Airline luggage extra money and weight

[ExScoop]

On the ABC news tonight
They are charging $100 for each carry on and check in luggage

One air line is charging extra for overweight passengers because they take up more than one seat

[defense51]

It won't be long before the luggage costs are as much as the ticket. Ridiculous!

[Emerson1]

One air line is charging extra for overweight passengers because they take up more than one seat
How is that a bad thing? If you are such a fatass you need two seats they should have to pay for it.

[defense51]

How is that a bad thing? If you are such a fatass you need two seats they should have to pay for it.
They don't charge less for skinny or lightweight passengers...

[Old Tiger]

On the ABC news tonight


One air line is charging extra for overweight passengers because they take up more than one seatThat makes sense though because the less seats that are filled means loss of money.

[AP Panther Fan]

Last year, flying out of the Fort Myers airport, they had an outdoor area where you could pay for and check your luggage. I was shocked when the person informed me that they do not work for the airline and requested a tip. You can tell I don't fly often, I guess.

btw, OT, your signatures continue to get more and more offensive...:dispntd:

[rockdale80]

Last year, flying out of the Fort Myers airport, they had an outdoor area where you could pay for and check your luggage. I was shocked when the person informed me that they do not work for the airline and requested a tip. You can tell I don't fly often, I guess.

btw, OT, your signatures continue to get more and more offensive...:dispntd:

They will continue to charge it as long as consumers pay for it. It is ridiculous.

What is offensve about his signature? Last time I checked Bikini's and dancing were not considered lewd by the general public. The only thing offensive to me is she has on too many clothes. :)

[Farmersfan]

I'm a pretty big person at 6' and 250lbs and I don't have a problem with charging a large person double who has to take up two seats. I think they must be SOLD OUT before they can justify this though. If they fail to sell even 1 seat on the flight then how can they claim the fat person cost them. But I'm pretty sure the loss of that extra seat isn't the main issue here. I think it is more directed to how grossly overweight people effect or influence the other passengers. Nobody wants to sit next to a very overweight person. Perhaps they should call this an inconvenience fee! But I have to ask if they feel justified in this then who would they not also charge extra to the mother with the crying baby, the man with breath that could scramble eggs or the old woman with so much perfume it chokes you? Seriously, if this is a inconvenience fee then why would they not charge extra for every person who causes inconvenience to others? I'll tell you why! It's because this society has already established a core belief where obesity is concerned. Most people today have ZERO tolerance or sympathy for it! Not saying that is right or wrong. But if this is just about the extra seat or the extra fuel cost associated with a grossly overweight person then I also ask why a extra skinny person isn't given a discount?

[Farmersfan]

On a similar situation I recently encountered I need some thoughts from you guys. My employer had a "Weight Loss" contest last year. They established the rules that stated that the person who lost the largest percentage of their body weight would win the contest. On the surface this seemed fine in the beginning but it slowly started to eat at the back of mind. It felt wrong to me to set the rules so that a 150lb person could win the contest by losing less total weight than a 300lb person. I didn't enter the contest so it wasn't important but after giving this a lot of thought is seems to me that this a really, really discriminatory practice. Seems to me implementing a bell curve to accommodate thinner people in a "weight loss" contest is equivalent to making a long legged person run 10 yard further than a short legged person in a race. Or forcing tall people to jump higher than short people in a high jump contest. The logic behind the idea is that a very obese person of say 300lbs could lose 30 lbs far, far easier than a person who weights only 150lbs. 30lbs would be only 10% of the total body wieght for the obese person but the same 30lbs would equal 20% of the body mass of the 150lb person. But isn't this a "Weight Loss" contest? With this logic why wouldn't we make a 7' tall high jumper jump one foot higher than a 6' tall high jumper in order to get the same credit? Why wouldn't we measure the strides of our sprinters and adjust the required running distance based on their stride advantage? Seriously, how is it ok to expect a 300lb man to lose 30lb in a weight loss contest in order to simply stay even with a 150lb man who loses 15lbs? This rationale fails to take into account the fact that perhaps the 300lb man is 7' tall and the 150lb man is 5' tall. The 300lb man could be a professional football player with a BMI (body mass index) of 15 while the short man could be a short fat little guy........ Going back to the subject of this thread, I say it is allowed because of society's ideas about obesity. None of those other adjustments to competitions that I mentioned would ever be allowed yet this was not only accepted but praised. I just don't get people sometimes.