Pay for Two

But it's important that all passengers be comfortable on Southwest flights, she said. "If we have a full flight and there's somebody sitting next to [a larger passenger], the other customer becomes upset." Oh yes, musn't upset the "smaller" passenger. Totally OK to humiliate and judge the larger person though. *grumble*

Wonder if the seat belt extension rule applies to pregnant women too? How completely idiotic!

Yes, it is time for a boycott. And I think some pickett lines might be in order. We need to make some noise about this!

I think fat people should boycott them, after all they could pass this policy on. Does ADA cover some fat people? Its disgusting. Even the thin people are squished in. Actually since anyone over 160lbs probably needs to put the arm rest up--I guess they think they will be making more money. They will be turning people off instead. This is just rude.

Dear Southwest Airlines, People are entitled to enough personal space to be comfortable in a way that a person doesn’t have to worry about the width of his shoulders or hips. I’m a big person but it’s my shoulders and hips that need room. Seating should be large enough to accommodate football players, body builders, or other people who work for a living. If you’re going to charge by the pound, fine but if that’s the case a smaller person should be charged equally less. Maybe your accountants or the other bright people who came up with your fine solutions should work in smaller spaces since they have less space between their ears. Or maybe you’re just becoming a SMALL company. Get a clue! http://www.grandstyle.com/airlines.htm Have it your way I don’t need it Big Guy

Considering the size of airline seats these days, I think they see it as a way to make extra money. Frankly, if you're taller than 5'4" and heavier than maybe 160 lbs, you're not going to fit comfortably into one of those little seats. I think it's disgusting that Southwest is doing this. What are they going to do, have a "butt sizer" like the carry-on luggage sizer, and if your butt doesn't fit, you have to shell out extra? I see this as basically a fine levied against larger people. If airlines are truly concerned about having a comfortable situation for "all" passengers, how about being kind of fair and also fining 1. Parents of loud screaming babies 2. People who won't stop talking to you even after you put on headphones and open up a magazine 3. People who suddenly recline the seat in front of you, without warning, ESPECIALLY when you have the tray down and are doing work and how about a bit more leg room for those of us who are taller than hobbits?

I wonder if Shaquille O'Neal has to pay double since I'll bet HE is too big to fit in even a first-class seat with both armrests down. Not that he'd fly with THAT airline anyway. Oliver Miller? I just looked at my old, unused Zairmail account - they used to let you enter a letter for free and have it computer-generated and mailed for free along with a page of ads (to pay for the "free" stuff), but it appears they're not doing that anymore. Wouldn't it have been fun to bombard SouthWorst with snailmail absolutely free? Ah well, for this one I'll pay.

Southwest soars to new heights! *said tongue in cheek* At the risk of sounding chain-letterish, pass this on to all your friends or print it out and stick it in with your letter to Southwest. www.cableone.net/shanynrose/shame_on_southwest.htm

Just thought I would share the experience I had today. I was finishing a trip to Louisville, KY. I arrived and recieved my boarding pass as normall and 15 minutes before the flight was informed that I would need to purchase an additional seat. Further more since the flight was over booked there was a chance I would not even be able to take the flight. I asked the ticked agent why I would need an additonal seet since I didn't need a seat belt extender and could ride with the the arm rest down. She replied with "It is just our new policy". Since I needed to get home, I purchased the additional seet and got on the flight. After I was seated a flight attendent asked if anyone was sitting in the seat next to me since they were trying to get new people on. I informed her that I had been forced to purchase the seat and would give it up if they would refund my money on it-- she said she couldn't do that and so no one sat there. Looks like Southwest plans to keep this a very arbitrary decission. I do not plan to fly them again.

If a person really uses *two full seats*, then the southwest policy seems fair.

I am not a big person and I find this ruling by Southwest Airlines totally humiliating to large people. So you have ticket agents making judgement calls about who is too big.... Please! I used to like Southwest, only flew them once, but the fares were cheap. I will not use them and would advise others not to do so.

I think the new policy is totally ridiculous!! Its just another way of inundating overweight people with the idea that they are not "good enough" for society. What's next, will overweight people have to pay more in restaurants or for rental cars ( extra wear and tear)? Come on America , speak up for your rights. I do see the other side of the matter with people feeling encroached upon by a passenger who is overweight. But if airlines would make their seats to accomodate "real size people" this debate would not have ensued.

So Southwest says it is important that all passengers be comfortable on their flights but they don't have to do anything to make them comfortable. Instead of doing something to make everyone comfortable, they have to make some people feel like crap to make other people feel comfortable. So if some people feel uncomfortable sitting next to say a Viet Namese person, or a child who makes too much noise, or a person who smells bad, does that mean that person has to buy an extra ticket? When will people just accept that we are not all the same size and it is nobody's fault just nature? Why do people in this country always have to apologize for who they are?

I am a size 30 woman, with over a 60" circumference in my hips. I have almost exclusively flown on Southwest airlines, mainly because they are cheaper than other airlines. I usually fly with the armrest up even on crowded flights and ask for a seatbelt extender and have never been asked to purchase an extra ticket. According to SWA's statement on their website www.iflyswa.com, this policy of purchasing an extra seat is not new, so why haven't I been asked to buy a second seat? I have never felt nor has the person next to me made me feel as if I'm taking up "their space". I would also generally be travelling with my 6yr old daughter who takes up less than her seat so why should I have to purchase another seat if I'm seated next to her? Because I'm sure she's not going to complain that her mommy is taking up her seat and demand her money back!

It sounds to me like this could open a door for many new forms of discrimination. What about someone who isn't fat, but happens to be wearing bulky clothes? What about someone from another country wearing a native costume that doesn't fit into one seat? It sounds to me like SW just wants an excuse to make more $$$, regardless of whether its legal.

I like the Southwest policy. I am a frequent flier who spends a lot of money on airline tickets. Like you all, I like to fly comfortably and I do not have a problem with the people who sit next to me be they large, small, of a different skin tone or whatever. I do have a problem with strangers touching my leg and thigh (I feel this right is reserved for my husband). I also have a problem with someone taking part of the seat I paid for. Asking for a more comfortable seat is within your rights. Why not? I agree! What you should not do is ask for more comfortable accomodations at someone elses expense (both finanically and emotionally). We are not required to give you a "free ride" or access to our personal space.

Catherine: What you should not do is ask for more comfortable accomodations at someone elses expense (both finanically and emotionally). This is exactly what Southwest is asking of fat people: to obtain more comfortable accommodations, they have to pay more. That's wrong, unethical, and discriminatory.

What I see most evident in this, is not about discrimination, it is about maintaining capitalism and free enterprise. We have the freedom to fly Southwest, or any other airline. We make choices with the dollar on who we 'vote' for as the best airline. We can put someone out of business with our votes. If we continue to involve governmental agencies on some of these matters, we lose more and more of our freedoms to 'vote' with our dollars. So if you don't like Southwest's policies, don't fly them and encourage others not to fly them. Let free enterprise show who will stand.

I recently wrote this letter to Southwest Airlines after I was asked to purchase the extra seat: Southwest Airlines Customer Service P.O. Box 36647 Dallas, TX 75235 Dear Sir or Madam, On a recent flight from Phoenix, Arizona to Albuquerque, New Mexico I was instructed by the ticket agent at the counter that I would be required to purchase a second ticket because of the “over-sized customer” policy. He informed me that the flight was full and was oversold and that I would need to purchase an extra ticket if I wished to take that flight. We talked briefly and he provided me with some information and a number to call if I wanted to talk to a customer service agent about the situation. I purchased the ticket and because the flight was full, I was unable to receive a refund on the extra seat I purchased. I did not believe a refund was in order, because I do agree with the logic of the policy in some areas. I do believe that on a sold out flight it is wrong to encroach upon someone else’s space and I back the policy in that regard. However I do have strong concerns about other areas of the policy. My biggest concern would be over the lack of consistency. I flew to Phoenix from Albuquerque with no problem … apparently deemed not to be oversized. However it was on the flight back from Phoenix to Albuquerque that I was deemed to be oversized. Had I increased in size so much during my stay in Phoenix that I had suddenly become oversized? I apologize for the slight sarcasm, but I think you might see where there is concern on my part. My second concern was on the policy of charging for the second seat whether there are two people on the plane or 200. Like I stated previously, I fully understand and agree with the policy of charging for the second seat if the plane is full, however when the plane is 70 percent full or less I don’t understand the need to charge for the second seat. It is apparent that there will be an abundance of open seats on the flight, thereby decreasing the chances that I might have to sit next to someone. I do understand that a refund would be in order if I was charged for an extra seat and the plane went out with open seats, but then it becomes a matter of having to request a refund and go through the process. How long does the process take … the extra seat is charged immediately, is the refund posted immediately or is it a lengthy process? Now I was always told that a person should try to provide solutions to perceived problems and I believe that I have a few suggestions on how to handle this situation. I do believe that it is a situation that is going to become more persistent. The truth is that more Americans are moving toward the “oversized” classification every year and it is not a problem that will go away anytime soon. Alas, my recommended solutions. The first would be to eliminate the guesswork for your ticket agent on what is oversized. You provide exact standards for people on how big carry-on luggage should be by providing the baggage checkers at the ticket counters (the displays that allow you to put you bag into the predetermined area to see if it is too big). Why not do the same with passengers? Not I’m not saying you have a chair out in front where everyone can see, but maybe each ticket counter has an area where a seat is available to test on. It should be an area that is discreet and the situation should be handle in a proper manner, but I think most people who believe they shouldn’t be charged the extra ticket would want a sure-fire way to prove it one way or another. I think you would receive less resistance from passengers who know they are too large for one seat, because they won’t want to take the test. It may seem a little brash, but it does away with the inconsistency that seems to be the focus of most of the concerns of “oversized” people. Second would be to establish a policy that the second seat is only charged when the flight shows higher than a 70 percent passenger load, or whatever the predetermined percentage may be. This would eliminate the whole need to go through the refund process and would eventually save Southwest Airlines money and time. The third solution may not be economically feasible, but I think that it is a good suggestion. In most cases an “oversized” person is encroaching on about 50 percent of the seat next to them. So why not take one row of seats on each side and instead of having a row of three seats, have a row of two seats … i.e. four seats on every plane that are 50 percent bigger than regular seats. Then charge passengers an extra 50 percent on their ticket to purchase the seat in advance. For example: A plane ticket from Albuquerque to Dallas is $100 one-way, but an oversized customer could purchase an oversize seat for a 50 percent premium on the ticket price, or in this case a $50 extra charge for the oversized seat. It would cost me $150 for the ticket versus $100, but it would eliminate the need for a ticket agent to make a judgment call or the possibility that a passenger encroaches on another passenger’s space. In addition you could make it an incentive for an oversized customer to purchase the seat in advance by two factors. One is the convenience that the oversized passenger knows in advance that he/she won’t have to go through the hassle of possibly having to buy another extra seat the day-of travel. The second factor is that by buying it advance you save money by not having to purchase the extra seat during your day-of travel, i.e. if you purchase the oversized seat ahead of time you pay 50 percent extra versus 100 percent if you take your chances on the having to purchase the extra seat the day-of. My last concern is that is the extra-seat policy also doesn’t address Rapid Rewards credit. I strongly believe that if an extra-seat purchase is required and there is no option to receive a refund, i.e. a full flight, then the Rapid Rewards credit should be posted, when requested, for the extra seat purchased. I think this is just common sense. If you buy an extra seat, then you should receive the Rapid Rewards credit for that extra seat you purchased. I would like to wrap up by saying that I was surprised that Southwest Airlines has led the charge on this issue. Southwest Airlines is the last airline I would have thought of as being at the forefront of this concern. Your airline has always been the ideal standard in customer service, and yes I understand that means all passengers, but as I stated earlier the oversized passenger is not a trend or a fad, but an epidemic that will only become more of an issue as time goes on. I travel frequently enough to consider looking at other options where the chances of having to go through this experience are less likely. Do those options have the same great prices or overall customer service, probably not, but when you factor in the cost of an extra ticket the price doesn’t seem such a deal and when you factor in the objectivity and inconsistency of the “oversized” passenger policy, the customer service doesn’t shine as brightly as it once did. I implore you to look at this concern and the above suggestions and do what Southwest Airlines has always seemed to do; rise above the rest in providing what you always have … great fares and great customer service.

Thanks for sharing your letter Omar! Re: your flight, just one question: It was oversold, and you purchased an extra ticket...did you still end up with someone sitting next to you, or did they actually let you have the adjacent seat open? I totally agree with on the need for a SET height/weight policy if Southwest insists upon penalizing oversized passengers. Not only would it eliminate a lot of inconsistency (one seat to your connection...OOPS, gotta pay again to finish the trip!) but it would avoid making the ticket agents the bad guys. In fact, I put that in MY letter to Southwest. The idea of a "test seat" was one that crossed my mind also but I don't believe they'd ever do it - their focus, imho, has always been on quantity and speed rather than on quality of service and taking the time needed to adequately serve passengers. And I used to fly Southwest at least once a month, sometimes twice - but that was about 14 years ago. I am a larger person and I haven't flown Southwest (or ANY airline) in 5 years, but I know I used to fit in the seat with the armrest down and have lost about 30# since then. Still, this policy has me reluctant to fly ANYWHERE with ANYONE. I am easily embarassed for one thing, and for another I don't generally travel with enough money to purchase an extra ticket, especially at a "walk-up" rate. Thank God my family prefers to take "roadtrips." My kids used to fly to their grandparents' alone on Southwest, but our dollars aren't even going to pay Southwest to carry their 65-pound butts until Southwest either backs off or sets some concrete standards for this policy.

Shanyn rose - It's funny that you ask the question on whether they plane was oversold (incidently, it was). They actually let me get on the plane and the seat next to me remained vacant .... which means that someone stayed in Phoenix for the next flight because of the policy. On one hand I felt bad that someone probably had to stay behind, but on the other hand it wasn't really me making that decision. I'm a big guy, but I do fit in the seat with the armrest down. However I have very broad shoulders and at 6'4'' am a little taller than most average passengers and my shoulders usually end up next to another passengers head ... which is where the encroachment comes in. Like I said before, I understand the right a person has to their own space, but there are some serious inconsistencies with Southwest Airline's policy.

It seems many of you are forgetting something- Southwest is not charging you to fly you somewhere. They are charging you for one seat. You get that one seat, and no more. If it takes you more than one seat to get to Boston or LAX or LaGuardia, then you need to pay for more than one seat. I am 6'6", 250 lbs. By no means small. I fit on Southwest, and usually fly Southwest. If I wanted bigger seats, I would fly first class (and pay more for the extra room). Sometimes, for long flights, I fly American, which has wider coach seats. I say, congratulations to SWA, for standing up to the fattening of American citizens.

If "encroachment" is the issue, I want the child who kicked my seat back all the way from Anchorage to Chicago, the old lady who fell asleep on my shoulder halfway to DC, and the laptop-carrying dual-tray-table user on my last Seattle flight to pay for the extra space they used. But, of course, that won't happen.

Paul's Post:"...to obtain more comfortable accommodations, they have to pay more. That's wrong, unethical, and discriminatory." How is that discriminatory? If I want to stay in the more comfortable accommodations in a hotel you can bet I'll be paying more for it. Do you think Shaquille O'Neal screams discrimination when he has to pay huge sums of money for specially made clothing, shoes, doorways or comfortable travel arrangements? I doubt it -- besides the fact that he makes millions of dollars, he probably also is smart enough to realize that it isn't discrimination. As a normal weight person who is sometimes seated beside large travelers, I like the airline's policy. (I agree it has to be enforced consistently, which isn't happening yet.) Why should I pay full fare for my flight then turn up at the airplane to find I'm going to be sharing my seat? One suggestion that it's only fair to pay for a second seat if you fill both seats completely is ridiculous. What makes a large person think they have any right to even 5% of my seat? Should I ask for a refund from the airline or demand it from the large traveler beside me? If the child kicking my seat, the elderly woman asleep on my shoulder or the baby crying is bothering me, I can ask them to stop or ask the flight attendant for earplugs. Can I ask the large person to please shrink for my convenience? No, but I CAN ask that they purchase the space they need so I don't have to scrunch myself into a corner to accommodate them. Even those who can sit without seatbelt extenders sometimes encroach on the seat next to them. I don't think most pregnant women who are a healthy weight would be overflowing their seat, and tall people, while being cramped, are not affecting the person beside them. It's a width issue. People who are disabled and need to travel with an attendant/helper have to pay to bring that person along -- depending on the airline, they may get a discounted fare. People who are sick, disabled or overweight have to pay more for medical insurance. Is that discrimination? Are we discriminating against smokers by charging them the same high premiums? Is smoking a disability?

Jen, in reading your post I realized that I shouldn't've used the word "comfortable"; I truly meant "accommodating". The seats on airlines are, arguably, uncomfortable for everyone - but for fat people, they are definitely not accommodating. People who are sick, disabled or overweight have to pay more for medical insurance. Is that discrimination? For the overweight, yes, it is. Are we discriminating against smokers by charging them the same high premiums? Is smoking a disability? There's a large difference between a fat person and a smoker. Smoking is something which not only causes damage to the person smoking, but also to people near the smoker while smoking, and the environment. It's a habit that can affect others even if they're not involved. Fat people aren't hurting anyone. Oh, there'll be plenty of people saying, "They're hurting themselves!" - the truth of the matter is that the only people hurt by obesity are closed-minded individuals who can't accept the ideas that fat people can be healthy, live normal lives, and should be able to fit in airplane seats. Sharing seats isn't fair to you, Jen, but imagine how any fat person put in that position feels. Do you think they enjoy it? Do you think that they deserve a seat, just as you claim to, because they paid for it? I think that if you want to be accommodated, and you do, then every fat person who flies wants to be accommodated, too. It's unfair and discriminatory to force fat people - and only fat people - to pay more... on an arbitrary basis, mind you. Southwest is doing this for three reasons: the PR (which backfired), the money, and to please a few passengers like yourself who will say, "Yes! What a great policy!" They expected many more people to be on their side.

Maybe you would like to clarify exactly HOW you think it is discrimination to ask overweight people to pay higher medical premiums while it isn't to ask it of smokers or the sick or the disabled? All 4 of those groups of people are going to have special needs and will cost the medical system more (Yes some overweight people can be healthy, but the majority are not....they have an extra strain on joints, heart, lungs, etc)....so those groups are probably paying higher premiums to cover the costs. (One could argue that smokers are heathly NOW, so why are they paying higher fees??) Where I live, men pay more for car insurance, and those under 25 pay more than those over 25....are those cases of sexism or age discrimination? No, groups of people who statistically cost the system more, pay more. I asked if smoking was a disability, and if it was discrimination to charge them more for health insurance, not if their smoking bothered others....I never said overweight people bothered me just for being the way they are. I didn't say they had any affect on anyone else except when they are occupying a portion of my seat. If the traveller beside me asked me to hold her dog on my lap all the way to kalamazoo, I'd have a problem with that too. If she has a special need she should deal with it and not involve me. I don't think Southwest is benefitting from this. They are getting a ton of bad press and lawsuits. They are attempting to convince people who need more space to buy it ahead of time. They aren't making more money because if the flight isn't full they're refunding the extra seat cost. If they don't charge extra (and instead give away extra space to big people for free) they're losing money, because they have to leave a potential passenger behind. If they charged a person the extra seat fee and then seated another traveler beside them, yes you would have a clear cut case of discriminition because they would be just levying a "fat tax" for no reason, but as the posts above show, that isn't happening. Yes the seats are uncomfortable for everyone, and I don't enjoy the situation of being placed beside a large person, but I think there is a limit. At some point, a person is so large that you really cannot seat anyone in the seat directly next to them, and then who is supposed to absorb the cost? The airline? Sure, I'd love it if they did, but this is a capitalist society and that's not going to be economically feasible. And I believe I gave an example in which it isn't just fat people and only fat people who are being singled out and charged.....but I'll repeat myself. Those needing an assistant/nurse/oxygen tank/whatever have to pay for an extra seat (because they need the extra seat to bring their necessary help along).

Jen: Maybe you would like to clarify exactly HOW you think it is discrimination to ask overweight people to pay higher medical premiums while it isn't to ask it of smokers or the sick or the disabled? The higher premiums for overweight people are based on statistics. As has been proven by various studies I've linked to over the past few years, as well as some that have been in the media, statistics can (and do) lie. The *only* thing that insurance premiums *should* be based on is the individual's health. It's not fair to anyone involved to make sweeping generalizations; yes, it's all done in the name of business, and I acknowledge that. It is still unfair. Where I live, men pay more for car insurance, and those under 25 pay more than those over 25....are those cases of sexism or age discrimination? No, groups of people who statistically cost the system more, pay more. This is off-topic, but... Yes, they are. Again, statistics can and do lie. It's funny you should mention this, as this is another area that I strongly believe in. Car insurance is something that should be rated on a case-by-case basis. I am a single male under 25 with a fine driving record, yet my rate is far higher than a female I know who is younger than me who has had several accidents. Again, a case-by-case basis is warranted here. And again, I do know that this is something that would cost the insurance industry a lot of money. I asked if smoking was a disability, and if it was discrimination to charge them more for health insurance, not if their smoking bothered others.... If [another passenger] has a special need she should deal with it and not involve me. But don't you see that this involves you in the first place because of a flaw in the system? If the seats were larger, you wouldn't be 'bothered' by anyone else. You could have a nice, larger seat all to yourself - without anyone interfering. Fat people would be happier, because they could have a realistic shot of actually fititng in seats. "Average" people would be happier, because they would have some more room in their seats. At some point, a person is so large that you really cannot seat anyone in the seat directly next to them, and then who is supposed to absorb the cost? The airline? Sure, I'd love it if they did, but this is a capitalist society and that's not going to be economically feasible. Actually, it is. I linked to an article that outlined a theoretical situation for Southwest to expand its seats to accommodate the majority of people. Guess what? The costs wouldn't *have* to be doubled as the airline is claiming. It's economically feasible for them to do so, but the fact that it will cost them ANY money to do so isn't worth it for them. Instead, they'll get sued - possibly into making these changes. I don't think Southwest is benefitting from this. If they don't charge extra (and instead give away extra space to big people for free) they're losing money, because they have to leave a potential passenger behind. ...But they've done this to fat people. They've forced them to go elsewhere. Don't you see that as being "left behind"? If they charged a person the extra seat fee and then seated another traveler beside them, yes you would have a clear cut case of discriminition [sic] because they would be just levying a "fat tax" for no reason, but as the posts above show, that isn't happening. It's still discrimination because, in part, people are being judged without any device on their size. They are being eyeballed, and told if they are "too fat" or not. Some airports are telling passengers to buy two seats. Some are not. That in and of itself is not fair. Judging with a device, by the way, would still be discriminatory. The entire premise is flawed in its execution. Those needing an assistant/nurse/oxygen tank/whatever have to pay for an extra seat (because they need the extra seat to bring their necessary help along). These are all very different situations that result in the same thing: paying for two seats. - Bringing along a person means there are now two people aboard. Two people, two seats. That's fine. - Bringing a necessary medical device: this is a *thing* that takes up space. It is not alive. It is necessary. One person, one piece of large cargo. They can be charged for bringing cargo along, I imagine. - A fat person. One person, two seats. The second seat is necessary due to the cramped size of the first seat. The first seat is flawed. Southwest will charge for two instead of truly fixing the problem. One person, one seat. I stand by my statements. Yes, this has been a disaster for Southwest, but it's been a disaster for people who simply don't understand or empathize with the situation, too.

I'm sorry to burst everyone's bubble here, but the idea that everybody is uncomfortable sitting in a SW airline seat is simply not true. As someone who is 5'5" and 140 lbs, I honestly have no problem with their seats. My sister, who is "obese" according to the new BMI index (she is 5'4" and 170lbs) also has absolutely no problem sitting in an airline seat. In fact, during all the flights I've taken I have noticed that an overwhelming majority of the passengers have no problem whatsoever sitting in an airline seat. Although it is stated that fat people are the majority in this country, you must admit that passengers who cannot fit in an airline seat are in fact the minority on any given airline; if this were not the case the airline companies would be taking the seat expansion suggestion more seriously. However, realize how many customers had to have complained to Southwest about having to share a seat with a large person next to them for the company to re-enforce this policy. Obviously enough, since the airline's goal is to keep the majority (yes, I state majority, since it is impossible for any company to satisfy ALL customers) of their ticket holders happy. Why should any airline install new larger seats just to accomodate a few passengers for each flight (and forcing eveybody else to pay a higher ticket cost on new seats they didn't want in the first place) when simpler solution would be what SW proposed: if you take up more than one seat, you must pay for it! If you know you cannot fit into an airline seat, save yourself the trouble and buy 2 seats in advance, and most likely you'll get a refund after the flight. If you don't like it, then why not simply choose a different airline to fly on, and let this company enforce their policy. Aside from one lawsuit (which has been done before, and what was the outcome...?) and a lot of griping, the fact remains that the majority of airline passengers have no problem with this "new" policy, and that is why Southwest firmly stands behind it.

Regarding Lucy's comments above. The fact is airlines have been making seats narrower and narrower. The space between the rows is smaller and smaller. Cram more people in the plane, make more money. I am 5'10'' and 150 lbs. I don't consider myself fat but I'm not comfortable in an airline seat. The solution is to go back to decent seats like they had at the beginning of commercial aviation. Seats that fit a wide range of people instead of seats designed to fit a so-called 'average' person.

I am flying to Florida on August 17th. I am affectionately known as "The Big Fat Queen of Everything." I hate to say this, but I have measured my butt, sat on test chairs, and made two calls to the airline to see if I will "need" one seat or two. So far, I seem to be okay, but there is still no definitive answer. In the first place, the airline has told me that their seats are 17 inches wide and in the next call, the seats are 18 inches wide. No one can tell you over the phone if you will need two seats, because there are no objective criteria and it will do you no good to go to the airport in advance and ask, because it is a subjective decision made at the time of travel. Of course, they would gladly take my money for the second seat, whether I needed it or not, but, at this point no one has been able or willing to tell me if I need to buy the second seat. I have been told there are 25 empty seats on my flight, and that should make a difference. But that may be true on one leg of my trip and not on another. How on earth can one plan one's trip, when we do not know the rules? THIS is what I find offensive and discriminatory-the fact that my ass will be eyeballed by some minimum wage drone at the airport and, depending upon what he/she thinks of my proportions, I may, or may not, need to purchase a seat. ALSO, I bought my tickets in March, well before all this brew-ha-ha. I think that people who purchased their seats BEFORE the stricter enforcements of the rule should be somehow grandfathered in or something. After all, I bought my tickets, in person, at the airport terminal. They should have told me then how much my trip would cost so that, if I didn't like the policy I could change my plans. As it is, I got a very good deal and now I cannot change my SW tickets without losing a substantial amount of my money. I mean, they are not even refunding my money because of their new enforcement policies that went into effect AFTER I bought my tickets in person at the airline counter, etc. etc. Now, that sucks, as anyone here, fat, thin or whatever, must agree.

Responce to Lucy: Give me a break. At 5'4 and 140 lbs you have no place talking about being compfortable in any seat. You aren't even a little bit fat. Good for you. About your sister, leave it to life to consider her obese, but TRUST ME. 5'4 and 170 lbs is not fat either. I am 5'4 and 289 lbs and I have never been on an airplane before. But I will someday and this whole situation is disgraceful and humiliating. I have problems with some seats, but ONLY the especially small ones. I can image that if I tried to sit in an airlines seat I would be able to pull down the arm rest and I could make the seatbelt fit, but I would spill over the seat underneath the arm rest. I am perfectly willing to pay for an extra seat if I take up the seat (But I don't have the money and therefore that is the reason that I have never flown anywhere.) but I resent the methods that they have of "mentally measuring" overweight people. Set a weight limit and I wouldn't mind purchasing my ticket in a different manner than everyone else. I would prefer that the desk where I purchased my tickets and where I would be weighed or measured would be out of sight of all the NORMALLY biased people that would laugh OR questioning kids that don't know when to shut up. Then I could board the plane and get my two seats (in which I could relax and take my space) with none of the others have any clue of the humiliating experience of being measured or weighed. I would even feel better if I was weighed by an elderly individual or someone fat like me, mainly because smaller people can be mean with only their eyes sometimes. That isn't fair and isn't nice.

This is really so sad. How can we ever expect world peace and harmony, when people object to even sharing a little space on an airline seat?? I just cannot believe the hatred and intolerance. My God, someone actually saying she just couldn't have someone's leg or thigh touching hers. This is so incredible. What is wrong with tolerance?? People wonder why we have so many laws on the books, and it is basically because people will find a cause to hate. Southwest has tapped into fat hatred. They should be proud. And yes, there are other solutions that would cost them very little, but they choose not to use them. If the fat are to be charged for an entire extra seat so they don't encroach on anyone else's space, then every one of us has the right to demand that irritating children not be allowed to fly... people who wear fragrances that offend us must be left on the ground too. Gosh, I can think of all kinds of things I should not have to tolerate on public transportation! It is easy to point out what one thinks of as obvious...supposedly fat people are less healthy, so should have to pay more for insurance...but people who don't exercise that are thin are not healthy either, according to all of the medical articles I have read, yet that question is not even asked on the forms for insurance. What about people who drink?? They surely pose a higher risk. What about people who are sexually active with different partners?? Surely they should be charged more, as well as people with dangerous hobbies, or tickets for speeding or dangerous driving?? I hope you can see what I am getting at, as none of those situations are ridiculous. Why is it so hard for some to believe that just as people come in different colors and heights and are considered normal, they also come in different sizes, and that too is normal?? Why is that so hard to accept?? Are the majority so brainwashed into the Twiggy mentality that they cannot think rationally?? This is so discouraging. In light of the hatred and bigotry that have caused all the wars, civil rights slayings, and even 9/11, must we continue finding reasons to ostracize a portion of society? Why can't we learn to celebrate our diversity rather than despise each other?

Thank you, Laurie :) That was beautiful and I wish there were more people like you around to bring sense into the lives of everyone.

Does anyone here have any real evidence that they shouldn't charge double?(I am absolutley on your side!) Because I am having a debate aginst paying double and we need total evidence to support this.

Hi chubbies, I have read all those comments and i think that Southwest Airlines has a considerable reason to charge obese people more money. I personally am obese, i am only 5'4'' and 250lbs. I do a lot of travelling and every single time, the people beside me always complain and I am always trying to avoid getting in other peoples ways. I really do not like to butt into other people's business and be all over their seat either, so i think that it is a good idea for Southwest Airlines. They have a right to refuse service to ANYONE and if you will cost them unhappy travellers, then they should allow you to purchase two seats since you are taking up two times as much of their money, food, and service. Thank you for your concern.

charging not charing

This policy is wrong because isn't Southwest discriminating against their own people? People can not tell me that everyone that works for Southwest is at good weight. So people that are overweight and work for Southwest , do they have to pay double for seats or do they get discounts. Also does it make employee's mad about this policy?