bniu

I'm no small guy but I agree here, Southwest definitely has got this one right. Make the COS buy two seats and provide a method for an automatic refund if the flight isn't full. Honest, up front, open, consistent, and fair. I'm no small guy, and I fully support Southwest's policy. When a COS flies on WN, he knows exactly what he needs to do. The problem with all the other legacy carriers is that everything is done case by case, which leads to inconsistency.

I think the real problem is inconsistency, and not whether a policy is sensitive or insensitive. Can anyone name UA/US/AA/DL's actual policies on COS?

I actually had a debate with my classmates on this policy, and ironically, all the thin people felt it was mean the COS had to buy 2 seats, and all the big guys supported the 2 seat requirement. When you buy a seat, you are actually renting 17" of seat width! If you need more, pay more. Just like at a restaurant, if one entree doesn't fill you, then pay for another.

Having come across many GRANDES in my life, I'm fully convinced that it's a lifetime of bad choices that resulted in becoming a GRANDE.

PTravel

This is, of course, absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. It's no one's business to judge someone else's life choices (if, in fact, life choices are responsible). Someone's weight is irrelevant to me and is no reflection on their character.

Simple idea: if you have special needs, whether it two adjacent seats because of weight or traveling partners, extra legroom because of height, aisle seats because of claustrophobia, window seats because of flying phobia, or anything else, it is up to you to see that your needs are met without making your problem the problem of the strangers seated around you. You shouldn't impose on other passengers, and other passengers have the right to expect that you will not impose on them.

masonuc

It's really not irrelevant. When people have a disability, we all feel more compassion for their problem. We've designed laws to make sure they are treated fairly even if it costs the business or their employer extra money. That is a conscious decision we have all made and the vast majority of people support. Because we could all be disabled, or our children could be born disabled, through no fault of our own. But fat people are fat because of choice, not disability. They choose to overeat and become fat. Thus I feel far less compassion for the fat guy intruding on my seat than a disabled person that needs to put her equipment in my personal space. And likewise I want the fat guy to bear all the burden of his condition in how it affects me -- whereas I am more than willing to bear some of the burden for a disabled person to be treated fairly.

PTravel

Your understanding of obesity is, to be charitable, "incomplete." Regardless, someone's life choices are not the business of strangers. The only question is whether someone is imposing on strangers due to their special need. I don't care if a pax is overweight or "over-height." It is their responsibility to see to their needs, and not the responsibility of strangers to assume the burden of their problems. Obesity is not a disability, but neither is height, having children, or wanting to travel with one's spouse. In all such cases, it is up to the person with the special need to see that it is met.

tommyleo

You imply to be an expert on the subject. Please take the time to "complete" our understanding of obesity if you're going to claim such superior understanding. Maybe we'll learn something new.

tommyleo

That's the best analogy I've read yet. ^

I tend to eat way more than most people I know when I am in training for sports competition. Imagine if I told the waiter at the restaurant that I should not pay for that second appetizer because it's "just not fair" that I happen to have a faster metabolism than others!

PTravel

You inferred I am an expert on the subject. Your inference is incorrect. However, I have read enough to know that for two given individuals consuming the same amount and type of foods, one may gain weight and one may lose weight depending on a number of factors.

Regardless, it is, as I said, irrelevant to the question of personal responsibility for seeing to one's needs on an aircraft without imposing on anyone else.

tommyleo

You responded to another poster by writing: "Your understanding of obesity is, to be charitable, 'incomplete.'" Sounds like an expert opinion to me. Tell us about these "factors" that make people weigh 400 pounds while eating the same foods as a 170 pound person. How about a source? Inquiring minds want to know!

PTravel

I can't help how it sounds to you. You are responsible for your own mistakes.

Do your own reading. Did you have someone write your term papers in college, too? Or did you just rely on "common sense," and wonder at the grades you received?

Often1

How a person becomes too large to fit in a seat without infringing on a seatmate's space is completely irrelevant. If you don't fit in a seat, you buy a second seat. How the POS got to be a POS has nothing to do with the seat + space that the seatmate bought.

Same thing for the guy with his leg in a cast who needs to elevate it. Doesn't matter to me whether he broke it saving somebody's life or robbing a bank (well, maybe not robbing a bank). Fact is that he needs space to elevate his leg and he needs to buy the space to do so.

Folks make this way more complicated than it is.

PTravel

^^

Mr. Vker

OK, I ask this sincerely. I have flown several flights. Domestic and trans-oceanic where I have seen paralyzed passengers. They were in business class out of necessity. I would assume the airlines didn't provide this premium seating out of charity. Am I correct? They need more services and functionality. I assume they pay for it.

I used to be a COS. If I was in coach, I bought two tix. It was more comfortable for me and for the other passengers. I really appreciated SWA policy of refunding second seat if flight didn't go out full.

stevens397

This last page of posts look like the type you see right before a thread is closed

I think many people have expressed themselves very cogently - it's a topic that has existed on a number of threads and I feel pretty good that the issue has been fleshed out in a very dispassionate and reasonable way. Can't imagine there is that much more to say!

dcpatti

in some cases, medical insurance may cover this expense. It depends to some extent on why the passenger is flying. I doubt medical insurance will cover the second seat for the obese passenger.

It's obvious that the FA's and GA's will take the path of least resistance: hoping that nobody complains about seat encroaching instead of proactively solving the problem. Lots of reasons why: unclear policy that's hard to enforce; the potential for the situation to get out of hand; the push for an on-time departure. Plus weight is a highly personal issue, even if it's completely visible, and people in general are a bit reluctant to confront someone about such issues. All we can do is to avoid becoming that least-resistant path. Don't be a jerk, but know how to tactfully take care of your own best interests and not back down. If your seatbelt was broken you'd feel comfortable asking the FA politely to resolve the problem. No reason the same approach and polite tone can't be used in this situation. I for one have a hard time believing the FA's and/or captain knowingly let the passenger not have a seat belt for take-off/landing. I know it's easy for the FA's to MISS that, though, and the passenger who didn't speak up should take a small bit of the blame too.

serfty

Agreed.Indeed, without the belt being used, the aircraft should not have been permitted to take off. There is also no indication that the COS was able to do their own seat belt up either (or whether they used an extender).