I think United Airlines “Passengers requiring extra space” is Discriminatory
I just read United Airlines new policy, regarding “Passengers requiring extra space”
|
I think I am in the minority in my opinion, but United’s new policy smacks of discrimination. My experience with obesity may be limited to watching the Biggest Loser, but IMO, severely overweight people have a disease and should be accomodated.
United sites their reason for instituting the policy as 700 complaints in the past year due to people’s space being invaded. I agree with these customers. I wouldn’t want to pay for a full seat and only get a half seat because the person next to me needed more space. But why is the solution to make an obese customer buy 2 seats. Another solution would be for United to make larger seats available to these customers. Was that option even considered?
Also - if customer complaints are really driving this decision, what are United’s plans for …
- The smelly guy I sat next to last summer - I had to breath through my mouth for the duration of the flight to stop from gagging
- The 6′7″ guy who’s legs were clearly in my territory - do extra tall people need two seats?
- The mother with the crying baby- that wailing toddler sure gave me a headache. Should babies have to buy special soundproof seats?
- The sick lady who coughed and sneezed the entire flight - I hadn’t planned on being infected with a contagious disease when I boarded the plane. Should she have to buy a seat in the quarantined area of the plane?
I hope you see my point. If passenger comfort was really the goal, then we would see rules around all annoying passengers, not just the obese. This is why I think United’s new rule is either discrimination (which should never be tolerated) or a veiled attempt at increasing profits. Whichever it is, it makes me sad.
United Airlines should no longer be allowed to use the slogan, “Fly the Friendly Skys”, because their actions are mean!
I agree with you. Shame on United Airlines!
I somewhat agree and somewhat disagree. While I think that it is not a good solution to not allow people that don’t fit the criteria to not fly at all, it is not the same as “sitting next to a smelly guy” or “a mother with a crying baby” or “a sick lady.” The people you mentioned caused you discomfort, but did not interfere with your ability to fly safely. If the seatbelt cannot fit a person, this is a saftey issue. If they take up two seats to fit, this means that the person who purchased the other seat won’t be able to fly.
Obese people, I agree, do suffer from various diseases. I researched it in middle school. However, the disease-related obesity directly correlates to the person’s height. If the person is obese due to this correlation, they will usually fit into those seatbelts, with the extender. If they are unable to do so, then that means the remaining fat, that does not correlate to their height, was brought upon themselves.
I support the ‘buy the two tickets’ portion but not the ‘get off the plane’ portion.
And the option to expand seats would cost United Airlines billions of dollars to upgrade all their planes. They’re already in debt and therefore cannot do that.
I am not advocating a complete overhaul of planes. I am advocating that United make accomodations. That wouldn’t cost billions. In fact, I’m sure that by making an effort, United would gain positive pr and probably more customers.
Also - if safety is a concern, why can parents bring infants and hold them on their laps?
My problem with this issue is that United is choosing to pick on one type of person. I don’t believe that safety and customer complaints are the real issue. I think the real issue is $$. UA should just be truthful and say, if 700 obese people have to buy 2 seats, that’s another $700,000 in our pockets. Woohoo! And even better, we now have license to bump them from full flights and charge other customers higher rates. Aren’t we brilliant?!
As a Dietitian specializing in the area of weight management - all I have to say about this is … how incredibly sad — not just the UA policy but people’s responses (even more so)… just proof that in our culture — WEIGHTISM (discrimination and prejudice) against people that are not just the “right” weight (according to whomever is judging them)…. is the last “acceptable” prejudice.
Research has shown that people who are overweight (not only the morbidly obese, but even just 20-30 pounds overweight) are turned away from jobs and schools and doctors don’t always take their over weight patients’ complaints as seriously - blaming it on their weight “If you just lost weight” ….
Is this UA Policy discriminatory — Let’s think about it… have they made issue with people who are really tall - or taller than average? No. Sort of speaks for itself then huh?
Very sad. If we, as a country are willing to accept ANY KIND of prejudice - it will eventually be our downfall.
Positvelydee, thank you so much for your comment. I wish everyone were as enlightened. It’s tragic that most people don’t even see this as prejudice. They think its ok to call overweight people names. Some of the comments on other blogs are so mean and hateful, I can’t even imagine how horrible these people will feel when they walk onto a UA airline. It’s terrible!
Personally I cannot imagine a more humiliating scenario than being told that you can’t fly or must pay double because you are too fat. I guess you are implementing such a cruel policy because it likely affects only a minute percentage of your customers, so it will only have a negligible affect on your bottom line.
I would not be affected by your new policy and my wife would not either. Yet she is overweight and has always talked in fear about some airline instituting such a policy. She would die from humiliation, she has repeatedly told me. You think that her attitude is unique among American women, who always feel like they are fatter that what they truly are? I would say her attitude is probably more on target than not.
I am sure that you will rarely have to implement your policy because really fat people will choose not to fly your airline. I only hope other people on conscience also boycott your airline for your lack of compassion. Fat discrimination has always been okay among the cruel blockheads of society but you have elevated it to new heights. Can’t think of another American company I would hope would be forced into bankruptcy more than you. Until then, enjoy your elitist passenger manifests!
Thanks John. I hope others realize the cruelty behind this policy. United Airlines will regret this decision as nice people exert the only force we have … we’ll vote with our wallets. I have a flight to DC this summer. I usually fly United, but instead, I am flying Frontier.
I think everyone is focused on the wrong thing here. The question isn’t really whether or not someone needing two seats should get two seats — it’s pretty clear that if someone takes up that amount of space, they ought to have it, and nobody else should be asked to sit in the seat that another person is partially occupying. For the sake of safety, for the sake of comfort, for whatever reason, as a fat person myself, I think that is reasonable. But what I don’t get is that people are insisting that the fat person pay for the seat, as if the act of paying for the seat solves the problem. It doesn’t. What people want is not to be shoved in next to a person who takes up more space than the airplane is designed to allow them; no matter who foots the bill, giving them the space is the solution. The airline could absorb the cost themselves, on the rare occasion when it is truly an issue, rather than humiliating their larger customers and charging them a fat tax. But they choose not to.
I think the airline has done a nice job of obfuscating the issue; they have skillfully made it look like they are concerned about customer comfort while not really taking any of the responsibility for that comfort on themselves. Very clever indeed. If customer comfort were really their chief concern, they would give the seat free of charge to the person needing it. Or better yet, make the seats bigger to begin with. Or, given that the fat person who doesn’t fit in the seat or is not welcome in their seat (I’ve witnessed more than one disgruntled thin person complain loudly to the attendant that their fat seatmate needs to be moved), given that they are already starting from a place of discomfort and humiliation, why not upgrade them for free to an unused seat in the business or first class sections? Since the seats aren’t being used, and the alternative is to kick them off of the plane? No fair, I can hear people screaming, no fair! Well, how fair is it to pay double for the pleasure of flying coach? Or to be the subject of such a heated and demeaning public discussion about the moral wrongness of your belly rolls?
Disabled customers who require more than one seat because of their disability get that seat free of charge — not because the airlines care, but because the ADA provides for that. As of now, obesity is not considered a disability, and therefore is not covered under the ADA, but in my opinion, issues like this will at some point cause that idea to be scrutinized, and perhaps changed, and then the airlines will be forced to do the right thing: give everyone the space they need, all for the same price per person.
My solution would be to allow a large person to book two seats for the price of one, the same way disabled passengers can: in advance, so the airline can count both seats as taken. The airline absorbs the cost, just as they have to with passengers whose legally recognized disabilities require two seats. The fat person pays a fair price, the thin people get the whole 17″ they paid for, and everyone’s happy. If their concern was truly for passenger comfort, that is what the solution would look like. But they really just want it to look that way without doing anything real to make it so.