tartempion Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 United Airlines will start charging obese passengers for a second seat on flights on or after March 4 for travel on or after April 15. According to United's Web site, the policy relates to passengers fitting the following criteria: * Unable to fit into a single seat in the ticketed cabin * Unable to properly buckle the seatbelt using a single seatbelt extender * Unable to put the seat's armrests down when seated Passengers falling under any of those criteria will be relocated next to an empty seat. If no unused seats are available, the customer must either purchase an upgrade to a cabin with available seats or change to the next available flight and purchase a second seat. Customers who meet the criteria and do not purchase the second seat will not be allowed on the flight. "Please understand that we care a great deal about all of our customers' well-being, and we have implemented this policy to help ensure that everyone's travel experiences with United are comfortable and pleasant," United said on its Web site. United Airlines is the largest commercial-passenger airline at Honolulu International Airport, according to the Pacific Business News' 2009 Book of Lists. It is run by Elk Grove, Ill.-based UAL Corp. (Nasdaq: UAUA). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakai Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Ryanair is thinking about doing the same. They had a survey recently asking passengers their opinion about this "would be measure"....huge approval rate. Don't remember the newspaper's article though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunsanuk Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Hi, I agree with this rule as well. I mean why should I be discomforted by sitting next to an obese person whose body intrudes on my space; the space I paid good money for. I would even go as far as to link bodyweight and luggage weight. I.e. obese = lower luggage allowance; skinny = higher luggage allowance. Sanuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Goodtime Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 Finally, the world makes sense for a moment! Here is an idea about people's weight and luggage: Everyone gets an allocation of weight. I would mark it at 300 pounds (136 Kilograms). This is fair. Obese people would have a possible surcharge or would have to indicate they were obese when buying the ticket, so the airline would make sure there are two seats for the obese passenger. We have to start bringing back fairness into the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USVirgin Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I also agree, and I think it should have happened a lot sooner. I'm pretty sure UA didn't want to make the decision at the risk of being discriminatory, but this one just makes sense compared to many other pricing initiatives. I have nothing against fat people, or people who are just plain big, but space and weight are very tangible and should be charged for. I'd prefer the airlines just make coach seats larger, but that ain't gonna happen. I've had some miserable flights myself, being an airline employee on standby and getting that last seat in the back sandwiched between two fatties. Of course, getting a free ride, I wouldn't complain but if I paid for the ticket I'd be rightly upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stickman Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 100% with you. Not only do seriously fat people often infringe upon your personal space, they often give off a lot of heat - and if they are pressed up against you because their frame cannot fit in their space it is dreadfully uncomfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USVirgin Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 So the future of airline travel is 'step up on the scale and let's measure your heat.' Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Scrutinizer Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 I can foresee the lawsuits coming with this one. I hope UA had some very good lawyers to consult before coming out with this. The class action suits will be huge, pun intended. A few good lawyers will tear this one up I feel. I can hear them licking their chops now, they are hungry for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USVirgin Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 My guess is that UA's lawyers have decided the time is finally ripe to win in court. What a waste of money, no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khun_Kong Posted April 20, 2009 Report Share Posted April 20, 2009 ... * Unable to fit into a single seat in the ticketed cabin * Unable to properly buckle the seatbelt using a single seatbelt extender * Unable to put the seat's armrests down when seated Passengers falling under any of those criteria will be relocated next to an empty seat.... If I'm not next to an available empty seat I will try to fail one of the tests so I can be relocated. Specially if it's back to front of the plane. And when the PC gang jump on this, crying that it's not fair to the horizontally challenged, please remind them of the very few Constitutional guarantees. Seriously, I've always thought the combined weight thing should apply, your body and your baggage together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.