The Fairness of Pricing vs Obesity

A good friend of mine sent me a comment recently on her experience booking a flight from Paris to New York. It read:
While booking a flight online with Air France (KLM) to New York a number of questions appeared on the screen:
1)    Which size are you Madame? (Please tick the one that applies) 32 – 34 – 36 – 38 – 40- 42 – 44? -  I ticked 44.
2)    Are you carrying a laptop or any hand luggage with you?  – I ticked both.
3)    Do you think you will need some tea, coffee, or water?  – I ticked water.
4)    Would you like an aisle seat or not?  – I ticked yes, I would like an aisle.
Then, the total would be T (‘regular’ ticket) +T (44: size too large – je suis d’accord, j’essaie d’être un 38 mais je ne réussis pas; translated as “I agree, I have been trying to become a 38, but haven’t succeeded…yet”) +20 euros for extra luggage + 10 euros for water + 10 euros for the aisle seat. About $70 on top of my ticket.
A not very exciting near future in the skies, wouldn’t you think?

I agreed with her but emailed her back that this size trend would continue and wished her good luck with the task of turning into a size 38.

Air France’s decision to require obese passengers who are unable to squeeze into a single seat to book a second one, may on the surface not seem like such a dramatic event but widespread publicity shows that it could have a lot of future implications. The new Air France rule became effective Feb. 1 and realty is that with airlines generally slavishly copying other carriers (think luggage, food and beverages), there’s little question Air France’s stipulations about “customers of size” will spill over in the US and internationally. Personally I think it is the first step in declaring overweight and obesity a western problem that needs to be addressed. Air France also claims that the issue not only involves comfort but also safety. Overweight passengers pose a safety hazard to other passengers, which may easily become the more important issue of the two.

Life for “wide bodies” is already very expensive and is getting to be more expensive as it will soon get a higher official price tag in almost every aspect of life. I have a friend who recently lost more than 100 pounds as his cost of living was getting ridiculous. Being a business man he preferred chartering a plane for his travels, lavish and enormously expensive. He confided in me that he had paid close to a million USD as obesity excess in the past four years of flying. Commercial flying had only one option for him: First Class and that was not even hassle free. The car he drove was a specially reconstructed SUV, no regular car could fit him. Cost a whopping $100,000. As a matter of fact, even though he had the money, he could never simply buy something off the rack and be comfortable. Boat, furnishings, stairways, clothing; anything needed to be adjusted for his use. But then the recession came and like so many, he lost a lot of his wealth, he could not afford the extras anymore and was only left one option….drop the pounds.
It’s one of those realities in life that in the end may save his life. And there are other considerations why this is not a discriminatory matter. Take for example any Florida theme park. I’ve seen it as well, a kid easily 275 lbs (6′5), a football player build, did not fit in the seats of the roller coasters at the Six Flags theme park and was not allowed to ride. This isn’t discrimination. The ride wasn’t built to accommodate someone his size. Next..  Some airlines charge more for extra leg-room. If you would like the emergency exit row, it sometimes costs about $10 more per ticket – for the extra leg room.

Airlines have been struggling with the issue of overweight and obesity for quite a while now primarily because lawsuits for discrimination get a lot of negative attention, which is why lowcost airline RyanAir in Europe avoided the battle long enough for Air France to bite off the head. In my opinion current economics have pressed many airlines to approach the issue from a financial and customer service angle than from a discrimination or health perspective. Smokers have been given the choice of not flying, quitting or curtailing the habit. When it all started in the 1980s under Surgeon General Koop, some business initiatives included Smoker servicing Airlines. They failed one after another, because the economics weren’t there.

When airlines are stringently pursuing the issue of obesity, especially now that they have a close grip on equipment and loadfactors, there maybe a “smart” business person that starts an Airline for “wide bodies only” and it too will fall flat on the numbers.

A variety of airlines are cautiously addressing the issue.

United adopted a tougher policy last year after receiving more than 700 complaints from passengers “who did not have a comfortable flight because the person next to them infringed on their seat,” said a United spokeswoman.
Their policy now: passengers who are too large to fit comfortably in single coach seats began to be required to buy a second ticket or upgrade to business class, where seats are larger — applicable in cases where United’s flight attendants could not find two open seats for them.
United’s flight attendants, who have the delicate task of enforcing the policy, have traditionally sought to find two adjacent seats, free of charge, for passengers who spill over their seats.
This is a bandaid of course and not a solution. It potentially delays flight and departure times. 
”We’ll first try to re-accomodate you on another seat on the flight,” said the spokesperson. 
If the flight is full, obese passengers risk getting bumped. And that’s usually when the unwanted trouble starts.

Could Travel Agents get mileage out of the issue?

Air France bringing up the safety issue of slow moving obese passengers will find its own way into he discussion and I can imagine airlines wanting the service of old fashioned travel agents back to pre-screen passenger while booking their tickets in the frontline. Just foreseeing the time and delay factor in flight handling and ontime records (a growing federal demand) when disputes start piling up at an airline’s airport ticker counter or at the gates alone, would be worth re-instating a 5 to 10% commission, let alone waiting to find out in an airplane whether a passengers can lower both arm rests like is the policy at no-frills -but always with a smile airline Southwest. Their “customer of size” policy insists that passengers who cannot lower both armrests buy a second ticket which is reimbursable if the flight is not full.  – That of course is moving potential arguments into the planes, which is the last place you want this type of confrontations.

American Airlines does not have such a requirement but urges passengers to “recognize ahead of time that they may need to purchase two seats.” – American Airlines seems to put of lot of faith in people policing their own size, which may be highly problematic.
Airlines already offer extended seatbelts to larger passengers to comply with safety rules but a number of other carriers now insist obese customers buy an extra seat.

A WideBody Class next to First and Economy Class

I clearly remember times when airlines offered First, Business and Economy seats with an additional last 5 to 10 rows for smokers. Why would it be so hard to re-instate a back of the plane class of 6 rows for overweight and obese people.
Make the size of the chairs larger so that for example 24 “wide body” seats now occupy the space of previous 36 seats.
Up the ticket price by 50% and everyone is “happy.” In addition they can use their own rear entrance/exit door, as to not interfere with the speed of the loading and unloading logistics.

Last but not least the current band-aid approach will also lead to competitive pressure from Asian and Middle Eastern Airlines that don’t feature these type of policies because they don’t have to. Their populations don’t suffer from Western obesity, but if I would be obese and have a choice  between taking Singapore Airlines with no penalty or United with a 2 seat purchase penalty on a trip from Los Angeles to Singapore, guess where my patriotism would make space for my wallet.

Airline business policy is to charge per seat occupied, not per passenger. Children under two who make the flight sitting in their parent’s lap are not charged to fly, because they do not occupy an additional seat. Disabled people who require more than one seat for stretchers, medical equipment, etc. are charged for all seats they occupy, even if they have a completely legitimate disability that they could have done nothing to prevent. Airplanes lift weight off the ground, the more weight the more expensive the lifting. It’s economics. Nothing else.

And in closing I would like to add my particular pet peeve: I’m in favor of installing a BO class as well, preferably enclosed, for those people that “forgot” to take a shower and use some deodorant before getting on the plane. If you ever sat next to someone like that for 8 hours, you’ll know what I mean. I may be looking at this the wrong way but then someone let me know why. Look for solutions, not for Band-Aids.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment below or subscribe to the feed to have future articles delivered to your e-mail and get the latest Amelia Island News, business, tourist activities and videos every morning!

You can also choose to follow SearchAmelia on Twitter to get your daily updates!