Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Tall people need to get over their sense of entitlement in this world. This sort of attitude totally boggles my mind. Short people get discriminated day in and day out and are disadvantaged in various spheres in life, you don't see them complaining.. they just make the best of it.
In this particular case, it's one of the few times Tall people are at a disadvantage and what do they do? they whine and complain like little children. Just quit the whining and buy the additional space already OR deal with what's available without bothering others.
If you are that tall that you can't fit in an airline seat then you are an outlier and you need to adjust to the reality that you need to buy additional space just like you need to pay more for bigger clothes. Quit acting like the world owes you everything!
Tall people are not the ones complaining, only the people wanting to recline their seats back are complaining. I, being at 6'4", do not care if someone reclines or not, if they can, all the power to them.
The entitlement comes from those thinking they have some unrestricted right to recline their seats, even though they cannot present any proof of this right, and in practice, this right has never existed as no one, and I mean no one, has ever been denied a ticket, forced to move, etc, because they were too tall for the person in front of them to recline their seat.
The person is renting a certain amount of seat space, it is not their problem if the person in front of them wants to intrude on this rented space as the tall person fits just fine, and no where does it state someone must accompany the requirements of having the seat in front of them recline.
- The airlines are essentially renting the same space to two different people, and not making any determination on who as the superior right to this space over the other person. In practice, the right goes to the person behind because reclining a seat is not an essential function, nor safety issue, and neither is a person's knees touching the seat in front of them. This is in contrast to an obese person whereas the not folding down the arm rests, and not fitting a seat belt is a safety issue.
In addition to the above, when airlines advertise their seat pitch, that is the "contract" in which the person rented the space from. A person reclining has no more/less inherit right to this space than the person behind, especially since both people have rented the seat space; this is where the "double renting" is coming into play. The only practice in this is what a mentioned above. And in contrast with an obese person, people pay for seat width as well, in which an obese person taking up more than their rented space is a violation of the seat renting contract, whereas a tall person taking up the space they rented is not as they still are not exceeding the space they rented.
- Seat pitch is different depending on the seat, factors like angle of the seat and cushion thickness play into this, these are things you cannot find on the airline website, and is rather impossible to find all together.
- Many of the current seats were designed with more spacing in mind, and the airlines crammed them together without a single regard to the seat was not designed to have such small spacing between the seats.
- Seats are different, some recline at different points on the seat than others, so on some planes, knees against the seat would never interfere with a seat reclining, whereas other planes it will; it is impossible to know this ahead of time.
- As you notice with recent stories, these were all in the extra legroom class, and none had anything to do with a tall person. And while reclining the seat was an issue, the cause was an arrogant jerk or two making an issue out of nothing (as some posters seem they would).
Originally Posted by annerk View Post
I don't care who is behind me. I will keep banging that seat back until either they move or the plane is landed and they are escorted off for purposely screwing with my seat
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjake54
Anyone believe any of this?
Of course not, if the poster kept doing that, that can be construed as an assault, and the poster will be the one escorted off. A person being tall is not screwing with anyone's seat, however, knowing slamming the seat into someone is assault, no different than slamming a door into someone on purpose.
This is why if someone gets some jerk like annerk in front of them doing stuff, best bet is to keep quiet and let everything fall as is; the FA's will take care of it, and being silent and polite is the best weapon; some people love getting hostile just to get a reaction out of someone so they can escalate the issue.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
Of course not, if the poster kept doing that, that can be construed as an assault, and the poster will be the one escorted off. A person being tall is not screwing with anyone's seat, however, knowing slamming the seat into someone is assault, no different than slamming a door into someone on purpose.
Airplane seats should have been designed like space saver recliners. The seat portion moves forward, so that the back doesn't actually use any additional space.
And the special snowflakes would whine about people moving the seat forward in that case. People would invent plastic devices that impede the forward progress of the seat.
Also, how are sliding seats going to help in an emergency? Airplane seats are, first and foremost, safety devices. Sure, a ratchet much like automobile seat belts could stop the seat from slamming forward in the event of a crash. But that's just one more thing that could potentially go wrong.
We all want more room -- a few of us more than most. But the MARKET always selects "cheap" over "comfortable." Until that changes -- until enough people vote with their wallet and select flights where seat pitch is a major consideration -- nothing will change.
So long as the vast majority click on the lowest-priced flight, we're in for more fights between passengers and more diversions. I've got my system for making sure I am not affected -- because "avoidance of pain" is a powerful motivator. But I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority of the air traveling public.
- The airlines are essentially renting the same space to two different people, and not making any determination on who as the superior right to this space over the other person. In practice, the right goes to the person behind because reclining a seat is not an essential function, nor safety issue, and neither is a person's knees touching the seat in front of them. This is in contrast to an obese person whereas the not folding down the arm rests, and not fitting a seat belt is a safety issue.
In addition to the above, when airlines advertise their seat pitch, that is the "contract" in which the person rented the space from. A person reclining has no more/less inherit right to this space than the person behind, especially since both people have rented the seat space; this is where the "double renting" is coming into play. The only practice in this is what a mentioned above. And in contrast with an obese person, people pay for seat width as well, in which an obese person taking up more than their rented space is a violation of the seat renting contract, whereas a tall person taking up the space they rented is not as they still are not exceeding the space they rented.
Where are you getting this information? It looks like you're just making it up.
From what I've read in airline tariffs you are not renting the space but the seat itself. There is certainly a loose guarantee that you will get the seat pitch that is adverstised and you've paid for but airline tariffs also indicate that the airline can move you to something different, and this is specified as part of the contract.
Also, if you buy that seat between point A and B and it reclines, you have the right to recline the seat. The airlines agree with this even though you don't.
Where are you getting this information? It looks like you're just making it up.
From what I've read in airline tariffs you are not renting the space but the seat itself. There is certainly a loose guarantee that you will get the seat pitch that is adverstised and you've paid for but airline tariffs also indicate that the airline can move you to something different, and this is specified as part of the contract.
Also, if you buy that seat between point A and B and it reclines, you have the right to recline the seat. The airlines agree with this even though you don't.
Passengers don't set the rules here, airlines do.
A person purchases a ticket based on the information provided on the airline's website or other sources. If the airline states a certain amount of seat pitch, then this is what you as a consumer is purchasing.
The airline can always move anyone to anything different, back before all of these seat issues and different pricing even began, I often got emergency exit row seats because I was tall, I did not request this or anything. Even now, I have been put a few times into more leg room areas without me paying anything extra just because the space was available, however, that is up to the airline, and that was a courtesy to me, not to anyone else. I also had the option to decline every single time.
Of course a person has the right to recline their seat, did I state anything different? However, a person does not have an unrestricted right to recline their seat; a tall person will not be forced off the plane because the person in front of them cannot physically recline their seat, a tall person is not forced to move to another seat, a tall person is not forced to pay more for a seat with more legroom; a person wanting to recline their seat does not have a superior right over another in this example, however, if physically possible, the person can recline their seat just fine when they want as other conditions allow.
You seem to have missed the part of my post (either by accident or on purpose) where I stated the airlines are renting the same space twice, and have not addressed this issue. Essentially, the airline is telling person A they have so much legroom available, but tell person B they have so much reclining room available, but the airlines are selling part of this space to two people, and conflicts will arise just as they will arise from selling any space to two people who want to use it.
However, in practice, the tall person's knees again the seat in front of them has always been accommodated over the person wanting to recline, and the reason is quite simply because there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about the tall person short of cutting off their legs. They can offer an area with more legroom, but with flights running almost full, this is rarely available.
And the special snowflakes would whine about people moving the seat forward in that case. People would invent plastic devices that impede the forward progress of the seat.
Also, how are sliding seats going to help in an emergency? Airplane seats are, first and foremost, safety devices. Sure, a ratchet much like automobile seat belts could stop the seat from slamming forward in the event of a crash. But that's just one more thing that could potentially go wrong.
We all want more room -- a few of us more than most. But the MARKET always selects "cheap" over "comfortable." Until that changes -- until enough people vote with their wallet and select flights where seat pitch is a major consideration -- nothing will change.
So long as the vast majority click on the lowest-priced flight, we're in for more fights between passengers and more diversions. I've got my system for making sure I am not affected -- because "avoidance of pain" is a powerful motivator. But I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority of the air traveling public.
But if you notice, the recent events were with people in the premium section, which has more legroom, so these conflicts did not have much to do with space, rather an idiot or two.
Millions of people fly every day and it is very rare to have any conflict over anything like this, and I have never had such a conflict. Most people will just accept whatever it is because all in all, the flight is only a few hours and that is it. So if a person cannot recline their seat because of a tall person, that is usually accepted unlike in contrast with a device that stops the seat from reclining, because that is not a human, physical characteristic keeping a seat from reclining.
You seem to have missed the part of my post (either by accident or on purpose) where I stated the airlines are renting the same space twice, and have not addressed this issue.
Airlines do not rent space, they sell seats between two points. Check their tariff, no where does it say they are renting space. You are stating your subjective opinion here which is not based on fact. If so, what are you basing it on other than your opinion? Anything?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
