Southwest airlines to fatties: We'll refund the 2nd ticket u buy

[JEDI]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/26/travel/passenger-weight-debate/index.html?hpt=hp_bn10

"The airline will refund the cost of the second seat after the flight."


WTF?

this can be soooooooo abused. heck, i guess even skinny people can do it when they dont want someone sitting in the middle seat.

WTF!

 

[Genx87]

Weird, why would they refund the cost of the second ticket? They are using that second seat.

 

[BoomerD]

Weird, why would they refund the cost of the second ticket? They are using that second seat.

HEY! STFU! I'm only using part of it...

Besides...you skinny people aren't using it all. ()

 

[Exterous]

Weird, why would they refund the cost of the second ticket? They are using that second seat.

Its discrimination against skinnier people! Great - now for my next SW flight I want to stuff my shirt full of pillows so I can get my second seat for free and then relax with no elbow wars to keep me pre-occupied for the flight

 

[Thebobo]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/26/travel/passenger-weight-debate/index.html?hpt=hp_bn10

"The airline will refund the cost of the second seat after the flight."


WTF?

this can be soooooooo abused. heck, i guess even skinny people can do it when they dont want someone sitting in the middle seat.

WTF!

Oh look I used fatties in my thread title, I put down other people to make myself feel better. Grow up

 

[Bowfinger]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/26/travel/passenger-weight-debate/index.html?hpt=hp_bn10 ...

Thank you ... not for that article, but for a link within it. I've long felt the problem with airline seats is NOT just obese people. As someone who is both tall and broad-shouldered, I've always found most airline seats are too small, both in legroom and in shoulder room, even though my butt fits between the armrests. I did some research on my own several years ago and found that the average adult male shoulder width is wider than typical 17" to 19" airline seats. Nonetheless, this is ignored by the airlines in their never-ending quest to cram more people into less space, and by smaller people who immediately launch into ignorant spews about "fatties"

But I am now vindicated. Within the story linked above is this link: Airline Squeeze: It's not you, "It's the Seat"

[ ... ]
Americans are getting bigger, says Kathleen Robinette, who's studied human body measurements for the U.S. Air Force for three decades.
But in general, the problem's "not you -- it's the seat," she says with a chuckle.

Since Robinette's first airline seat study for NASA and the FAA in 1978, she has a different perspective when she boards an airliner. "I always see all kinds of arms hanging out into the aisles. That means the seats are too narrow, and there's nowhere for the shoulders and arms to go except into the aisle because there's not enough room in the seat."

When "you keep getting your arm whacked by the cart as it comes down the aisle," don't feel guilty, she says. It happens to everybody. "And it's because of the seats."
[ ... ]
But the American rear end isn't really the important statistic here, Robinette says.

Nor are the male hips, which the industry mistakenly used to determine seat width sometime around the 1960s, she says.

"It's the wrong dimension. The widest part of your body is your shoulders and arms. And that's much, much bigger than your hips. Several inches wider." Furthermore, she says, women actually have larger hip width on average than men.

The industry used the male hip as a seat measuring stick "thinking that it would accommodate the women too, but in fact they don't accommodate the larger women."

The result: Airline seats are approximately 5 inches too narrow, she says. And that's for passengers in the 1960s, let alone the supersized U.S. travelers of today. ...

The article then talks about legroom and seat pitch, but doesn't offer any ergonomics data on best practices. It does note that being too confined to adjust one's position can cause health issues like Deep Vein Thrombosis. All I know is that when I sit in standard coach seats, I'm pretty well wedged between the my seat and the seat in front of me, with my legs stuck in unnatural positions.


In short, the problem isn't just "fatties". It's adults who are above average in any dimension, and the airlines who refuse to design their seating to match real people.

 

[xBiffx]

"The armrest is considered to be the definitive boundary between seats; width between the armrests measures 17 inches.

How many non obese grown men measure less than 17 inches from arm to arm?

The rule of thumb: not encroaching on "any part" of the neighboring seats.

Impossible when the objective of the airline is to fill a sardine can with as many sardines as they can considering they get payed by the sardine.

 

[Apple Of Sodom]

Thank you ... not for that article, but for a link within it. I've long felt the problem with airline seats is NOT just obese people. As someone who is both tall and broad-shouldered, I've always found most airline seats are too small, both in legroom and in shoulder room, even though my butt fits between the armrests. I did some research on my own several years ago and found that the average adult male shoulder width is wider than typical 17" to 19" airline seats. Nonetheless, this is ignored by the airlines in their never-ending quest to cram more people into less space, and by smaller people who immediately launch into ignorant spews about "fatties"

But I am now vindicated. Within the story linked above is this link: Airline Squeeze: It's not you, "It's the Seat"


The article then talks about legroom and seat pitch, but doesn't offer any ergonomics data on best practices. It does note that being too confined to adjust one's position can cause health issues like Deep Vein Thrombosis. All I know is that when I sit in standard coach seats, I'm pretty well wedged between the my seat and the seat in front of me, with my legs stuck in unnatural positions.


In short, the problem isn't just "fatties". It's adults who are above average in any dimension, and the airlines who refuse to design their seating to match real people.

If you are above average then you should pay above average prices. Get a seat in first class. Buy two seats. Maybe we can start offering fractional seats. I fit in my seat perfectly fine and absolutely hate getting stuck next to someone who is above average.

 

[Bowfinger]

If you are above average then you should pay above average prices. Get a seat in first class. Buy two seats. Maybe we can start offering fractional seats. I fit in my seat perfectly fine and absolutely hate getting stuck next to someone who is above average.

Poorly phrased on my part, since the average shoulder width was five inches wider than standard coach seating. (And that was in the 60's. The average would be even wider today.) In any case, I reject the notion that someone who is merely tall or even moderately overweight should be penalized for trying to use a public conveyance, or any other facilities open to the general public. Businesses should expect to accommodate the great majority of people.

I question the bolded comment above. Are you a petite person or perhaps not yet fully grown? If you truly fit in your seat perfectly, your shoulders are a good 5" smaller than average. That's the point.

 

[BoberFett]

I'll just leave this here.

http://www.businessinsider.com/airlines-have-a-small-profit-margin-2012-6

 

[Bowfinger]

I'll just leave this here.

http://www.businessinsider.com/airlines-have-a-small-profit-margin-2012-6

Absolutely, airlines have miniscule margins, but that's largely the industry's own fault. They collectively chose the tactic of cut-throat price wars, trying to cram more and more people on their planes with loss leader pricing. It's been a race to the bottom, and the result has been dismal service, unhappy customers, and lots of red ink. They are in a tough spot to be sure: they've conditioned consumers to demand artificially low prices and to shop only on price, they can't legally collude on pricing to ensure everyone makes reasonable profits, yet they lack the discipline to draw a line and refuse to cut their prices below the point of profitability, even if it means selling fewer fares.

Edit: and to pour salt in the wound, they now have TSA security theater to further drive up costs and to make flying commercially an even more miserable experience, encouraging even more customers to seek alternative transportation. Though I suppose at least with TSA, they don't charge extra for the groping and nude photos.

 

[BoberFett]

Do companies drive consumers or do consumers drive companies? Do you think families going on vacation are willing to spend an extra few hundred dollars just to have slightly larger seats? I think most people will deal with a couple hours of less than ideal comfort to save that kind of money. If you want comfort, there's always first class.

 

[MixMasterTang]

There are also much better seating options that airlines could implement. This article is from 2008 and I still have not seen these types of seats in any aircraft.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2008/04/delta-airlines/

 

[Bowfinger]

Do companies drive consumers or do consumers drive companies? Do you think families going on vacation are willing to spend an extra few hundred dollars just to have slightly larger seats? I think most people will deal with a couple hours of less than ideal comfort to save that kind of money. If you want comfort, there's always first class.

I think it's a vicious circle. People become accustomed to a pricing model and they live with it. Once airlines trained people to expect constantly discounted fares, we start demanding them and refuse to buy without them. If we were accustomed to paying an extra $50 per seat, however, most of us would do without thinking twice. That's the way it used to be. That's really what we're talking about, by the way, an extra $50 or so per seat, not a few hundred dollars (at least for typical domestic flights).

Yes, some people will no longer to be able to afford that, but that's fine. Some people can't afford Mercedes either. Life goes on, one adapts to what one can afford. The point is current airline margins are so thin it should be relatively easy to make more profit selling somewhat fewer seats at somewhat higher fares. Airlines simply have to abandon the model of selling fares at or below cost. Optimal profitability does not always come with highest sales volumes.

And I think that's really another fundamental issue with airlines and profitability. Thanks to endless acquisitions, there is really very little competition in the industry today. If there were, there would be more room for some airlines to compete based on service and comfort while others competed on cost. It's a common model in other industries which is why we have Bloomingdale's and Target and Wal-Mart all turning profits. Different models to serve different customers. Instead, in airlines today, the primary competition is around cost. Thus, the cut-throat race to the bottom.

Finally, there are two problems with First Class. First, its only available on certain planes. Commuter jets often lack FC seating. Second, it is intentionally over-priced for ego appeal (exclusivity) and as a loyalty perk rather than being priced proportionately to reflect its true added expense. It is also overkill from the perspective of merely trying to accommodate average male customers. Something like Business Class would be more appropriate, with somewhat larger seats and more legroom, but without the frills of "free" booze and china.

 

[Mermaidman]

Weird, why would they refund the cost of the second ticket? They are using that second seat.

The linked article is light on details. I would assume that LUV will refund the cost of the second seat IF the flight turns out not to be full. Seems like a reasonable policy.

edit: I am wrong. What a FUBAR policy.

 

[sao123]

The linked article is light on details. I would assume that LUV will refund the cost of the second seat IF the flight turns out not to be full. Seems like a reasonable policy.

edit: I am wrong. What a FUBAR policy.

This used to be the policy as recently as 2 years ago. It appears to have been changed to this latest version, where it no longer matters if the flight was full.

 

[Llwellyn]

This is an extremely recent change. They've always refunded the second seat if the flight wasn't totally oversold on any leg of a complete flight, and that's been their policy for the previous like 15 years or so. You're expected to buy the second seat if you need it and proactively preboard and select your own seats, and preserve your additional seat on your own if there are any issues.

This change where they will refund the second fare even if the flight is full is interesting as all hell, and another reason why I'll choose to use them in the future. They were the only airline that even offered refunds in any circumstance to start with, and now they are guaranteeing them. They also still don't have checked bag fees for the first bag, so why in the sam hell would you fly someone else and pay more?

And, as someone who does need the second seat (and I barely touch into the next seat currently, so I almost don't need it anymore and hopefully won't for much longer), I hate the people who do and don't buy it in advance and try to get by without one. No one wants to have to travel with you all up in their space... for any reason, at any size! Follow the policy, get the second seat, enjoy the extra room, and let everyone have an enjoyable flight FFS.

My most recent flight was on United, and having flown with the second seat there it was no issue, but they also don't offer refunds at all even when not oversold. It just costs twice as much to fly. Fair enough, since that is what their policy is and it's clearly stated up front.

 

[OutHouse]

There are also much better seating options that airlines could implement. This article is from 2008 and I still have not seen these types of seats in any aircraft.

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2008/04/delta-airlines/

Awesome.

 

[Bowfinger]

The linked article is light on details. I would assume that LUV will refund the cost of the second seat IF the flight turns out not to be full. Seems like a reasonable policy.

edit: I am wrong. What a FUBAR policy.

That's a surprisingly customer-friendly policy, I'm impressed. I don't imagine they'll extend this to passengers who are "merely" broad-shouldered (since that will be the majority of adult men), but it's a great way to accommodate the obese. It's also a great service for those who might wind up sitting next to an obese person. With this policy, Southwest will potentially lose one fare, but they'll also have two happy, comfortable customers instead of three unhappy, uncomfortable ones. Kudos.

 

[Doppel]

That link to wired seems really neat.

Fatties already are offsetting some of their higher costs to non-fatties.'samoa airlines some tiny airline already charges by mass.
It makes good business sense if consumers can go for it and in a country where 2/3 of people are fatties I suspect these policies will be exceptionally hard to promote. And so so next time I pay extra for a 20 lb overweight bag but the morbidly obese near-death human oven next to me who didn't have an overweight bag and thus ends up paying less than me, I will continue to sit there squished next to his fat arms knowing there is nothing I can do about it.

Ideally we should see planes with car-like adjustable seats which go smaller for kids and larger for fatties so that although they pay more they get more room as well.

 

[Tom]

Fat people create jobs.

 

[1prophet]

Do companies drive consumers or do consumers drive companies?

A well mentally disciplined critical thinking consumer makes their own choices, the other 99.9% are easily manipulated using their own desires against them by the companies which tell them what to think, want, and buy.

 

[Thebobo]

Fat people create jobs.

Damn skippie we do!

 

[BoberFett]

A well mentally disciplined critical thinking consumer makes their own choices, the other 99.9% are easily manipulated using their own desires against them by the companies which tell them what to think, want, and buy.

Sucks to be them. Good to be the company that parts fools from their money.

 

[EagleKeeper]

On a normal 6 seat aircraft per row; the business class seats are 4 per row.

That indicates that thte value of the business seat is 50% more than the economy seat.

As Bowfinger stated; the cost to the passenger for a Business class seat does not reflect the revenue cost.

Status and/or perk