Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Mar 12th 2005 | 3:12 pm
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
By Ken Dermota
Washington - Yara Zubalskyj had a bum foot when she took her seat next to
an obese man on a recent Lufthansa flight from Washington. But in
Frankfurt, six hours later, other things hurt, too.
"He tried to keep in his seat, said Zubalskyj, 58.
"But he kept dozing and when he slept, his elbow kept hitting my chest."
Zubalskyj is one of a growing number of travellers crowded by wide-body
passengers who cannot fit into the standard, 43cm airline seat.
One-third of Americans are not just fat but obese, due to junk food diets
and lack of exercise, according to official US statistics. The waistline
problem is growing.
Airlines are caught in the squeeze, by passenger "air rage" and at least
four lawsuits in the United States - all by overweight travelers.
Zubalskyj said she may become the first to sue an airline on behalf of the
slim.
"I think they should be sued - by people who are not obese who do not
deserve to be hit," she said.
'I guess I'm just a fat, black woman'
What hurt Zubalskyj most, however, was her pride.
Lufthansa's flight crew suggested she move. She protested that she had
reserved a so-called bulkhead seat to accommodate her foot. The only empty
seat with foot room was in first class. Lufthansa denied her an upgrade.
Lufthansa officials in Germany refused to return her phone calls, and only
when she was back home did she receive an offer of $400 (about R2 500), she
said.
"I found it to be very insulting and demeaning," she said.
That was also Nadine Thompson's experience - but for different reasons.
"I wanted to cry but couldn't," Thompson said.
Thompson is one of four overweight persons who sued Southwest Airlines over
its policy of asking passengers who cannot fit into a seat to pay for a
second one.
"I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
She runs a cosmetics business in Exeter, New Hampshire.
Thompson said she liked Southwest so much that she was a frequent flier -
until she was escorted from a flight by two armed sheriffs after refusing
to buy a second ticket.
"I had my armrest down, seat belt fastened," Thompson said, when a manager
boarded the plane and told her that for the comfort and safety of herself
and other passengers, she would have to buy a second ticket.
"I guess I'm just a fat, black woman and I guess I'm not allowed to fly
this airline," Thompson said she told the sheriff.
Thompson said the airline apologised, but too late. Her discrimination suit
goes to trial in February 2006.
"It's not discrimination in any shape, form or fashion," said Southwest
spokesperson Ed Stewart.
"We have a customer size policy," he said. "It's the same policy as every
other airline."
So why is Southwest getting sued?
"We had an internal memo that had it enforced around the country," Stewart
said.
He said other airlines drop the problem into the customers' lap, so to
speak.
"This may come as a surprise, but the person in the other seat may not want
to be sat on," said Stewart. He pointed out that Southwest had won the
other three suits.
Southwest's policy is to charge for an extra seat only if the plane is
full, Stewart said.
Luckily, Stewart said, less than half of one percent of passengers are
affected.
However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
to shrink costs.
"As Americans are getting larger, seats are getting smaller," said Pat
Funk, vice president of the Consumer Rights Travel Centre, a nonprofit
group which tracks fliers' rights.
"Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
Seat width, now measured in hundredths of an inch, cannot shrink much, but
the space from front to back does.
Funk, who travels a lot, once weighed 200 pounds. She said she trimmed
down, in large measure, to fit into airline seats.
"It's claustrophobic," she said.
"I would be just as unhappy as the Lufthansa lady," she said.
By Ken Dermota
Washington - Yara Zubalskyj had a bum foot when she took her seat next to
an obese man on a recent Lufthansa flight from Washington. But in
Frankfurt, six hours later, other things hurt, too.
"He tried to keep in his seat, said Zubalskyj, 58.
"But he kept dozing and when he slept, his elbow kept hitting my chest."
Zubalskyj is one of a growing number of travellers crowded by wide-body
passengers who cannot fit into the standard, 43cm airline seat.
One-third of Americans are not just fat but obese, due to junk food diets
and lack of exercise, according to official US statistics. The waistline
problem is growing.
Airlines are caught in the squeeze, by passenger "air rage" and at least
four lawsuits in the United States - all by overweight travelers.
Zubalskyj said she may become the first to sue an airline on behalf of the
slim.
"I think they should be sued - by people who are not obese who do not
deserve to be hit," she said.
'I guess I'm just a fat, black woman'
What hurt Zubalskyj most, however, was her pride.
Lufthansa's flight crew suggested she move. She protested that she had
reserved a so-called bulkhead seat to accommodate her foot. The only empty
seat with foot room was in first class. Lufthansa denied her an upgrade.
Lufthansa officials in Germany refused to return her phone calls, and only
when she was back home did she receive an offer of $400 (about R2 500), she
said.
"I found it to be very insulting and demeaning," she said.
That was also Nadine Thompson's experience - but for different reasons.
"I wanted to cry but couldn't," Thompson said.
Thompson is one of four overweight persons who sued Southwest Airlines over
its policy of asking passengers who cannot fit into a seat to pay for a
second one.
"I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
She runs a cosmetics business in Exeter, New Hampshire.
Thompson said she liked Southwest so much that she was a frequent flier -
until she was escorted from a flight by two armed sheriffs after refusing
to buy a second ticket.
"I had my armrest down, seat belt fastened," Thompson said, when a manager
boarded the plane and told her that for the comfort and safety of herself
and other passengers, she would have to buy a second ticket.
"I guess I'm just a fat, black woman and I guess I'm not allowed to fly
this airline," Thompson said she told the sheriff.
Thompson said the airline apologised, but too late. Her discrimination suit
goes to trial in February 2006.
"It's not discrimination in any shape, form or fashion," said Southwest
spokesperson Ed Stewart.
"We have a customer size policy," he said. "It's the same policy as every
other airline."
So why is Southwest getting sued?
"We had an internal memo that had it enforced around the country," Stewart
said.
He said other airlines drop the problem into the customers' lap, so to
speak.
"This may come as a surprise, but the person in the other seat may not want
to be sat on," said Stewart. He pointed out that Southwest had won the
other three suits.
Southwest's policy is to charge for an extra seat only if the plane is
full, Stewart said.
Luckily, Stewart said, less than half of one percent of passengers are
affected.
However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
to shrink costs.
"As Americans are getting larger, seats are getting smaller," said Pat
Funk, vice president of the Consumer Rights Travel Centre, a nonprofit
group which tracks fliers' rights.
"Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
Seat width, now measured in hundredths of an inch, cannot shrink much, but
the space from front to back does.
Funk, who travels a lot, once weighed 200 pounds. She said she trimmed
down, in large measure, to fit into airline seats.
"It's claustrophobic," she said.
"I would be just as unhappy as the Lufthansa lady," she said.
Mar 12th 2005 | 4:15 pm
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
On 13 Mar 2005 04:12:21 -0000, Catharine <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
>By Ken Dermota
>Thompson is one of four overweight persons who sued Southwest Airlines over
>its policy of asking passengers who cannot fit into a seat to pay for a
>second one.
>"I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
>She runs a cosmetics business in Exeter, New Hampshire.
A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
I'm sure she's a nice person otherwise - but still enormous.
wrote:
>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
>By Ken Dermota
>Thompson is one of four overweight persons who sued Southwest Airlines over
>its policy of asking passengers who cannot fit into a seat to pay for a
>second one.
>"I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
>She runs a cosmetics business in Exeter, New Hampshire.
A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
I'm sure she's a nice person otherwise - but still enormous.
Mar 12th 2005 | 5:28 pm
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, George Max <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 13 Mar 2005 04:12:21 -0000, Catharine <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
>>By Ken Dermota
>>Thompson is one of four overweight persons who sued Southwest Airlines over
>>its policy of asking passengers who cannot fit into a seat to pay for a
>>second one.
>>"I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
>>She runs a cosmetics business in Exeter, New Hampshire.
>A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
>I'm sure she's a nice person otherwise - but still enormous.
If she is 5' 10" or under, she is MORBIDLY obese. According to the fat
acceptors, she only needs to proclaim herself beautiful and fit, then her
life will be perfect.
>On 13 Mar 2005 04:12:21 -0000, Catharine <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
>>By Ken Dermota
>>Thompson is one of four overweight persons who sued Southwest Airlines over
>>its policy of asking passengers who cannot fit into a seat to pay for a
>>second one.
>>"I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
>>She runs a cosmetics business in Exeter, New Hampshire.
>A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
>I'm sure she's a nice person otherwise - but still enormous.
If she is 5' 10" or under, she is MORBIDLY obese. According to the fat
acceptors, she only needs to proclaim herself beautiful and fit, then her
life will be perfect.
Mar 12th 2005 | 7:33 pm
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
George Max <[email protected]> wrote:
> Catharine <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
> A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
The article failed to mention that she's nine and a half feet tall.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 35 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Malaysia, Israel, Palestine, Austria, Thailand
> Catharine <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "I am overweight, but I'm not obese," said Thompson, 127kg.
> A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
The article failed to mention that she's nine and a half feet tall.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 35 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu
Latest photos: Malaysia, Israel, Palestine, Austria, Thailand
Mar 12th 2005 | 8:00 pm
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Catharine wrote:
...
> However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
> to shrink costs.
...
> "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
> Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
people as baggage.
Anthony
...
> However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
> to shrink costs.
...
> "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
> Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
people as baggage.
Anthony
Mar 12th 2005 | 8:21 pm
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
"Anthony Matonak" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:qiTYd.2817$b_6.1184@trnddc01...
> Catharine wrote:
> ...
>> However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
>> to shrink costs.
> ...
>> "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
>> Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> downsizing seats to cut costs.
Or its just another lard arsed hippo attempting to blame anyone but themselves.
> Ultimately this method isn't going to work for much longer because there is a
> limit to how small you can make a seat and still put passengers in it.
Mindless silly stuff, as always from fools like you.
> Perhaps they can start shipping people as baggage.
They already do, stupid.
news:qiTYd.2817$b_6.1184@trnddc01...
> Catharine wrote:
> ...
>> However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
>> to shrink costs.
> ...
>> "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
>> Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> downsizing seats to cut costs.
Or its just another lard arsed hippo attempting to blame anyone but themselves.
> Ultimately this method isn't going to work for much longer because there is a
> limit to how small you can make a seat and still put passengers in it.
Mindless silly stuff, as always from fools like you.
> Perhaps they can start shipping people as baggage.
They already do, stupid.
Mar 12th 2005 | 8:26 pm
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:00:06 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, Anthony Matonak <[email protected]>
arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
... Catharine wrote:
... ...
... > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
... > to shrink costs.
... ...
... > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
... > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
...
... Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
... downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
... work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
... a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
... people as baggage.
Or make larger seats and increase their prices...
arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
... Catharine wrote:
... ...
... > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
... > to shrink costs.
... ...
... > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
... > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
...
... Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
... downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
... work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
... a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
... people as baggage.
Or make larger seats and increase their prices...
Mar 12th 2005 | 8:39 pm
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 10:26:09 +0100, Magda <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:00:06 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, Anthony Matonak <[email protected]>
>arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
> ... Catharine wrote:
> ... ...
> ... > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
> ... > to shrink costs.
> ... ...
> ... > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
> ... > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
> ...
> ... Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> ... downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
> ... work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
> ... a seat and still put passengers in it.
Seat pitch wise they passed this point long ago
>Perhaps they can start shipping
> ... people as baggage.
>Or make larger seats and increase their prices...
or design the seats better, sitting for 12 hours in a Boeing747 with
the stiffening piece of wire from the top of the seat pocket jammed
into my knee caps is not my idea of comfort. When the pitch is so
small why does the airline have to make it worse by filling the seat
pocket with glossy trash magazines?
--
Martin
wrote:
>On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:00:06 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, Anthony Matonak <[email protected]>
>arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :
> ... Catharine wrote:
> ... ...
> ... > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines trying
> ... > to shrink costs.
> ... ...
> ... > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said Funk.
> ... > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
> ...
> ... Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> ... downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
> ... work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
> ... a seat and still put passengers in it.
Seat pitch wise they passed this point long ago
>Perhaps they can start shipping
> ... people as baggage.
>Or make larger seats and increase their prices...
or design the seats better, sitting for 12 hours in a Boeing747 with
the stiffening piece of wire from the top of the seat pocket jammed
into my knee caps is not my idea of comfort. When the pitch is so
small why does the airline have to make it worse by filling the seat
pocket with glossy trash magazines?
--
Martin
Mar 12th 2005 | 8:42 pm
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
George Max <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>. ..
> A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
> I'm sure she's a nice person otherwise - but still enormous.
Yes indeed. I considered myself obscenely overweight at 110kg, so this
woman is a massive 17kg heavier, and she's probably a lot shorter too.
This all adds up to morbid obesity.
> A 127Kg (279.4lbs) woman is most certainly obese. She's in denial.
> I'm sure she's a nice person otherwise - but still enormous.
Yes indeed. I considered myself obscenely overweight at 110kg, so this
woman is a massive 17kg heavier, and she's probably a lot shorter too.
This all adds up to morbid obesity.
Mar 12th 2005 | 8:52 pm
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
On 13 Mar 2005 04:12:21 -0000, Catharine <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Kirstie Alley should make an excellent poster girl and advocate for
the rights of overweight people.
No one wants to be overweight. If they are they should not be
punished for being so.
Anyway who says they are overweight.
If what the statistics say is true more than 50% of the population is
larger and heavier. Then they are the majority and the norm. In that
case all public transport must fit their size. The smaller size
people are the minority and therefore below norm.
wrote:
>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Kirstie Alley should make an excellent poster girl and advocate for
the rights of overweight people.
No one wants to be overweight. If they are they should not be
punished for being so.
Anyway who says they are overweight.
If what the statistics say is true more than 50% of the population is
larger and heavier. Then they are the majority and the norm. In that
case all public transport must fit their size. The smaller size
people are the minority and therefore below norm.
Mar 12th 2005 | 9:16 pm
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
PaPaPeng <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 13 Mar 2005 04:12:21 -0000, Catharine <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
>Kirstie Alley should make an excellent poster girl and advocate for
>the rights of overweight people.
But she should be ashamed for taking over the role as barmaid in
Cheers for Diane (Shelly Long ) in Cheers. It just wasn´t the same
after that.
Kristian
>On 13 Mar 2005 04:12:21 -0000, Catharine <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>>Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
>Kirstie Alley should make an excellent poster girl and advocate for
>the rights of overweight people.
But she should be ashamed for taking over the role as barmaid in
Cheers for Diane (Shelly Long ) in Cheers. It just wasn´t the same
after that.
Kristian
Mar 12th 2005 | 10:47 pm
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
> > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines
trying
> > to shrink costs.
> ...
> > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said
Funk.
> > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
> work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
> a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
> people as baggage.
Yes pitch may be less, but please explain how seat width has reduced. A 737
or A320 etc has always had 6 seats across. unless you know of any in a 4-3
config. oh bugger perhaps I've given the airlines some ideas now.
trying
> > to shrink costs.
> ...
> > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said
Funk.
> > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
> work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
> a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
> people as baggage.
Yes pitch may be less, but please explain how seat width has reduced. A 737
or A320 etc has always had 6 seats across. unless you know of any in a 4-3
config. oh bugger perhaps I've given the airlines some ideas now.
Mar 12th 2005 | 10:50 pm
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 11:47:47 -0000, "Thomas"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines
>trying
>> > to shrink costs.
>> ...
>> > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said
>Funk.
>> > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
>> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
>> downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
>> work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
>> a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
>> people as baggage.
>Yes pitch may be less, but please explain how seat width has reduced. A 737
>or A320 etc has always had 6 seats across. unless you know of any in a 4-3
>config. oh bugger perhaps I've given the airlines some ideas now.
KLM squeezed an extra seat into their business class European flights.
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> > However, the problem came at a tough time for cash-strapped airlines
>trying
>> > to shrink costs.
>> ...
>> > "Planes are more packed and there are fewer (available) seats," said
>Funk.
>> > Many of the airlines are downsizing seats, she said.
>> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
>> downsizing seats to cut costs. Ultimately this method isn't going to
>> work for much longer because there is a limit to how small you can make
>> a seat and still put passengers in it. Perhaps they can start shipping
>> people as baggage.
>Yes pitch may be less, but please explain how seat width has reduced. A 737
>or A320 etc has always had 6 seats across. unless you know of any in a 4-3
>config. oh bugger perhaps I've given the airlines some ideas now.
KLM squeezed an extra seat into their business class European flights.
--
Martin
Mar 12th 2005 | 11:26 pm
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Anthony Matonak writes:
> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> downsizing seats to cut costs.
No, the problem is with fat passengers. Normal people can still fit
into the seats.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Sounds like the problem isn't with the passengers but with the airlines
> downsizing seats to cut costs.
No, the problem is with fat passengers. Normal people can still fit
into the seats.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
Mar 12th 2005 | 11:27 pm
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Fliers up in arms over wide passengers
Rod Speed writes:
> Or its just another lard arsed hippo attempting to blame anyone
> but themselves.
Those are the ones who become and remain extremely fat.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
> Or its just another lard arsed hippo attempting to blame anyone
> but themselves.
Those are the ones who become and remain extremely fat.
--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
