Oversize passengers - neighbours rights?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bealzebub has taken both time and trouble to explain what the likely procedure would be on the day of operation, and at the sharp end.
What you, as an individual may choose to do after such a hypothetical incident is entirely up to you: Any disagreement that may arise would be with the airline involved, and their lawyers if appropriate, not with the individual crew members involved.
What you, as an individual may choose to do after such a hypothetical incident is entirely up to you: Any disagreement that may arise would be with the airline involved, and their lawyers if appropriate, not with the individual crew members involved.
I'm now going to open a hornets nest which I am sure has been opened before. If I weigh 160 lbs and have hold luggage of 40lbs, why should I pay the same as a pax who weighs 300lb with the same luggage allowance?
Guest
Posts: n/a
wowzz
Because airlines sell seats to passengers (including a hand and checked luggage allowance.)
As I understand it and in simple terms, the airline prices the flight by looking at the aircraft volume and weight/balance constraints and then pricing seats and air freight to maximise the return (yield.) For the sake of argument, let's disregard yield management techniques.
The average pax weight is assumed and relies on a distribution across a range, so the individual weight of a passenger is immaterial to costing a ticket.
Airlines tend to sell passengers space at a premium, rather than weight.
Currently, your question doesn't fit the model, it would be the equivalent of asking a private school why the slowest kid in the class doesn't pay higher fees than the brightest, as s/he takes more of the teacher's attention.
Maybe the model will change in the future.
Because airlines sell seats to passengers (including a hand and checked luggage allowance.)
As I understand it and in simple terms, the airline prices the flight by looking at the aircraft volume and weight/balance constraints and then pricing seats and air freight to maximise the return (yield.) For the sake of argument, let's disregard yield management techniques.
The average pax weight is assumed and relies on a distribution across a range, so the individual weight of a passenger is immaterial to costing a ticket.
Airlines tend to sell passengers space at a premium, rather than weight.
Currently, your question doesn't fit the model, it would be the equivalent of asking a private school why the slowest kid in the class doesn't pay higher fees than the brightest, as s/he takes more of the teacher's attention.
Maybe the model will change in the future.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: JNB
Age: 59
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what about my kids that only weigh 20-25kgs (44-55lbs) and yet pay 75% of ticket and full taxes (and 100% on domestic flights!). F3G is right in that we are being sold space not freight kgs.
But I think that this is all one big (pun intended) conspiracy. Plane has 150 seats and 98% of pax fit in very easily. Carrier increases capacity to 180 (by reducing width & pitch) and "tight" fits climb from 2% to 10%. Then carrier starts forcing supersize pax to buy 2 tickets. Who loses: all pax (reduced space/overflow into my space/buying 2 tickets); who wins: the carrier (150 up to 180 paying seats)!! It is discrimination against all pax!!
Back to reality. The problem is that no carrier is going to lay down specific details of when a pax has to pay for a second seat as they will be opening themselves to the PC brigade. Instead they leave it up to check in staff and CC to address the situation. If the carriers had clear published guidelines the CC/PIC would never be sucked into the debate.
But I think that this is all one big (pun intended) conspiracy. Plane has 150 seats and 98% of pax fit in very easily. Carrier increases capacity to 180 (by reducing width & pitch) and "tight" fits climb from 2% to 10%. Then carrier starts forcing supersize pax to buy 2 tickets. Who loses: all pax (reduced space/overflow into my space/buying 2 tickets); who wins: the carrier (150 up to 180 paying seats)!! It is discrimination against all pax!!
Back to reality. The problem is that no carrier is going to lay down specific details of when a pax has to pay for a second seat as they will be opening themselves to the PC brigade. Instead they leave it up to check in staff and CC to address the situation. If the carriers had clear published guidelines the CC/PIC would never be sucked into the debate.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MidMarMile I think you have hit the nail on the head actually 
I, and certainly the the Captain, has much more important things to deal with on boarding a departing flight than issues that could certainly be avoided if all airlines had a policy on this. It's just easier for them to avoid the PC brigade publically and then sweep up privately if need be.
I know that ryanair muted introducing a policy to this effect but they do a lot of things aimed at sparking a reaction and they did get just that on this forum along the lines of
!!! Now we appear to have a complete u turn on here. Anyone know if FR actually did go ahead?
Bealzebub has explained the likely reaction you would get from the PIC if they were called to deal with this situation and the last response was priceless
As an SCCM calling the PIC would be last resort for me. I would try and resolve the "problem" within the resources I have available. That is time and available seating. Upgrades would not be granted to anyone because I do not have that option. We have one class of seat. It's called a passenger seat and is "equal" class in terms of space.
We do indeed have legroom seats at the emergency exits and you can purchase a chance to occupy these under the speedy boarding process for a very modest fee. Furthermore if for any reason speedy boarding is not implemented properly by the agents downroute you can claim a refund. Occupy one of these seats and you are guarenteed not to be sitting next to obese pax. It is our policy that no extention belts are allowed at the emergency exits. Don't want to pay for this then you take your chances on who sits next to you. It's a free seating cabin.
That said I'm not oblivious to the discomfort this situation can cause as I too am SLF at times. Talk to me or any of my crew discreetly and we will do our level best with the resources we have available. Behave like a prima donna causing embarresment to anyone/have a hissey fit on or after doors closing and you will be seen as the problem which niether I or I suspect the PIC will want to take to 37,000 feet.
Also peeps just to clarify further when you get on board you will see 2 signs illuminated......no smoking and fasten seatbelts. These are reasonable instructions from the Captain and fall under the air navigation orders. If we are refuelling the seatbelt sign will not be on but you will be told this if you listen to the PA's. That is the time to flag up discreetly if you feel you can/may not be able to comply with this whether or not you fly loco or on a flag carrier plane with a first class/buisness cabin.
I, and certainly the the Captain, has much more important things to deal with on boarding a departing flight than issues that could certainly be avoided if all airlines had a policy on this. It's just easier for them to avoid the PC brigade publically and then sweep up privately if need be.I know that ryanair muted introducing a policy to this effect but they do a lot of things aimed at sparking a reaction and they did get just that on this forum along the lines of
!!! Now we appear to have a complete u turn on here. Anyone know if FR actually did go ahead?Bealzebub has explained the likely reaction you would get from the PIC if they were called to deal with this situation and the last response was priceless
As an SCCM calling the PIC would be last resort for me. I would try and resolve the "problem" within the resources I have available. That is time and available seating. Upgrades would not be granted to anyone because I do not have that option. We have one class of seat. It's called a passenger seat and is "equal" class in terms of space.
We do indeed have legroom seats at the emergency exits and you can purchase a chance to occupy these under the speedy boarding process for a very modest fee. Furthermore if for any reason speedy boarding is not implemented properly by the agents downroute you can claim a refund. Occupy one of these seats and you are guarenteed not to be sitting next to obese pax. It is our policy that no extention belts are allowed at the emergency exits. Don't want to pay for this then you take your chances on who sits next to you. It's a free seating cabin.
That said I'm not oblivious to the discomfort this situation can cause as I too am SLF at times. Talk to me or any of my crew discreetly and we will do our level best with the resources we have available. Behave like a prima donna causing embarresment to anyone/have a hissey fit on or after doors closing and you will be seen as the problem which niether I or I suspect the PIC will want to take to 37,000 feet.
Also peeps just to clarify further when you get on board you will see 2 signs illuminated......no smoking and fasten seatbelts. These are reasonable instructions from the Captain and fall under the air navigation orders. If we are refuelling the seatbelt sign will not be on but you will be told this if you listen to the PA's. That is the time to flag up discreetly if you feel you can/may not be able to comply with this whether or not you fly loco or on a flag carrier plane with a first class/buisness cabin.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: East Anglia.
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airlines sell seats. Before I spout, I am 12 stone and can fit into any seat offered me. I do not know anyone close to me who is grossly overweight.
I feel that large people should not be discriminated against, many cannot help being large and, seats to accommodate them should be made available, don't ask me how, it's not my job.
If it is deemed necessary to charge them more, then that passenger has a choice.
Safety should take precedence over profit. imho.
I feel that large people should not be discriminated against, many cannot help being large and, seats to accommodate them should be made available, don't ask me how, it's not my job.
If it is deemed necessary to charge them more, then that passenger has a choice.
Safety should take precedence over profit. imho.
Guest
Posts: n/a
lowcostdolly
I would be really interested in how you would approach this dilemma.
The flight is fully sold (let's assume no staff or others qualifying for a jumpseat are travelling.)
One of the pax is so large that s/he is spilling over the armrest and encroaching into the next seat.
The pax for that seast is very slim, but nonetheless cannot get into the seat without being in physical contact with the large person and really does not wish to endure this.
What do you do? You are damned if you do and damned if you don't - either party will be outraged if you offload them.
Let me say that I am not setting you up here, I am genuinely interested in how you would handle this unlikely, but not impossible situation.
I have witnessed a similar event on a flight last year, but there was a spare seat or two, so the crew shuffled pax arond and it was okay - though the #1 (whom I know) told me he got some grief from the person who had to be moved.
If travelling low cost, this is one of the reasons I often buy an extra seat, I know I'll have lateral space even if the pitch is 'snug.' If I were on a flight where such an incident occured, I'd be okay with having the larger person next to me, as the middle seat would take the strain, but I would want to take the aisle seat, for obvious reasons.
PS: I deduce you work for easyJet. Just my tuppence, but I've had nothing but good experiences over the past 7-8 years and have a high regard for the professionalism of the CC on your carrier.
I would be really interested in how you would approach this dilemma.
The flight is fully sold (let's assume no staff or others qualifying for a jumpseat are travelling.)
One of the pax is so large that s/he is spilling over the armrest and encroaching into the next seat.
The pax for that seast is very slim, but nonetheless cannot get into the seat without being in physical contact with the large person and really does not wish to endure this.
What do you do? You are damned if you do and damned if you don't - either party will be outraged if you offload them.
Let me say that I am not setting you up here, I am genuinely interested in how you would handle this unlikely, but not impossible situation.
I have witnessed a similar event on a flight last year, but there was a spare seat or two, so the crew shuffled pax arond and it was okay - though the #1 (whom I know) told me he got some grief from the person who had to be moved.
If travelling low cost, this is one of the reasons I often buy an extra seat, I know I'll have lateral space even if the pitch is 'snug.' If I were on a flight where such an incident occured, I'd be okay with having the larger person next to me, as the middle seat would take the strain, but I would want to take the aisle seat, for obvious reasons.
PS: I deduce you work for easyJet. Just my tuppence, but I've had nothing but good experiences over the past 7-8 years and have a high regard for the professionalism of the CC on your carrier.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3G I just love you.....I knew you would have a personal reply to my post
I think I have answered your question in my post did I not? I would deal with the situation as diplomatically and sensitively as possible within the resources I have at the time and that does include time as well as seats.....as you know an SCCM at EZY then you will be fully aware OTP is an absolute priority after safety.
As a last resort I would consult the Captain if I could not resolve the problem myself within these very limited resources...in other words I would pass the buck to the person in actual command of that hypothetical flight and he/she would then make the decision as to whom is offloaded if necessary. That decision would be based on whom is seen as the problem from an operational point of view. Basically that would probably be the person who is refusing to sit down and fasten their seatbelt at this time. The SCCM would be able to advise on this
I know that seems harsh but in that situation I, and the Captain, will deal with the situation at the time.....other people in my company are paid to deal with the ongoing problems which may result in that decision. I think Bealzebub made that clear and I don't even know if he/she works for us.
What the company do in terms of service recovery after this point is not my problem......my flight will have departed on time to the satisfaction of the majority on board and my managers.
Sorry if that was not the response you wanted.
I think I have answered your question in my post did I not? I would deal with the situation as diplomatically and sensitively as possible within the resources I have at the time and that does include time as well as seats.....as you know an SCCM at EZY then you will be fully aware OTP is an absolute priority after safety.
As a last resort I would consult the Captain if I could not resolve the problem myself within these very limited resources...in other words I would pass the buck to the person in actual command of that hypothetical flight and he/she would then make the decision as to whom is offloaded if necessary. That decision would be based on whom is seen as the problem from an operational point of view. Basically that would probably be the person who is refusing to sit down and fasten their seatbelt at this time. The SCCM would be able to advise on this
I know that seems harsh but in that situation I, and the Captain, will deal with the situation at the time.....other people in my company are paid to deal with the ongoing problems which may result in that decision. I think Bealzebub made that clear and I don't even know if he/she works for us.
What the company do in terms of service recovery after this point is not my problem......my flight will have departed on time to the satisfaction of the majority on board and my managers.
Sorry if that was not the response you wanted.
Guest
Posts: n/a
as you know an SCCM at EZY then you will be fully aware OTP is an absolute priority after safety.
Your reply makes sense, in the context of getting the flight away on time and I appreciate the honesty in saying that you would pass the buck, since I honestly cannot see what else you could do and was interested as to whether I was missing a trick.
Actually, you had not asnwered my post specifically, as I cited the example of someone who could not fit into the seat without being physically in contact with the other person - in other words they could not get into the seat unencumbered, which raises the question of which party is causing the problem.
Anyway, I don't think that would really alter your answer.
Thanks for responding.
Last edited by Final 3 Greens; 23rd Sep 2009 at 15:15. Reason: to clarify encumbered seat
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is obviously not going to be a clear answer to this question, especially on the point of which pax is the problem. It seems clear to me the problem is the obese pax who is occupying more than his/her fair share of the aisle in in question. From a safety viewpoint, should this person be in the centre or aisle seat he/she is a hazard in an evacuation situation. He/she cannot have the armrest raised according to safety rules but may try to do so.
There is nothing hypothetical in this question and I do not understand why a clear answer cannot be given as the circumstances cited are perfectly clear. It seems one either accepts several hours of discomfort and potentially being trapped in the event of an evacuation without complaint or suffer the consequences.
s37
There is nothing hypothetical in this question and I do not understand why a clear answer cannot be given as the circumstances cited are perfectly clear. It seems one either accepts several hours of discomfort and potentially being trapped in the event of an evacuation without complaint or suffer the consequences.
s37
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A whole new world now!!
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No tricks F3G just how it is. Whichever way this situation is viewed at present it is loose/loose for everyone apart from the carrier. Until all carriers wake up to the fact obesity is an ever increasing problem within the UK this situation will not be addressed.
Avitor has made the very relevant point here.....safety should take priority over profit. All UK carriers I think would adhere to this even if it is not immediatly apparent to Joe Public. Unfortunately profit will take priority over comfort.
I have recently travelled on a Monarch airlines Airbus 300 as a pax/SLF for a weekend break. The amount of pax crammed onto this plane was in my opinion obscene. Furthermore the working enviroment for the CC which I have appreciation of was hardly ideal. Unless they are a size zero it was difficult to walk forwards down the cabin without touching overhanging pax limbs in the aisle which I know pax do not like either. Also I would have found it very frustrating to have pax constantly in the galley area queing for the loo's. This is how the plane is designed in order to maximise seating which no douubt works very well for the Monarch exec's and their yearly bonuses.
I have a friend who works for Monarch and on his recommendation duly purchased legroom seats and I certainly got these. However the width was very poor even allowing for the tray table stowage I knew would be there. I am a size 12-14 so hardly large. I could put up with this for my short hop to the med but I'm not sure I would have been so tolerant if I had been going to say Goa which is around 10 hours and I believe the max this plane does. What can the CC/Captain do about it? Nothing I'm afraid.
Looking to my right I saw Mr and Mrs Rotund sitting on the exit row with their extention belts and the CC responsible for the exit squeezing in next to them on her seat. Unlike some carriers Monarch appear to have no policy on this
I asked my friend re this point and as a pilot he didn't know either
. However he did tell me that 361 was the amount of pax Monarch had proven to the CAA they could evacuate from this plane so that is what it holds now. They have even made modifications to ensure they can achieve this i'e no bulkheads dividing the cabin's.
This is a classic example of a carrier maximising profit but putting safety first. As for comfort well it might be worth checking with your carrier what you are actually paying for at the time. I'm afraid it seems if you want comfort then one way or another you will have to pay for it.
Not saying I agree with this I think it is just how it is nowdays.
Guess I can expect some incoming now!
Avitor has made the very relevant point here.....safety should take priority over profit. All UK carriers I think would adhere to this even if it is not immediatly apparent to Joe Public. Unfortunately profit will take priority over comfort.
I have recently travelled on a Monarch airlines Airbus 300 as a pax/SLF for a weekend break. The amount of pax crammed onto this plane was in my opinion obscene. Furthermore the working enviroment for the CC which I have appreciation of was hardly ideal. Unless they are a size zero it was difficult to walk forwards down the cabin without touching overhanging pax limbs in the aisle which I know pax do not like either. Also I would have found it very frustrating to have pax constantly in the galley area queing for the loo's. This is how the plane is designed in order to maximise seating which no douubt works very well for the Monarch exec's and their yearly bonuses.
I have a friend who works for Monarch and on his recommendation duly purchased legroom seats and I certainly got these. However the width was very poor even allowing for the tray table stowage I knew would be there. I am a size 12-14 so hardly large. I could put up with this for my short hop to the med but I'm not sure I would have been so tolerant if I had been going to say Goa which is around 10 hours and I believe the max this plane does. What can the CC/Captain do about it? Nothing I'm afraid.
Looking to my right I saw Mr and Mrs Rotund sitting on the exit row with their extention belts and the CC responsible for the exit squeezing in next to them on her seat. Unlike some carriers Monarch appear to have no policy on this
I asked my friend re this point and as a pilot he didn't know either
. However he did tell me that 361 was the amount of pax Monarch had proven to the CAA they could evacuate from this plane so that is what it holds now. They have even made modifications to ensure they can achieve this i'e no bulkheads dividing the cabin's.This is a classic example of a carrier maximising profit but putting safety first. As for comfort well it might be worth checking with your carrier what you are actually paying for at the time. I'm afraid it seems if you want comfort then one way or another you will have to pay for it.
Not saying I agree with this I think it is just how it is nowdays.
Guess I can expect some incoming now
!
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'm afraid it seems if you want comfort then one way or another you will have to pay for it.
I agree with you and I travel C on all flights of 3 hours duration or more.
361 on an A300 does seem sardine like, I have been on an A300-600 confirgured for about 100 less, in two classes and it was comfortable.
I tend to agree with Avitor, but when I suggested on a thread that I'd have no objection to paying a small levy to fund two seats for the occasional very large person, the reaction was very negative.
It seems the people who complain the most are the ones who do not pay for the comfort.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a fascinating question, isn't it? I guess the practical answer for a passenger is to get to the aircraft before any fatties, whether or not seats are allocated, so that you'll be the one already sitting down and keeping the armrest down which, as has been hinted, probably gives an moral advantage if the fattie tries to take the next-door seat and can't get in.
If he/she then squashes you with a mass of lard you can complain loudly.
The difficulty for the crew is illustrated neatly by Bealzebub, a Captain, a master of the committee decision, saying:
while lowcostdolly, who is evidently what it says on the tin, tells us;
I do realise that these two statements, seen in their contexts, are not totally contradictory, but neither poster really answered the question of what decision they would come to when decision time is upon them. And that's understandable; there's no real rule, and there needs to be as the obese take over the earth.
If he/she then squashes you with a mass of lard you can complain loudly.
The difficulty for the crew is illustrated neatly by Bealzebub, a Captain, a master of the committee decision, saying:
if called upon to make a decision, I would base that decision on their (ie CC) recommendation.
As a last resort I would consult the Captain if I could not resolve the problem myself
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: FarFarAway
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not have the overweight (if that is the PC term) pax present a medical certificate (should it be the case) to the check-in/gate staff stating their illness (which clearly causes the overweight issue hence they would be entitled to extra "space" in the a/c).
If no medical certificate is being showed to the check-in/gate staff, then a very diplomatic suggestion of purchasing another seat (ticket) and explanation for the reason behind it might help; if that fails, there is always the suggestion "your arms and legs can travel, but your belly won't unless you check it in and pay extra for it";
Failing that, after the "overweight" pax finishes threatening you and your airline with taking you to court, you could always reply "oh yeah, well you should sue McDonald's first cause they fcuked you up"!
Joke aside, i think we should adopt the American "way of doing things", that being "charge them for being fatties!" Too right! Unless it's a medical condition (which they can't help), pay up or get off! Why should CC as well as SLF have to put up with your "out of order, don't care" obesity? If you are not able to look after your weight, surely you cannot be in any aircraft!
Yes, it sounds horrible coming from a CC, i know. Reality check!!
But tell me why, please do explain, why should we put up with other people's indifference? How many times before i was securing the cabin and "the" pax, sitting in an emergency exit row, is asking for an extension seat belt.
"I'm terribly sorry, but if you do require an extension seat belt i'm afraid you can't be seated in an emergency exit row"
Shout, roll eyes, puff, shout some more, swear perhaps, roll eyes...
It's not my fault you are in this state!
And come service, you will ask for a pizza, Pringles, a "lager love" and after that a DIET COKE. Are you joking me??!??
So, my advice to you "overweight" pax is take some of that money you won after taking McDonald's to court and invest it in some time spent at the gym, hire a personal trainer, buy a Fitness Board for the wii, anything that'll help you lose weight healthily, ditch the fat foods and start looking after yourself! After all, you only live once...
Before you jump on my throat, i am a healthy 8 and a half st, 5ft 5" height and proud of it. I'm no Miss Universe, but i am happy with my body.
Takes a lot of self control and self RESPECT to keep it that way so i suggest you do the same. Or PAY FOR THE EXTRA SEAT
Regards in an extension belt,
ATS
If no medical certificate is being showed to the check-in/gate staff, then a very diplomatic suggestion of purchasing another seat (ticket) and explanation for the reason behind it might help; if that fails, there is always the suggestion "your arms and legs can travel, but your belly won't unless you check it in and pay extra for it";
Failing that, after the "overweight" pax finishes threatening you and your airline with taking you to court, you could always reply "oh yeah, well you should sue McDonald's first cause they fcuked you up"!
Joke aside, i think we should adopt the American "way of doing things", that being "charge them for being fatties!" Too right! Unless it's a medical condition (which they can't help), pay up or get off! Why should CC as well as SLF have to put up with your "out of order, don't care" obesity? If you are not able to look after your weight, surely you cannot be in any aircraft!
Yes, it sounds horrible coming from a CC, i know. Reality check!!
But tell me why, please do explain, why should we put up with other people's indifference? How many times before i was securing the cabin and "the" pax, sitting in an emergency exit row, is asking for an extension seat belt.
"I'm terribly sorry, but if you do require an extension seat belt i'm afraid you can't be seated in an emergency exit row"
Shout, roll eyes, puff, shout some more, swear perhaps, roll eyes...
It's not my fault you are in this state!
And come service, you will ask for a pizza, Pringles, a "lager love" and after that a DIET COKE. Are you joking me??!??
So, my advice to you "overweight" pax is take some of that money you won after taking McDonald's to court and invest it in some time spent at the gym, hire a personal trainer, buy a Fitness Board for the wii, anything that'll help you lose weight healthily, ditch the fat foods and start looking after yourself! After all, you only live once...
Before you jump on my throat, i am a healthy 8 and a half st, 5ft 5" height and proud of it. I'm no Miss Universe, but i am happy with my body.
Takes a lot of self control and self RESPECT to keep it that way so i suggest you do the same. Or PAY FOR THE EXTRA SEAT
Regards in an extension belt,
ATS
Guest
Posts: n/a
ATS
Playng devil's advocate, then why does your employer make every passenger pay a levy to cover the cost of wheelchair pax, when they might have injured themselves driving like a loony on a motorbike or even be too lazy to walk through the terminal?
I take it that you disagree with your employer's policy?
If not, surely there should be a 'fatties levy' to cover their costs? And gven that it is a seat only, with no taxes, that should n't be too much, should it?
Shall we say 50 cents per pax, or about 90€ per flight?
Surely that should do the job?
Playng devil's advocate, then why does your employer make every passenger pay a levy to cover the cost of wheelchair pax, when they might have injured themselves driving like a loony on a motorbike or even be too lazy to walk through the terminal?
I take it that you disagree with your employer's policy?
If not, surely there should be a 'fatties levy' to cover their costs? And gven that it is a seat only, with no taxes, that should n't be too much, should it?
Shall we say 50 cents per pax, or about 90€ per flight?
Surely that should do the job?
easyJet do have a policy that if you can't fit into their seats then you need to purchase another one. So on that airline at least it shouldn't be a problem as if someone is spilling into your seat then they are automatically in the wrong.
I wonder how many people know of the policy though ...
Link to it here.
I wonder how many people know of the policy though ...
Link to it here.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Continental Europe
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Capot and F3G who have asked some interesting hypothetical questions. I also am a Number 1 for a free-seating company and if a full flight has one seat down (taken up by lard), after consulting the captain, we would probably follow the same procedure if one seat was inoperative for another reason (such as vomit/pee or broken). That is call for volunteers (including speaking privately and respectfully to the fatso to encourage him/her to volunteer first) to take the next available flight, offering increasing amounts of cash incentives until the cash incentive reaches the value of compulsory compensation. (Similar to an overbooked flight). If still no volunteers, the last to check in gets offloaded and we're on our way. If the situation gets out of hand (ie aggressive/abusive) then police are called. Offloading someone who doesn't want to be offloaded can be difficult hence the volunteer method is preferred. Although the Captain does have the last word, in my experience, any problem relating to the cabin they say "what do you want to do about it" or even "I'll leave it in your capable hands - if you're happy I'm happy".
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: FarFarAway
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F3G,
It's all BUSINESS, as i'm sure you very well know...
I was just suggesting a (maybe) EU regulation that states that all "overweight" pax that are in the above condition due to illness should not be asked to purchase another seat/ticket.
The rest of them, the lazy ones who don't care, let them bloody pay; the fuel burn will be ever so grateful, thank you very much!
It's all BUSINESS, as i'm sure you very well know...
I was just suggesting a (maybe) EU regulation that states that all "overweight" pax that are in the above condition due to illness should not be asked to purchase another seat/ticket.
The rest of them, the lazy ones who don't care, let them bloody pay; the fuel burn will be ever so grateful, thank you very much!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Continental Europe
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call Operations, silly
Capot:
When the senior looks at the Captain and the Captain looks at the senior and they both draw a blank, the simple answer is to call Operations on the cell phone (after all we're still on the ground). It doesn't mean you'll get a good solution, but it means that the responsibility has been deferred to the poor bugger who answered the phone and the consequences of the decision lies with someone else... Which is what really matters.
The difficulty for the crew is illustrated neatly by Bealzebub, a Captain, a master of the committee decision, saying:
if called upon to make a decision, I would base that decision on their (ie CC) recommendation.
while lowcostdolly, who is evidently what it says on the tin, tells us;As a last resort I would consult the Captain if I could not resolve the problem myself
I do realise that these two statements, seen in their contexts, are not totally contradictory, but neither poster really answered the question of what decision they would come to when decision time is upon them.
Guest
Posts: n/a
James 1077
This was one of the reasons I asked the question to lowcostdolly and why I worded the question so specifically to say that the slim person could not fit in the seat without bodily contact with their larger neighbour.
It is one thing to have a policy and another thing to define what 'not fitting into a seat' looks like.
From lowcostdolly's reply, I would deduce that easyJet have not issued a clear definition to 'operationalise' the policy, so that places the crew in a difficult position, unlike clearly defined criteria about who may sit in an exit row.
I have not been able to find a Ryanair policy about this matter, but the company does offer two ways of securing extra space
Ryanair - FAQS : Can I purchase an extra seat for a large person?
Ryanair - FAQS : Can I check-in a musical instrument or purchase an extra seat to carry it in the cabin?
As times move along, people get bigger and flights gets busier as theworld comes out of recession, I anticipate legislation to resolve this matter.
easyJet do have a policy that if you can't fit into their seats then you need to purchase another one.
It is one thing to have a policy and another thing to define what 'not fitting into a seat' looks like.
From lowcostdolly's reply, I would deduce that easyJet have not issued a clear definition to 'operationalise' the policy, so that places the crew in a difficult position, unlike clearly defined criteria about who may sit in an exit row.
I have not been able to find a Ryanair policy about this matter, but the company does offer two ways of securing extra space
Ryanair - FAQS : Can I purchase an extra seat for a large person?
Ryanair - FAQS : Can I check-in a musical instrument or purchase an extra seat to carry it in the cabin?
As times move along, people get bigger and flights gets busier as theworld comes out of recession, I anticipate legislation to resolve this matter.