Should airlines be required to offer obese passengers another seat or two at no extra charge?

In My Humble Opinion
1

There is a current change.org petition authored by a social media influencer, Jaelynn Chaney, asking for the FAA to regulate airlines that fly in the US to provide obese passengers, at no cost to the passengers, an extra seat or two, so that they may fly comfortably. She recognizes that all passengers may have to bear the costs of this change through increased air fares across the board. There are over 18,000 signatures currently.

Some states have recognized obesity as a protected class for discrimination purposes, but most states and the Federal government have not. In some cases obesity can be considered a disability. Airline policies are differing as well.

Alaska Airlines - requires a second seat purchase if you can’t fit comfortably within your seat with the armrest down

Allegiant - recommends passengers who can’t fit comfortably with the armrest down to buy a second seat

American Airlines - requires a second seat purchase if you require a seatbelt extension and you can’t fit comfortably within your seat with the armrest down and your body extends 1" beyond the outside of the armrest

Delta - recommends obese passengers purchase a second seat

Frontier - requires passengers that are unable to lower the armrests purchase a second seat

Hawaiian - recommends that a second seat be purchased if you can’t comfortably sit with both armrests lowered

JetBlue - no policy

Southwest - encourages a second seat purchase if you cannot fit comfortably

Spirit - requires a second seat purchase if you encroach on an adjacent seat or unable to sit comfortably with the armrest down

United - required to purchase a second seat of you don’t fit with the armrests down

Clearly there is a lot of differentiation between airline current policies. I am curious if there is a disproportionate number of obese passengers booking tickets on airlines that recommend but do not require the purchase of a second ticket.

Should the FAA enforce the proposed policy on US air carriers? And should all passengers bear the costs equally?

2

Hell no. I shouldn’t be subsidizing somebody else’s poor dietary and exercise habits.

3

In fairness to Chaney, her petition calls for airlines to accommodate people who are of unusual sizes in every direction - extremely tall people, for instance, are mentioned.

4

No, but there should be some way to mark that a person is purchasing a 2nd seat for the use of one person and airlines should not be allowed to physically separate that conjoining.

5

Getting an extra seat for no extra charge would be an exercise in comedy. Who is going to police this, we can barely get people to use carryons that fit the overhead bins.

Start throwing around the option to get an entire empty seat next to you, free? Sign me up and everyone else on the plane, we all want it.

6

I say no, becasue they are in the business of renting space. They already do it with luggage, if your carryon is too big it has to be placed under the plane. If your baggage weighs too much you get charged more.

That and I don’t see flying as a right, I see it as a regulated business that can set its own rules within limits. The person next to the oversized person has rights too.

7

How would this work? Free upgrades to business or first class?

8

It would actually make sense to go the other way - if someone is obviously too large to fit in a seat, the person should be required to purchase a second ticket. I like the idea of specifically accomodating people by offering two-seat, single person tickets. Maybe you could even have a discount for them if the flight isn’t full.

I once spent an entire flight basically scrunched against the sidewall of the plane because the person next to me was probably 350 lbs. I couldn’t even put down the arm rest between us, and I got the use of about half a seat for three hours.

I also once spent the two hours at a very expensive concert sitting on the arm of my chair because the lady beside me took up her seat and mine. And she spent the entire concert balancing food on her ample bosom and eating nonstop.

I know it sucks to be obese, and that some people really can’t help it. If you want to set up a charity for such people to provide discount seats, that’d be fine. But you can’t expect other people to suffer because of their problems.

I know that if I were that obese, I would never force someone out of their chair like that woman did to me, so I wouldn’t go to concerts and I’d pay for an extra airline ticket or not fly. Common courtesy. I’m not imposing my problems on others.

9

…and this is the gripping hand of the debate. No one likes airplane seats, and we all know every airline has been making them smaller and smaller to cram more and more people on each flight.

How about we mandate larger seats for everyone? Is there anyone here who would object to having more room on a flight?

10

Yeah, but at what cost? Larger seats means less of them in the available space, so the cost of each seat would have to rise.

My initial response is no. If obesity is considered a disability, then things may be different. I mean, if someone requires an additional seat for say, their medical equipment that keeps them alive while they are on the flight, then sure, the airline can afford to let that passenger have a free adjoining seat. But what is a disability, in the case of obesity? Not everyone who is large is at fault for that - will the airlines require a doctor’s note that the person should be accommodated on a flight because of their size, which is out of their control? What is “normal”, anyway?

11

This is my understanding (to a degree) of how things work right now. If you’re flying economy, you pay more for leg room (the various ‘plus’ programs), or business / first class which are larger / more comfortable / less crowded.

We could probably further differentiate the flying experience, the cheap ‘cattle’ seats (and that’s what I fly due to my cheapness), the economy plus, a new ‘economy deluxe’ (the business/first class larger seats but without the booze and boarding benefits and likely be more comfortable for larger/taller customers), and first class with all the perks.

It’s not an ideal situation, but it reflects the costs fliers are willing to bear with. Honestly, with the needs for additional security, the fight over baggage sizes and costs, and the predatory pricing schemes (for the luggage, etc), I’ve pretty much ruled out flying for anything that I could drive in a day. And that leaves out the equally predatory costs of renting a vehicle, about which we’ve had various threads.

12

An interesting adjacent issue is a gathering push by Congress to require the FAA to mandate a minimum airline seat size, both width and available legroom, to reflect the current realities of Americans’ ever-burgeoning sizes and the changing demographics of who flies as the retired Baby Boomers grow in number, girth, and infirmity.

It is thinly disguised under the rubric of requiring FAA to analyze, then demonstrate by tests, that the current evacuation time standards (90 seconds) can actually be achieved by actual Americans of an accurate population cross section as to size, age, and disability. Vs the current de facto standard of a plane full of college kids. And then report the results of their tests to the public and Congress for action.

Essentially this is trying to turn cramped cabins into a safety issue that properly falls under FAA, rather than a consumer protection issue that properly falls under a different and much less powerful department of DOT or the unrelated FTC’s consumer protection watchdog folks. It’s not batshit insane to recognize the safety implications of cramped conditions are non-zero, but that’s not the real motivation here.

This was brought up by Congress before, in 2018, and FAA so far is doing an excellent foot-drag on this, asserting back to Congress that they have done various engineering simulations based of extrapolated real data and there’s no safety issue here.

The legislation to set and pay for the FAA’s 2024 budget is under consideration right now. It commonly includes a bunch of language requiring FA investigate this or that and report back. This issue is once more to the fore with some language this time trying to make it harder for FAA to weasel out of this obvious congressional trap. Here’s a cite from a couple weeks ago:


Tying this back to the OP's topic ... It is obvious to anyone who thinks about this for even a minute that if indeed somehow seats have to get bigger, a lot less will fit in any given airplane and fares will react accordingly since the cost to buy and operate the machine hasn't changed much. Claiming to deliver something to the public for no cost by Congressional fiat is a time-honored ploy. Which always fails in the real world. King Canute would be proud.
13

To answer the thread title, NO.

14

The airlines have made everything smaller and smaller to cram more people on board.

So, yeah, passengers are entitled to a trip when they buy a ticket.

15

How do they handle this in Europe? Becasue we are known for appreciating their guidance when it comes to social issues such as this. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

16

In my experience, the seats are no bigger but the people are smaller.

17

I would love to see them step back to the old original seats and spacing from before they started cramming people in. I remember when the center batch of seats was 3 across, then 4 across then 5 across. Seats went down from [can’t google easily on my phone] 21 inches to 18-19 inches with the seat pitch losing enough so that little 5’5" me now sits with my knees slammed into the seat in front of me. IF they did that, then they could charge extra. Maybe they could set aside 2 or 3 rows of fat economy like that if they don’t want to do the entire plane, and charge them for that improved economy or whatever it is called [I frequently end up in those because I am physically handicapped and get hauled in in a wheelchair =( ]

18

There are many scholarly articles written arguing the constitutional right under Article 14 to travel, including air travel. Some have even argued that it is a basic human right under UN declarations.

19

No, they should be given the option of purchasing extra room in the same way that taller people do and the airlines should be mandated to keep those two purchased seats together but I think that is where the reasonable expectation ends.
I don’t expect people to subsidise my leg length and nor should I be expected to subsidise someone’s width.

20

But they are not being denied travel since they have other options. Trains, ships and automobiles come to mind.