Comments on: Suck It, Southwest Airlines

By: Herbal Remedies Girl

Herbal Remedies Girl — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:52:41 +0000

Who would even consider charging someone for two seats just because they are obese! That is ridiculous!

By: Susan

Susan — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:29:59 +0000

Well, the thing that bothers me with this whole concept is: my child who is small travels with me and together we fit comfortably in two seats. According to Southwest Airlines, even though she is small and together we take up two seats, I must still buy two tickets for myself and one for her. Why? If their complaint is the seats taken up then this just shows that it is their BIAS and not the seats taken up which matters.

Also, why is there no similar cost to extremely TALL people? I have had guys 6’5″ behind me who push against my seat for a whole flight or who put their legs into the aisle, etc. IF the airline does not make them purchase another seat also…that again proves that it’s not about the logistics but rather about their bias!

By: Donna

Donna — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 01:19:25 +0000

This announcement thrills me, because I 100% fall into that category with both my MS and obesity, and I haven’t been able to travel for the past couple of years because I need someone with me and can’t afford to bring anyone. Now I can! I’ll find a skinny attendant so my ass can comfortably spread into their free seat a bit. :D

By: Alyssa

Alyssa — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 03:45:10 +0000

Libbyblue, would that include Victoria? Thanks!

By: Staci

Staci — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 20:15:08 +0000

I can walk fine, carry my luggage, and am in no way functionally handicapped by my size, yet I certainly don’t fit in an airline seat without significant pain and discomfort.

Weightlessone – can’t you see the contradiction here? If you can’t fit into a seat, them you are, indeed, functionally handicapped by your size.

By: Becky

Becky — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:05:45 +0000

I can fairly easily fit in a single airplane seat, so no, I am not functionally disabled by my obesity for the purpose of flying. People who cannot fit in a single airplane seat are functionally disabled by their obesity for the purpose of flying. This is not all that difficult of a concept. Try reading all the comments before you add yours.

By: anon

anon — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:12:02 +0000

No the supreme court of canada says obese people who are disabled will receive an extra seat, are you disabled by your obesity?

By: Becky

Becky — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:49:16 +0000

Lilah – when you’re buying a plane ticket, you’re not paying for a seat, you’re paying for passage. You’re paying for a trip from A to B. If you need two seats it is absolutely not either logical or fair to pay two fares, because you’re not getting two trips.

Of course that’s from the point of view of the customer. From the point of view of the airline – as long as the flight isn’t full, the same logic applies. If the flight is full, it is a burden on the airline because they’re losing a fare as the result of having one less seat to put someone in. But I don’t think that burden justifies charging someone two fares for one trip – and the Supreme Court of Canada agrees with me.

By: Becky

Becky — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:35:37 +0000

Tara, read Vidya’s comment. Being unable to fit in the seat is considered a functional disability in the context of flying. A previous ruling suggested airlines use the model currently used on Southwest Airlines to determine whether a passenger needs a second seat – if they cannot lower the armrest, they need a second seat.

By: Lilah

Lilah — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 15:34:26 +0000

I’m sorry, I really don’t think this is far to the airlines. If you are taking up two seats, you should pay for two seats. It’s the logical, fair thing to do.