02 February 2010

Airline passengers remain high on fat tax

More than three-quarters of respondents in a poll by Skyscanner favored an airline "fat tax," which comes in the wake of on-off news that Air France imposed a definite, mandatory two-seat requirement.

But Air France: are they or aren’t they?

"The latest is that the airline promises to reimburse obese passengers it asks to buy a second seat if the plane isn't full," says NewsSource.com.

The company, which has long offered obese travelers the option of buying an adjoining seat at a discount, said that passengers would be fully reimbursed for the second fare in 90 percent of cases.

Obese passengers who don't reserve a second seat may not be allowed to board, at the captain's discretion, and if there is not an unoccupied adjoining seat. The policy will come into force starting in April.

This comes after widely-publicized news that the carrier was definitely charging for overweight passengers, which Air France later denied. The new two-seat requirement was met with overwhelmingly approval.

In the Skyscanner poll, only 22 percent of the 550 people questioned disapproved of introducing extra payments for overweight passengers.

Skyscanner co-founder Barry Smith said a so-called "fat tax" was a very sensitive issue for airlines who are reluctant to alienate heavier passengers.

"On one hand, it's not unreasonable for airlines to charge passengers extra if they occupy more than one seat. On the other, many would argue that it should be the responsibility of airlines to adjust their standard seat size, enabling them to comfortably accommodate all passengers," he said in a statement.

In the US, Southwest Airlines and United Airlines have a policy where "oversize" people need to buy a second seat and can claim a refund if the plane is not full. This followed complaints from neighboring passengers.

Bloggers responded heavily in favor of the fat tax.

But others were not impressed. One dieter said:

"As a FFT -- fat frequent traveler -- I find all this talk of charging me and my large brethren insulting and unfair. So last night on my flight from Amsterdam to London I rejected the offer of my snack and also only drunk water. I am now off to buy some celery."

By David Wilkening

Post your comment

Your Comments (3)

kilogramme fare !!!

Just heard about a kilgramme fare which one airline that flies Australia/USA is going to introduce (probably as a gimmick, but what the hell, no such thing as bad publicity). At present a 46kg person with 100kg of lugggage pays a fortune in excess baggage charges, whereas a 100kg person with 46kg of luggage pays nothing at all. That's not very fair !!!

By Craig Mathews, Monday, February 22, 2010
narrower seats not wider

people don't want to pay fares now that in many cases are loss leaders for airlines, so they need to jam more seats on an aircraft not less, to reduce cost per seat, so expect to see reduced seat pitch & maybe more seats across, eg. instead of 2-3-2 across a 767, they may all go 2-4-2 as in high density charter aircraft like in UK, or a subclass, called SCUM class, which is cheaper than economy but tighter seats, no baggage allowance at all (checked or carry on), no food, no water-zippo, but cheap !!!

By Craig Mathews, Monday, February 22, 2010
wider seats

In America the need for wider seats becomes larger all the time! Recently the university hospital near my home built a huge new cardiac care facility. All the chairs are approximately 50% wider than normal chairs. What does that imply? Maybe airlines need to do the same thing!

By Elizabeth Griffin, Tuesday, February 2, 2010