The future of airlines

[Roberts5]

In reply to: bananabender on Wednesday 09/07/08 10:10am

Just called my 75 yr old mother in law to explain that despite suffering from Polio at age 20 and being confined to a wheel chair ever since, that the extra cushioning sheÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s put on is now going to cost her more when she makes her bi annual flight from a regional country area to the city for ongoing therapy.

 

I told her that it is no excuse that her minimal pension (courtesy of the KRudd government) is barely enough to live on let alone pay for the privilege of travelling with a few extra pounds. Imagine the poor businessman that has to sit next to her.

 

Can you imagine that she had the hide to tell me that she has had a terrible time during the past 55 years and that she is as entitled to pay the same for an aircraft seat as the rest of usÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¦ÃƒÆ’Æâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¦.

 

[mminion]

QUOTE (Roberts5 @ Wednesday 09/07/08 11:01am)

Roberts5

 

Yes there is a human side, but you can't throw economics out the window because it doesn't suit your issue.

 

If you personally drove her in your car from point A to point B you would be "directly" paying for that "extra cushioning". I don't see you suggesting that the government should be issuing you with a fuel rebate to cover that "extra" cost.

 

In some cases weight is not controllable (as you highlight), but in most cases it is. The issue here is anti-discrimination laws mean you can't have "two rules".

 

I am all for allowing exceptions in cases such as your mother in law but in doing so it's only a matter of time before some 35 year old male weighing 145kg (but otherwise healthy) sues the airline for charging him extra.

 

A flight from Sydney to London (using a 747) there's an aprox 15 to 1 ratio. For everyone 1kg of person, you need 15kg of fuel.

 

Two people, one is 80kg the other is 115kg. At 15:1 and the cost of Jet-A the second person costs a couple of hundred dollars more to transport.

 

Jet-A has increased by 40% in the last year... the per kg model is coming, either suggest a change in anti-discrimination laws (to allow for cases like your mother in law) or tell her to expect to pay more.

 

Cheer

Matt

[swuzzlebubble]

In reply to: mminion on Wednesday 09/07/08 11:43am

Weight does not seem to be covered by the Act anyway.

 

Maybe pregnant women could be excluded?

 

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/con...1991204/s7.html

 

QUOTE

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1991 - SECT 7 7 Discrimination on the basis of certain attributes prohibited The Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of the following attributes-- (a) sex; (b) relationship status; © pregnancy; (d) parental status; (e) breastfeeding; (f) age; (g) race; (h) impairment; (i) religious belief or religious activity; (j) political belief or activity; (k) trade union activity; (l) lawful sexual activity; (m) gender identity; (n) sexuality; (o) family responsibilities; (p) association with, or relation to, a person identified on the basis of any of the above attributes

[mminion]

In reply to: swuzzlebubble on Wednesday 09/07/08 12:49pm

Weight falls under "Indirect Discrimination"

"A party may be able to lawfully discriminate indirectly where they can show that the policy or practice is reasonable in all the circumstances."

 

You can have a rule based on weight, but it has to be applied "in all the circumstances".

 

You can't waive the fee for a 75 year old female confined to a wheel chair AND then charge a 35 year old male weighing 145kg (but otherwise healthy)

 

Cheers

Matt

[balance]

In reply to: mminion on Wednesday 09/07/08 12:37pm

Hi MM good to see you around,

airlines pretty much regard passengers as walking freight anyway so a weigh in is likely sooner or later. With the carbon tax issue too it seems likely.

If it includes everyone and everything carried it becomes a user pay system which the conservative side champion these days.

 

Not saying its right or ethical but agree it may happen.Difficult to do and would create all sorts of issues.

 

Having travelled near seat busting (literally) large folk I could well understand the indignation of a 60 kg lightweight being charged for extra baggage with some plonker weighing twice that travelling for the same fare or less.Especially so if they also take up a measure of the seat either side.What a joy that is.

 

Would be an interesting sight at the travel agent... sorry sir you cant afford to fly unless you lose 70 kgs by Christmas.

[swuzzlebubble]

In reply to: balance on Wednesday 09/07/08 02:14pm

I might get in early and start a hot sauna franchise near airport check-in lounges.

[balance]

QUOTE (swuzzlebubble @ Wednesday 09/07/08 02:20pm)

Liposuction to the left departures to the right... http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/devilsmiley.gif

 

More seriously can we see a time where listed airlines move back toward govt sponsorship?

I know plenty still are being the flag carriers etc but given the remote nature of some countries ie us in oz and NZ and the importance of being connected by way of trade tourism and defence issues more support maybe needed especially so when the competition is subsidised or their jet fuel is virtually free.

[swuzzlebubble]

Another aspect to all this is should anyone pay for excess weight/bagage on a half empty plane?

[Vilmac]

In reply to: swuzzlebubble on Wednesday 09/07/08 03:25pm

Stop it Swuzzle,

 

I am laughing so much I am losing weight.

[ComUnNoTerms]

In reply to: swuzzlebubble on Wednesday 09/07/08 03:25pm

Using the same logic as "Paying a fat duty" there would be a case for an extra skinny person to a "very skinny discount".

 

The weight for fare setting whilst ideal for American Airlines might not work to well for Ethiopian Airlines however.

 

 

 

Keep up the good ideas people

 

C