Have you tried GLP1 medications and found it didn't work for you? We'd like to hear about your experiences, what you tried, why it didn't work and how you're doing now. Click here to tell us your story

'Pay as you weigh' debate

RachaelKaye4
RachaelKaye4 Posts: 57 Member
in Chit-Chat
'Pay as you weigh' is a fascinating debate...

http://www.shape.com/blogs/shape-your-life/airline-charges-weight-accused-discrimination

What do you think?

Rach x
«13

Replies

  • Greenrun99
    Greenrun99 Posts: 2,065 Member
    Ever sit on a long plane ride next to someone that is half in your seat.. ya they should maybe pay more. I understand it sucks, but hey don't like it fly another airline.
  • shred_me_up
    shred_me_up Posts: 267 Member
    What about if you are muscular and weigh more? Or tall and take up more room? Are we talking the space one takes up in the plane, or actual weight? i just feel like there are too many criteria and too many exceptions for this to really be able to work :/
  • sperocras
    sperocras Posts: 60 Member
    Weight is the factor that determines fuel usage, so for airlines, I believe that is the only factor they're considering.
  • Rottnme
    Rottnme Posts: 167 Member
    It's an idea but it doesn't make sense in too many ways. ...Consider a tall person (6'7") vs a short person (5'1"), the system would NEVER be equal. What about two men, both 6'5" tall and weighing 275#? One is "average build" (though obese by BMI standards) and the is other ripped and solid muscle. How do you quantify that? I understand what they are getting at but the system as proposed doesn't seem to work in my eyes.

    ...additionally, this opens the door for all other transport industries to do the same busses, cabs, boats, and trains all use fuel too, now what?
  • Hexahedra
    Hexahedra Posts: 894 Member
    Ever sit on a long plane ride next to someone that is half in your seat.. ya they should maybe pay more. I understand it sucks, but hey don't like it fly another airline.

    They can also choose to drive, take a train, or take a ship where seating space is not that limited.

    I'm all for airline passenger width measurement. if you're much wider than the tiny seats, then you gotta pay more. I'm quite certain that if you're that wide, you're that much heavier as well.
  • Rottnme
    Rottnme Posts: 167 Member
    Weight is the factor that determines fuel usage, so for airlines, I believe that is the only factor they're considering.

    Right but to penalize one person becasue they are tall or muscular (heavy) and reward another because they are short or petite (light) isn't too far from racism (black/white/asian/etc.) is it?
  • DalekBrittany
    DalekBrittany Posts: 1,748 Member
    Too many unspecified variables to form a real opinion, but I suppose it could make sense for obese people to pay more. And this is coming from an obese person. I wouldn't take any more offense to it than I do having to pay 2 dollars more for jeans because they have to use more fabric. However, there really isn't a well defined way to figure out how it would be done. Too many factors like muscle, height, etc.
  • FP4HSharon
    FP4HSharon Posts: 664 Member
    I think anyone can just look at someone & tell if they'd spill over into the adjoining seats. They could give a hip measurement as a guide & if the person's hips are larger, then they should pay for another seat. If a person arrives & hasn't bought another seat, then they should be charged. They could have a test chair (just like the carry on bag test frames) if the person insists they wouldn't spill. Would it be embarrassing for them, yes. But if they let them know when they book what the deal is, then it'll be their own fault if they don't buy another seat. I've sat next to large people whose bodies were literally almost pushing me into the seat on the other side. While it would cost more money, even the large people would have to admit that THEY would be more comfortable to have 2 seats if needed.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    It's an idea but it doesn't make sense in too many ways. ...Consider a tall person (6'7") vs a short person (5'1"), the system would NEVER be equal. What about two men, both 6'5" tall and weighing 275#? One is "average build" (though obese by BMI standards) and the is other ripped and solid muscle. How do you quantify that? I understand what they are getting at but the system as proposed doesn't seem to work in my eyes.

    ...additionally, this opens the door for all other transport industries to do the same busses, cabs, boats, and trains all use fuel too, now what?

    But planes specifically rely on weight. Buses and other modes of transportation go the same route every day and a little more weight or a little less doesn't make a huge difference.

    Weight plays a different roll in airplanes. Airplanes factor weight into how much fuel they need, how much runway they need to take off, how much the plane will weight at landing etc. I don't know how big of a difference it makes in fuel consumption.

    And this weight fee also includes baggage and anything else you carry on the plane.

    I talked about this with my husband who is a big guy last night. We would be happy to pay the rates Samoan airlines is asking.
    It would still be cheaper for us even though I am not light and he is a bigger guy.
  • MeanSophieCat
    MeanSophieCat Posts: 200 Member
    What about if you are muscular and weigh more? Or tall and take up more room? Are we talking the space one takes up in the plane, or actual weight? i just feel like there are too many criteria and too many exceptions for this to really be able to work :/

    Agree with this. My husband is 6'5" and 225lbs. That is very different from 5'0" and 225lbs.
  • micheabr
    micheabr Posts: 72
    Well that's one way to discourage obesity.
  • yo_andi
    yo_andi Posts: 2,178 Member
    What about if you are muscular and weigh more? Or tall and take up more room? Are we talking the space one takes up in the plane, or actual weight? i just feel like there are too many criteria and too many exceptions for this to really be able to work :/

    Agreed! I am tall and usually have to contort my legs in funny ways if I sit anywhere near the back of the plane. Because I am tall, I am also heavier than say the average 5'4 woman.
  • Melo1966
    Melo1966 Posts: 881 Member
    They need to also go by the weight of peoples carry-ons too.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Too many unspecified variables to form a real opinion, but I suppose it could make sense for obese people to pay more. And this is coming from an obese person. I wouldn't take any more offense to it than I do having to pay 2 dollars more for jeans because they have to use more fabric. However, there really isn't a well defined way to figure out how it would be done. Too many factors like muscle, height, etc.

    This is specifically about weight not size. This fee also includes anything you are taking on the planes, baggage, carry on, purse, etc. It isn't about the space being taken up.
  • willwhite78
    willwhite78 Posts: 21
    Yup, it's all about weight. If you're muscular and weigh as much as a fat person, you should pay the same as the fat person, because the criteria is the weight you bring on the plane. If you want extra leg room because you're tall, many airlines offer seats with more leg room for an additional price.

    I don't have a problem with airlines charging based on weight because:

    The four forces on an airplane are thrust, drag, lift and weight. If you increase the weight of a plane, you have to increase the lift. The only way to increase lift is to increase thrust if you want to maintain the same speed, which also increases drag if the aerodynamics of the wings need to change (with more flaps, etc). So an increase in weight on an airplane is a HUGE problem.

    Secondly, airlines sell additional space and weight to cargo companies (UPS, FedEx, Yellow, etc) to save money. An extra 100 pounds on a person is an extra 100 pounds of cargo the pane has to leave behind, and thus is lost revenue.

    So, would it suck? Yeah. But it's a reasonable proposition as long as EVERYONE is charged based on weight.

    (I also don't have a problem with size limitations requiring people who can't physically fit in a seat to purchase an adjoining seat)
  • cuterbee
    cuterbee Posts: 545
    I'm sort of OK with it as long as they weigh the luggage and the person for the total weight. If the airline is thinking about cost of transport (more weight = greater cost), then that makes sense.

    My daughter is tiny, but when she travels, I think she takes her entire extensive wardrobe with her; I carry a small backpack. The difference between the two of us to fly is probably around 10-20 pounds if you include luggage and carry-on.

    Of course, this will make it difficult to buy your ticket online unless they're planning on weighing everyone at check-in.
  • olDave
    olDave Posts: 557 Member
    When airtravel first started that's exactly how people were charged...by their weight. They had to step on a scale in the airport.

    I have no issue with it today except that the airlines would have to go back to the larger seats that they started out with on airplanes. It's a matter of comfort....for everyone.
  • DavidC1857
    DavidC1857 Posts: 149 Member
    Given the weight of the plane, fuel, cargo (they move a lot of cargo on commercial planes), etc., the variable weight of the passengers is pretty insignificant. If it were significant, they'd be weighing passengers as they get on and doing fuel calculations on the fly.

    Now, if a person is taking more than one seat, either making his/her neighbor uncomfortable, or possibly pushing another paying customer off of the flight, that would be another story. I would expect to have paid more for that when I was obese, and I was very tall so I never really spilled over.
  • sperocras
    sperocras Posts: 60 Member
    Weight is the factor that determines fuel usage, so for airlines, I believe that is the only factor they're considering.

    Right but to penalize one person becasue they are tall or muscular (heavy) and reward another because they are short or petite (light) isn't too far from racism (black/white/asian/etc.) is it?
    I'm not saying what they're doing is right. I'm just saying that was my understanding of their viewpoint. They could do it the way the clothing manufacturers do it - charge the same cost for everything and make more profit on the smaller sizes. At least that way, everyone is paying the same amount for the same distance travelled despite it using more fuel for one person compared to another (or more fabric, as the case may be).
  • mgmlap
    mgmlap Posts: 1,377 Member
    We recently took a flight out to NJ. My daugher is petite...5'1"...she sat next to a guy that was average height..but yet..he kept 'Spilling" over into her area. He figured it was a kid..and what was she going to do..tell him to take his arm off her rest..and for him not to put his feet in her area..

    Overweight people are not the only ones "spilling" over..its also people who think they have the right when sitting next to someone smaller than they are.

    I do not agree with this..because its so subjective..

Categories