Man forced to stand on 7 hr. flight due to obese neighbor.

[Svartalf]

Nobody thinks the fat guy would have liability for forcing the standee out of his seat?

The family might have some civil recourse against him, but standing law makes this the responsibility of the airline to provide proper service, not the passenger's to ensure that his seating arrangements are compatible with his neighbour's.

[Svartalf]

Fatties that don't fit in one seat are supposed to buy two seats.
If you need two seats, you have to pay for two seats.

Is that a common rule among airlines? has it been challenged in court and upheld?

[Schneibster]

Nobody thinks the fat guy would have liability for forcing the standee out of his seat?

The airline is responsible for the comfort of the passengers, and therefore for the lack thereof.

[Audley Strange]

Nobody thinks the fat guy would have liability for forcing the standee out of his seat?

Certainly not me.

{edit to add} He would only have liability if it was a pulbic place or a place he owned. As both are customers and the plane is a private business, it comes under professional liability every time. Another one of my many talents was years in corporate insurance claims.

If he pushed the guy out in front of a bus, would he be liable? Yes. If he did it accidentally, maybe less so. But he deprived the guy of his seat, he should have some liability.

Not the same thing. In the first case he would be liable because it is a public place, this comes under public or personal liability and he actively pushed the guy. In the second case, the airline had a duty to provide a seat for both as customers, they did not. Considering as I said I think they have a legal liability to do so and considering anything that any accident that might have happened because he was standing, when he should have been sitting, they would be liable because it happened on their watch on their property and because of their ineptitude.

[klr]

I wonder is online booking partly to blame here? Did the airline have no clue that it had a two-seater on its hands until he turned up at check-in?

Of course, the airline industry practice of overbooking may also have played a part.

[Coito ergo sum]

It could be easily sorted by a narrow gate at check in. If you don't fit through you have to buy another seat

Or the fact that if you occupy more than one seat you have to pay more than one fare could be clearly stated when purchasing a ticket.

That sort of thing actually happened to Kevin Smith of "Jay and Silent Bob" fame. He was big and fat for a while, and he bought two seats on the plane. Even though he had purchased two seats, the airline didn't let him on because he was too fat. They later apologized.

[Coito ergo sum]

Nobody thinks the fat guy would have liability for forcing the standee out of his seat?

Certainly not me.

{edit to add} He would only have liability if it was a pulbic place or a place he owned. As both are customers and the plane is a private business, it comes under professional liability every time. Another one of my many talents was years in corporate insurance claims.

If he pushed the guy out in front of a bus, would he be liable? Yes. If he did it accidentally, maybe less so. But he deprived the guy of his seat, he should have some liability.

What if he offered to let him use his extra fat as a pillow? That would probably defray some of the liability.

[Coito ergo sum]

Fatties that don't fit in one seat are supposed to buy two seats.
If you need two seats, you have to pay for two seats.

Is that a common rule among airlines? has it been challenged in court and upheld?

I think it's perfectly legal, and it doesn't seem to me to be discriminatory. If you use two seats, why shouldn't you pay for two?

[Tyrannical]

Fatties that don't fit in one seat are supposed to buy two seats.
If you need two seats, you have to pay for two seats.

Is that a common rule among airlines? has it been challenged in court and upheld?

Yes on both accounts.
I think
I know people in that past have been told to buy two seats, and the law suits didn't make it any where.

[Schneibster]

Fatties that don't fit in one seat are supposed to buy two seats.
If you need two seats, you have to pay for two seats.

Is that a common rule among airlines? has it been challenged in court and upheld?

I think it's perfectly legal, and it doesn't seem to me to be discriminatory. If you use two seats, why shouldn't you pay for two?

Sure, but it's up to the airline to see to it that he pays for them and that they are reserved for him.

Unfortunately airlines overbook as a standard practice.

[Svartalf]

I wonder is online booking partly to blame here? Did the airline have no clue that it had a two-seater on its hands until he turned up at check-in?

Of course, the airline industry practice of overbooking may also have played a part.

if they didnt allow overbooking to happen in the first place, planes would rarely be so full a reseating would be impossible

[JimC]

Andrewclunn wrote:

Letting 400+ pound people on the plain isn't discriminating.

Hell, the thought of all those 400 pounders roaming the plain, eating everything they see is damn scary!


(sorry, mate, couldn't resist... )

[Wumbologist]

Bigotry against the morbidly obese is totally justified.

What about airlines not taking steps to prevent this, or the other guy getting the seat he paid for? The obese shouldn't be discriminated against, but they also shouldn't get preferential treatment.

[Drewish]

Andrewclunn wrote:

Letting 400+ pound people on the plain isn't discriminating.

Hell, the thought of all those 400 pounders roaming the plain, eating everything they see is damn scary!

(sorry, mate, couldn't resist... )

Bigotry against the morbidly obese is totally justified.

What about airlines not taking steps to prevent this, or the other guy getting the seat he paid for? The obese shouldn't be discriminated against, but they also shouldn't get preferential treatment.

I don't think he was given preferential treatment. It's just a natural result of the tragedy of the commons. When everyone is guaranteed equal access, those who behave badly (in this case those who take up more space than a normal seat size) punish those who only take their fair share. Since it's impossible to adjust the size of every seat to the customer (and then just charge them by size) the only practical solution is to create an in-group out-group approach where everyone within a certain boundary of size is treated as normal, and those beyond it are penalized. This is the essence of discrimination.

My thought is not that the man was told that he had to stand, merely that he chose to rather than have the gut of some fat sack of shit lapped over him, pressing him against the wall. The article even makes mention of another passenger who was scrunched up as a result of the man, so really, if this man could tolerate this bulbous bulge molesting him via his massive side fat rolls, then he was more than welcome to stay in his seat. What the airline did was not discrimination. They should have discriminated, and seen that the passengers should have been treated differently based on their weight. I understand that there is an emotional tendency to assume that discrimination must be bad, so you want what happened to be defined in terms of it being discrimination, but it was not. Again, I say fuck the Civil Rights Act.

[Warren Dew]

My thought is not that the man was told that he had to stand, merely that he chose to rather than have the gut of some fat sack of shit lapped over him, pressing him against the wall.

That's my read as well. He should just have kept the arm rest down and let the fat person squeeze in as best he could.

That said, I'd think it would violate some FAA regulation for the aircraft to take off with someone out of their seat, so the airline might face a fine for that.