Policy at SW Airlines .... Fair or unfair?

**LanSite** · 06-19-2002, 10:32 PM

Wow - some groups are gonna be screamin' I think ...

Southwest starts enforcing plus-size passenger policy
June 19, 2002 Posted: 4:34 PM EDT (2034 GMT)

(CNN) -- Southwest Airlines says it will begin enforcing a 22-year-old policy next week when it routinely charges large passengers for a second seat on its flights.

Starting June 26, Southwest passengers who are booked on full flights and need seat belt extensions, or whose bodies extend beyond the 18 3/4 inch cushions, will be required to purchase a second seat, said Christine Turneabe-Connelly, a Southwest spokeswoman.

"It's a policy that has been in place since 1980," Turneabe-Connelly said. "Over the years, we allowed some flexibility with the agents at the time of check-in. As of June 26, we will be consistent."

After examining the impact of the policy during the last few years, the airline's managers determined the flexibility created inconsistency and caused more stress for passengers and gate agents than it eliminated, Turneabe-Connelly said.

Gate agents might not have asked large passengers to purchase second seats on their outbound, partially-full Wednesday flight, but then those same people would get slammed with an extra fee on the overbooked Friday afternoon return flight.

Scenarios like that exacerbated tenuous interactions between employees and "people of size," Turneabe-Connelly said. "It's already a very difficult and sensitive issue to address."

All of Southwest's flights offer coach-sized seating. Business and first-class seats do not exist. And the "people of size" policy only applies to full flights where a larger person would not have access to an empty seat.

If a larger person required a second seat on an already full flight, then the flight would go into an oversell situation, and the crew would ask for volunteers to give up their seats, Turneabe-Connelly said.

The policy does not necessarily mean large people will pay double fares. If a person bought a ticket within the 14-day advance purchase window and knew they needed extra space, then that passenger would buy two tickets at that discounted fee.

However, if a person was buying a full-price ticket at the last minute for business or bereavement reasons, one seat would sell for the higher, walk-up fare, and the second one at the 14-day advance purchase price, Turneabe-Connelly said.

If a passenger buys a second seat and the plane is subsequently not full, passengers may get a refund. That too, Turneabe-Connelly said, has been the airline's policy since 1980.

The policy is really to ensure the comfort of all passengers, said Beth Harbin, a Southwest spokeswoman. Complaints from people of size have been rare, she said. Most complaints have come from people who felt discomforted by sitting next to larger passengers.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TRAVEL/NEWS/...ers/index.html

**onlinegs.com** · 06-20-2002, 12:13 AM

You know, sadly, I think I am going to have to agree with that. Airline seats are already scrunched enough that it is hard to fit in.

Also, since the policy only goes into effect in full flights, where the seating is especcialy tight, then I think that it is a good policy.

**LanSite** · 06-20-2002, 02:13 AM

You don't think the rights groups will be screaming?

**swampy** · 06-20-2002, 04:03 AM

I think it's fair enough, I wouldn't want to buy a ticket and find that my seat space was partly taken by another passenger.

the only other option is for the airlines to provide more room for passengers, and that isn't going to happen.

**jamiewi** · 06-20-2002, 04:22 AM

One way you could look at it:

In the vast majority of cases, obesity is a self inflicted problem. ie. if you're orca fat, you've got nobody to blame but yourself.

In the same way that people no longer tolerate smoking on flights, why should people have to put up with a huge sweaty arm or thigh encroaching on their personal space?

Maybe they should think about alternatives though for the fatties who are overweight through no fault of their own.

**phroenyx** · 06-20-2002, 06:39 AM

then there'd be excuses like 'no officer its medicinal'.

can't they just make bigger seats and have everyone happy?

**swampy** · 06-20-2002, 06:41 AM

making bigger seats would not make me happy as it would mean that less seats would fit on a plane, less passengers to pay fare, fare cost more, swampy pays more.

**enemem** · 06-20-2002, 06:52 AM

what would happen if a thin person and a 'person of size' (lovely phrase that

) travel together - can the thin person say that they are happy to have their companion encroach on their personal space?

and will the 'person of size' also get two meals, since they are essentially paying for two?

It sounds like a relatively reasonable policy, especially if this is an economy carrier and seats are tiny. At least it's good that they are being consistent now.

Do other airlines have similar policies?

- n.

**phlegm_thrower** · 06-20-2002, 06:54 AM

i just saw that on the news... i think it's damn fair...

think about this...

say you weigh about 70kg (sorry i dunno pounds) and the airline allows you 20kg baggage... that's 90kg in total... if you bring 30kg worth of baggage then you have to pay for the extra 10 kilos right?

now let's say an obese passenger of about 120kg in weight go on the same flight... even without any overweight baggage that's already an extra 30 kilos that they bring on board for free... now is that fair???

**enemem** · 06-20-2002, 07:30 AM

Originally posted by phlegm_thrower
even without any overweight baggage that's already an extra 30 kilos that they bring on board for free... now is that fair???

so is this about weight? I thought it was about size, taking up more space than others and encroaching on others' seating space?

maybe they should sell tickets by weight rather than size

- n.

**LanSite** · 06-20-2002, 07:48 AM

Well, from what I heard ~ if you need a seatbelt extender or if the armrests won't fold down properly ... you'll be required to purchase another seat ... and yes, from what I understand virtually *all* airlines have these policies, but have chosen not to enforce them because of 'fear of public outcry' ...

**enemem** · 06-20-2002, 07:58 AM

Originally posted by LanSite
Well, from what I heard ~ if you need a seatbelt extender or if the armrests won't fold down properly ... you'll be required to purchase another seat ... and yes, from what I understand virtually *all* airlines have these policies, but have chosen not to enforce them because of 'fear of public outcry' ...

that's the interesting part - in the article it said that they have had only very few complaints. how big is that airline? And are they just a national US carrier? I would think that the international carriers would have more of a problem pushing this through.

joke idea: enforce this like the hand-luggage rules: put a sample seat by the check-in counter, everybody has to sit in. if they spill over the sides, they gotta pay extra

- n.

**LanSite** · 06-20-2002, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by enemem
that's the interesting part - in the article it said that they have had only very few complaints. how big is that airline? And are they just a national US carrier? I would think that the international carriers would have more of a problem pushing this through.

joke idea: enforce this like the hand-luggage rules: put a sample seat by the check-in counter, everybody has to sit in. if they spill over the sides, they gotta pay extra

- n.

Well, it's the 4th largest US airline ~ far as I know, it is strictly US travel - and flying from Dallas (there are two major airports for Dallas - Love Field [SW is one of only 3 airlines flying in/out of Love] and DFW) is limited to contiguous states only (thanks to the Wright amendment ...)

**cyk** · 06-20-2002, 09:55 AM

People so large that they would require an extra seat should (but don't) fall under ADA (Americans with Disablities Act) all businesses under this law are required to accomodate people with disabilites. I think if you are this large it is not because you eat too much pizza but because of a serious medical condition, if the airlines have to accomadate one person's disability why not another?

Also most airlines have first class seats they can use any extra seats to accomodate larger passengers- so often they would give them the larger seat but SWA does not have any first class so that's not really possible.

despite the airlines , running razor thin profits and all the rest of their financial whining I think they should just accomodate the pssengers and avoid the negative publicity and potential lawsuits which may end up costing more money than giving someone a $100 seat

**phlegm_thrower** · 06-20-2002, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by enemem

so is this about weight? I thought it was about size, taking up more space than others and encroaching on others' seating space?

maybe they should sell tickets by weight rather than size

- n.

well in this case the weight and the space is on the same side

last time i came back from Japan i had to pay around $200 for overweight baggage @ $20/kg and i saw people heavier than both me and my baggage combined just strolled into the plane without paying so much as an extra cent...

so hell yeah!!! they should charge per weight... weight is the most important factor in a flight... that's why u don't see many fat bird flying around

the fat ones are usually grounded like penguins

**skitten78** · 06-20-2002, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by enemem

Originally posted by LanSite
Well, from what I heard ~ if you need a seatbelt extender or if the armrests won't fold down properly ... you'll be required to purchase another seat ... and yes, from what I understand virtually *all* airlines have these policies, but have chosen not to enforce them because of 'fear of public outcry' ...

that's the interesting part - in the article it said that they have had only very few complaints. how big is that airline? And are they just a national US carrier? I would think that the international carriers would have more of a problem pushing this through.

joke idea: enforce this like the hand-luggage rules: put a sample seat by the check-in counter, everybody has to sit in. if they spill over the sides, they gotta pay extra

- n.

OMG! That's what I was thinking!!! Like they have the over head bin size thing, they have a sample seat! LMAO too funny.

Also no they wouldn't pay for two meals because as far as I remember (flying with southwest a LOT) SW doesn't serve meals.

I also wondered about the little=person-travelling-with-big-person, then what?

phlegm_thrower- your penguin theory is tooooo funny!

So if big ppl fall under this disabilities act, and "businesses under this law are required to accomodate people with disabilites. I think if you are this large it is not because you eat too much pizza but because of a serious medical condition, if the airlines have to accomadate one person's disability why not another? "

Does that mean, that if you want to fly southwest and you're too big and you have a medical condition southwest should either: pay for a stomach staple, put you on a diet before flight, or build bigger seats for big people too?

**Markp.com** · 06-20-2002, 10:30 AM

Its totally fair... if you are fat, its your own fault. Just don't eat as much. There is no excuse. You should be forced to pay more for being fat, everywhere.

All these idiots that winge about being "big boned" or "its a glandular problem"... don't be so f***ing stupid.

Its a simple equation...
Eat lots + no exercise = lardy arse

So you must...
Eat sensibly + exercise = Normality

Simple eh... I should write a self help book for all the idiot Americans I see on my tv daily complaining about how fat they are.

**skitten78** · 06-20-2002, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Markp.com
Its totally fair... if you are fat, its your own fault. Just don't eat as much. There is no excuse. You should be forced to pay more for being fat, everywhere.

All these idiots that winge about being "big boned" or "its a glandular problem"... don't be so f***ing stupid.

Its a simple equation...
Eat lots + no exercise = lardy arse

So you must...
Eat sensibly + exercise = Normality

Simple eh... I should write a self help book for all the idiot Americans I see on my tv daily complaining about how fat they are.

Well there is such a thing as being "big boned"

BUT big bones do not 400 pounds equal!

Here's how to know how you're structured.

Make a circle around one of your wrists with your thumb and middle finger of the opposite hand.

Do your thumb and middle finger overlap? Then you have small bones (like me)

Do your finger and thumb touch? Then you have a meduim bone structure.

Do your thumb and middle finger not touch? Then you have large bones.

This works well because FAT doesn't generally build on your wrist too much. So you can get a good measurement there of your bones without the fat on ya too.

**phlegm_thrower** · 06-20-2002, 10:48 AM

i agree a lot of people have eating/weight disorder but then some are just lazy and never excercise and others just love to eat... that's why a doctor's certificate is needed to separate them...

**Markp.com** · 06-20-2002, 11:42 AM

Originally posted by skitten78
Here's how to know how you're structured.
Make a circle around one of your wrists with your thumb and middle finger of the opposite hand.
* BLAH BLAH EDIT * a good measurement there of your bones without the fat on ya too. [/B]

What if you have long fingers?

Thread: Policy at SW Airlines .... Fair or unfair?

Thread Tools

Display

Posting Permissions