Obese passenger wins case

[FFG 02]

From "The Age"
Recently read a post about a LCC in Oz charging significantly for excess baggage. You think we'll go down this path?
Had a mate who was recalled to a C130 SQDN one Saturday to ferry a similar sized dude from regional NSW to YSSY as he couldn't fit in a regional airliner. Needless to say many "Fat Bastard" accents were put on for the flight!
Obese passenger wins case against Air France
A Frenchman who weighs 170 kilograms has won a court case against Air France after it made him buy a second seat on a flight from New Delhi to Paris, he told AFP.
Jean-Jacques Jauffret, a 43-year-old screen-writer, said he was deeply humiliated when airline staff measured his girth with wrapping tape in front of other passengers at New Delhi airport.
Air France was ordered to pay 8000 euro ($13,599.95) in damages and to reimburse the cost of his second seat, in a ruling delivered last Friday.
Returning to France from a holiday in India in August 2005, Jauffret was told that as the plane was full he could not be assured a free seat next to him. Instead he was told to buy the extra ticket.
"The court recognised the humiliation I suffered. Now Air France is going to have to say clearly what is its commercial policy. Does it carry people or kilos?" he said.

[THE ORACLE]

The famous actor and director Orson Welles before he died frequently flew between the U.S. and Europe on the Concorde and he had a similar weight and girth to monsieur Jauffret and he always booked and had someone else pay for two adjacent seats in order to ensure nobody (least of all himself) was uncomfortable!!

[Ultralights]

too big for an aircraft seat? get the train!

[sinala1]

Call me cold and heartless if you will - but if you need 2 seats, bloody well purchase 2! Had this exact thing happen on 2 sectors today. 1 person on each sector who clearly and obviously needed 2 seats, and were aware of their size (both requested extension seatbelts at the boarding door). Both sectors were full flights with, quite literally, one seat free on each sector. Both times I managed to move around a number of people to eventually ensure the free seat was next to the person who required it. I did this mainly for the pax around them who were squashed (in one case, the Customer of Size was in the middle seat and he was, quite literally, squashing the guy next to him into the window - the girl on the aisle seat was petite and was still getting squashed).

Do not interpret this as me being unaware of pax needs, unaware of different reasons why people are overweight, or unsympathetic to their plights - but why should someone expect 2 seats (as often happens) just because they are overweight? You get what you pay for...

This is NOT discrimination on behalf of the airlines, and (apart from measuring the guys girth at checkin - thats totally inappropriate) I have difficulty understanding why a court ruled against the airline. Heres hoping they appeal the decision!!!

I think Southwest are on the money with their policy:

Customers who are unable to lower the armrests (the definitive boundary between seats) and/or who compromise any portion of adjacent seating should proactively book the number of seats needed during initial reservations. This purchase serves as a notification of an unusual seating need and allows us to process a refund of the additional seating cost after travel (provided the flight doesn’t oversell). Most importantly, it ensures that all onboard have access to safe and comfortable seating.

For more information, please refer to our Customer of size Q & A

* Rant mode off *

[Ixixly]

I'm sorry, this has got to be added into the dictionary somewhere under irony. I mean he is suing for being "Humiliated" when he was quite happy to make someone have to sit next to him the entire flight (A certainty if it was booked out) being squashed, let alone if the poor bugger wanted to "SQUEEEEEZE" past him to go the toilet or something, i'd be humiliated when i couldn't get out of my seat to go the toilet as well... let alone when the hosty brings the meals around...

And personally as if the other passengers hadn't already noticed him... i've personally had to try and load up a 140kg passenger onto a Bell407 once (I'm sure theres a few people out there with a fat guy story!!) and i'll be buggered if everyone else wasn't already asking to be on the flight that wasn't his :P

[WannaBeBiggles]

Please tell me how someone such as this person would allow the plane to be vacated in the maximum allowable time in an emergency?

Clearly if they are "pouring" over their seat they're not going to get out of the thing all too quickly...

Do people sue carnivals when they don't meet the minimum height restrictions for rides? Do they not get "measured up" infront of strangers and their peers?

I know that sounds harsh and but in case of an emergency they could quite easily endanger both themselves and other passengers...

We really do live in a society where people think the world owes them something...

It's quite black and white really... when we book a flight we book a seat, not just a right to sit somewhere in the aeroplane while it flies you from A to B, so if you require more than one seat then you buy an extra seat... It's not rocket science!

[Tiger 77]

"The court recognised the humiliation I suffered. Now Air France is going to have to say clearly what is its commercial policy. Does it carry people or kilos?" he said.

Neither... they carry seats and you buy how ever many seats you need.

Where has common sense gone? Whats with all the sueing these days? People are just becoming weak and lazy.

Tiger.

[windytown]

I too feel South West policy makes sense.

On LCC's which do not offer children's discounts it seems ridiculous to one one hand charge a high excess baggage rate while simulataneously charging the same rate for a just 2 year old child (max free weight of child plus allowage luggage 40kg) and a 170kg man (190kg with bag).

I certainly remember one flight where a rather 'large' passenger raised the arm rest and basically pushed my small son out of his seat and was offended when the boy (too young to understand) asked me why the man was doing it.

[Roger Copy Ta]

Not really. You buy a ticket to get from A to B and they allocate you a seat to sit in.

The question is who should be disadvantaged if someone requires two seats, the airline or the fatso?

[WannaBeBiggles]

Not really. You buy a ticket to get from A to B and they allocate you a seat to sit in.

And should you require more than one seat then you should have to pay for it...

Wonder how much this overly PC is costing us taxpayers every year?

[vanderaj]

Here we go again.

Please tell me how someone such as this person would allow the plane to be vacated in the maximum allowable time in an emergency?

I hope you remember typing that into the keyboard when you're old and infirm and need someone's help to even walk. My wife needs a wheelchair about half the time we fly, and she's 32.

Go f#$@ yourself.

I've had to fly on ever increasingly small seat pitches and seat widths. Back when I was a lad, the planes on major routes were 737's and 767's where you could easily "squeeze" even in the window seat.

I now have to regularly travel on wind up rubber band "planes" like the CRJ 140. That plane is so small that you have divest Mr Laptop of its outer sheath to fit in the "overhead" baggage compartment. Forget travelling with a small overnight case - that is too big for this modern plane.

LCC are causing most of the problems - see Southwest's policy as below. That's why I refuse to travel on them. As I don't know if any capricious and offensive folks like yourself will be there.

I weigh a bit due to diabetes. My weight is all out the front. I never have a hard time fitting into the narrow 17" seats of the CRJ. But I always need a seat belt extender due to my girth. I do NOT need a seat belt extender on the A320, A330, 747's, 777, and older 767's. I need them on all CRJs, the Embrarers, 757's, and the new gen 737's. For some reason, they have shorter straps as they expect midgets to fly on them.

What about the gentlemen who work out and are really HUGE. I once had to sit next to a Muscle Mary who I am sure made his partner(s) very happy. But he was impossible to sit next to. Unlike me, there was zero give - he was all hard muscle. He was broad across the chest and shoulders, and he had huge thighs. He probably had a 32" waist and a BMI in the low teens. He spread into my seat in a way I never spread into other's seats.

Would you discriminate against him? I thought not.

I pay for premium economy and try to upgrade to first as often as I can, but with the move to LLC with one class travel, and even the old carriers moving to tiny and uncomfortable regional jets, that is becoming harder and harder to do. If I have no choice, you have no choice. Put up with it.

This decision was about the way they humiliated the passenger. I'm sure all
the posters so far in this thread would be at the top of the line saying "hey, fatso, come here, we need to measure you". That's what this is about. Treating passengers with respect rather than just self-loading freight with a "CAUTION - WIDE LOAD" sticker on our foreheads.

Andrew

[sinala1]

Andrew no one here has advocated the humiliation of a passenger, nor have they begrudged providing extension seat belts. What people here are talking about is ANY person who needs more than one seat should purchase the amount they require! If you don't need more than one seat, but need an extension - no problem whatsoever. Happy to help as much as possible.

What gets my goat is when people who clearly and obviously require 2 seats (for whatever reason - bodybuilder, overweight etc etc) only purchase 1 - then bitch, whinge and moan because they are so uncomfortable (as are the 2 people seated next to them), and Expect - even Demand to be given a spare seat just on the basis that they need more room. Southwest's policy is more than fair - you pay for the extra seat, at Childrens fare, and if the seat does not oversell then you get your money back. How could that possibly be any fairer???

Originally Posted by vanderaj

I'm sure all the posters so far in this thread would be at the top of the line saying "hey, fatso, come here, we need to measure you".

Incorrect. Infact very few posts have made reference to the actual court case nor the humiliation suffered by the passenger who was "measured" at checkin. My post did - and I clearly objected to "measuring" the passenger at check in. But other posts about buying what you need are very valid, and in a world where people expect everything but wish to pay for nothing - well I hope Southwest's policy becomes an international standard. Its non-discriminatory, it has clear boundaries, and at the end of the day if the flight does not sell out then you get your money back!! It couldn't be any fairer than that

[Kiwiguy]

Sell the man a damn seat with a ticket stating it has a width of 17 inches and that is that!

If the man obstructs the evacuation, or egress of other passengers, then it is a Health and Safety issue and he may be declined his 17 inches of paradise!

Non obstruction of egress of others needs to be a condition of carriage.

As an airport caterer I entered the back galley of a 733 once at WLG. The bulk of passengers left the plane, but it took 24 minutes to get a quadraplegic from the aircraft on a 30 minute turnaround.

Tickets need to be written such that any person who obstructs or potentially the safe evacuation of others may be declined carriage.

Then you put the problem back on the obese person and then you offer a solution of another seat.

Also why not sell tickets which state that the sale of each ticket entitles the bearer to a maximum agregate weight ?

Then if some individual wants to exceed that by more than 10% irrespective of their personal weight, they are obliged to purchase a second ticket ?

[vanderaj]

I waited 35 minutes the last time I flew with my wife for the ground crew to find a wheelchair. It's really not the disabled person's fault that they can't walk, any more than it's a baby's fault for not being able to walk, or deaf people unable to hear or blind folks to see.

In the 1950's, flight was only for those with means. Today, it's our primary form of transport. If I want to go between the various destinations I regularly travel to (and I travel very frequently), I tell you know I'd take the train every time:

* No bull**** at the stations - roll up a minute before the train and you're on the train
* No security crap masquerading as anti-terrorist hooha
* Seats and legroom that take humans
* Can get up and walk about as you see fit instead of being stuck in my seat 30 or more minutes after take off just so cabin crew can take a breather. I remember the days when the seat belt sign came off within five or so minutes not even a decade ago
* Due to the security crap, even the trains here in the USA are faster than planes for journeys less than 400 kms. I will never fly to NYC because the train is faster and cheaper.

But you know what, in both Australia and the USA where I now live, train travel doesn't work as there's no new trains. I take trains to Philly and NYC regularly and i love it. I'd love to take them to Memphis. I'd love to take them to the 20 other odd destinations I go to regularly, but I can't. Air travel made expansion of train networks uneconomic.

So I have no choice. I have to travel by air. And I hate the modern air travel experience so much. I loathe going through LAX. So much so that I will be travelling back to Australia via SFO because LAX is the seventh level of hell on Earth. I believe they will be taking all 10 of my fingerprints when I return, just like a common criminal. With attitudes like that, travel is made hateful enough without the crap by ground crew and CC trying to enforce policies which I can do nothing about, and the airlines are doing their utmost to make fat people's lives as miserable as possible (overbooking, tiny planes, no first / premium economy, etc).

What possible purpose does making the PAX's life any harder serve? NONE.

Then if some individual wants to exceed that by more than 10% irrespective of their personal weight, they are obliged to purchase a second ticket

Cos on certain a/c types (the regional jets in particular), there are no second seats to be bought at any price. On my trips to Memphis, I regularly sit on the left hand side of the CRJ where there's a single seat hunkered in a cold heavily curved bulkhead. There was nowhere for my legs to go, not enough room between me and the seat in front for my 180 cm tall frame (5' 11" in the old money) to sit without splaying my legs under the seat, which is usually impossible because there's no room to stash stuff and so is usually full of other people's crap.

I've been travelling for around 35 years now at the (very nearly) pointy end and in cattle class all over the world. In days gone past, economy pax in Australia got a heated meal for breakfast which would make a today's US first class pax salivate. Today, I'm herded onto either very old equipment (such as MD-80s or DC9s), given "free" small cup of soda or water and crackers (if I'm lucky), or onto tiny planes with no real cabin service at all over a two and half hour flight. I hate it.

We, and I mean PAX in general, just want a bit of respect in a sea of crappiness that is the modern airline industry. That's all.

Until there's adequate room for all humans including folks like my 2.10 m tall boss, a premium economy or first class on EVERY flight, then there's no point in arguing this.

Andrew

[Hbr]

I'm SLF and have lurked for years and never really post, but I'm sick of fat pax whining.

You're fat. You take up too much space. Pay for the extra seat.

Don't talk to me about what is fair - I'm 176cm, 60kg, and am therefore subsidising fuel to drag your fat carcass into the air; I'm not going to subsidise your second seat as well.

Now I don't particularly like the Low Cost model*, I like my paper in the morning and my beer at night, but Southwest sound like they have it right in this instance.

What is it with this "I'm a victim" society... you're not a victim, you are lazy and have a bad diet. You probably smoke too.

(* Nothing against the staff )

[vanderaj]

What is it with this "I'm a victim" society... you're not a victim, you are lazy and have a bad diet. You probably smoke too.

I am not a victim. I told you - I choose to be in seats that fit when I can as it's far more comfortable for me, particularly when the rest of the air travel experience is so incredibly and deliberately hellish.

I don't often have that choice now that's there LCC everywhere, including in traditional carriers who insist on using tiny and far more uncomfortable planes. When I have no choice, neither do you. I am not buying a second seat when all I really want is a comfortable single seat. Take that choice away from me, and that's simply not my fault. I should not have to suffer a financial penalty for choices clearly outside my control.

At one stage, it is true I enjoyed a McDonald's meal or three. Once I ate McDonalds 52 meals straight. I ended up in hospital, and since then (some 18 years ago), I make it my sole purpose in life never to eat the same type of food more than once a month. Since then, I have a wildly varied and usually quite healthy diet. My downfall is two things:

a) portion sizes, which have increased everywhere, but most of all, here in the USA
b) my body is insulin resistant, probably from genetics (both my parents are large and so were theirs). This has inevitably led to a number of weight and heart related issues. These have for the last few years concentrated my mind considerably on getting down to a healthy weight.

I have to take a beta blocker to prevent high blood pressure. This pill does not work if I load my body with high fat, high salt foods. Therefore, I don't have a high fat, high salt diet any more.

I have to control my blood sugars so I don't fall into a diabetic coma. I check my blood four times a day. I am lucky - I can control my diabetes at this stage with diet and exercise alone, but to do so requires constant vigilance. I eat far less sugars and refined carbs than you do (I can guarantee this unless you're also a diabetic), I exercise at least 30 minutes every day (more on weekends). I have never smoked.

I didn't know I had diabetes until recently and I didn't manage my diet to the extent that I do now. The untreated diabetes caused my metabolic syndrome, which escalated over a long time (nearly 20 years) to the point where I am now morbidly obese despite being (at the time) on a good diet and exercise. Metabolic syndrome means that if you and I ate the same things for an entire year, you'd be a skinny whippet and I'd be fatter by the end of the year. My body is extremely efficient at converting ANY spare calories into fat. Eating even 20 kJ over my daily calorific intake requirements will cause me to put on weight. I got morbidly obese one day at a time, one diet at a time, one failed attempt at losing the weight at a time. Nothing worked despite ALWAYS trying for the last 15 years to take off weight. Now that I know I have metabolic syndrome and diabetes, I can finally get onto the right diet which avoids foods which my body readily converts into fat - even if I am eating like 1500 calories a day.

I am now slowly but surely (and safely) losing my weight. But compared to someone who has only a few kilograms to lose, it takes me about 5x - 10x the level of effort and extreme concentration on not eating ANY crap. I can't be lax about my diet because any lapse, particularly a lapse over a couple of months might kill me.

Now tell me again why I shouldn't travel? I am not a victim. I don't want your pity nor your scorn. I want a comfy seat with no seat belt extender. I am prepared to pay for it and be treated like a human. Is that too much to ask?

Andrew

[sinala1]

First you said:

Originally Posted by vanderaj

I told you - I choose to be in seats that fit when I can.

Then you said

Originally Posted by vanderaj

I am not buying a second seat when all I really want is a comfortable single seat.

Then barely one paragraph later you said

Originally Posted by vanderaj

where I am now morbidly obese despite being on a good diet and exercise

Surely quotes #1 and #2 contradict each other? And, going by what you had to say in quote #3, you are (unfortunately) in a position that means the likelihood of any standard airline economy seat - anywhere in the world - being comfortable for you is negligible to say the very least?

If you are happy to pay for Premium Economy, (which by your own admission you Require), then why not pay a child fare for the second seat - with the possibility of getting it refunded by Southwest? Cheaper in the long run I am sure!

What about the comfort of pax around you who have paid for the use of one seat, but are potentially only getting 1/2 or 3/4 of that space because someone else is taking it up? Again, Southwest's policy is 100% on the money. And, for the record, No - I do not work for them.

This is NOT discrimination nor a lack of compassion for peoples needs and the potential medical reasons behind their weight - just a logical way of looking at it all.

[Magoodotcom]

The question is who should be disadvantaged if someone requires two seats, the airline or the fatso?

The fatso, no argument!

Airlines SELL seats, they are not charities. If you take up two seats, that's one less the airline can SELL, so it's right that you should pay for two.

[Hbr]

Andrew;
I actually wasn't directing any comments at you, and I'm sorry you have health problems.

But why should I pay for people's consumer needs? I already pay taxes for health care, I shouldn't be forced to subsidise non-urgent travel.

I didn't say you shouldn't travel - travel all you want! But SOMEONE has to pay, and if its not you, its the rest of the passengers.

Next time I have excess baggage will YOU pay for it?

[AirlinePirate]

My downfall is two things:

a) portion sizes, which have increased everywhere, but most of all, here in the USA
b) my body is insulin resistant, probably from genetics (both my parents are large and so were theirs).

Arr.

Jus' because the portions are bigger does nae mean ye have to eat more.

If ye cook for yerself, ye can make the portions whatever size ye want!

If yer parents and grandparents are fat, then ye've been brought up thinkin' eatin' fattily be normal. That not be yer fault. But blamin' it on Nature when its really Nurture, that is.

I weigh a bit due to diabetes.

Perhaps ye be confused. Perhaps ye've got diabetes because ye weigh 'a bit'.

As ye've already said, ye were brought up eating fattily. That'd increase yer risk of diabetes.


If ye want, I be havin' a good recipie fer scurvy that works wonders!

If ye'r fat and need two seats, BUY two seats.


Arr.