lost.

Tino

Inconsistently applied? I've flown over 300 segments on Southwest metal, and I've never been asked to purchase a 2nd seat.

Looks 100% consistent to me...

MIKEM

Absolutely right. You only want to enforce this policy if the flight is full. Otherwise, let the person use two seats. The GA has a difficult job discerning who is too large, it's subjective. Not to mention the uncomfortable tension that will result between the PAC, the GA, and the surrounding PAC's that will overhear. This rule should be enforced only as a last result when a free double seat is not available. WN is right by not enforcing this policy when they do not need to.

lewisc

But if the flight is an oversell the COS won't be able to purchase a second seat without displacing a customer that bought the appropriate number of seats. What's worse, bumping a normal sized PAX so COS can purchase a second seat or telling COS there isn't a second seat available so he's getting bumped?

Reserving a second seat allows COS to get a second BP and actually (slightly) increases the probability that there be an empty seat so COS gets a refund.

battia

What a lively debate! I have to agree with the policy on its merit from both a business or financial aspect as well as from a customer service aspect (meaning serving the passenger who is left with half a seat because the COS cannot put down the armrest and is occupying half of my seat!) I do NOT agree with a relaxed attitude about enforcement because that may be just the thing that causes them to lose one of these lawsuits. They are in a tough position though....they are trying to make it fair and therefore giving a free extra flow-over seat in cases where the flight is not completely full (which I think is 100% fair) and therefore it is a flight by flight issue to be handled typically within the 20 minutes before take-off.

Maybe one solution is that they position the turnstiles/ropes in such a way that they mimic the width of a seat with the armrest lowered. Therefore, if you cannot approach the counter without knocking over the ropes you are aware in advance that you will have to purchase a 2nd ticket!?!