Why I HATE Southwest Airlines...

[ducklite]

Because SW doesn't assign seats, there's no guarantee this person will be with their family. They could have been scattered all over the plane.

Call me what you will, but I refuse to share my seat with anyone. I've had a couple times that an overweight person wanted to put the armrest between my seat and their's up so they could "fit" (in other words spill over into my seat) and I have refused. In one case the flight was full and the person of size had to leave the flight and take a later one. Not my problem, and I wasn't going to spend three hours sitting sideways or hanging into the aisle getting bumped and banged because someone's girth was in the space I paid for.

In the OP's case the gate agent's actions were wayyyyy uncalled for, as they KNEW it was an empty flight and were being obnoxious. But had the flight been full or close to it, IMHO they would have been well within their boundries requiring the OP to buy an extra seat.

Anne

 

[dznyntnh]

Yet another reason, of many, for me to no longer fly SWA.

I too am a person of size. I have no problems fitting in my seat with the armrest down and I managed to lose enough weight before my last trip to not need an extender (probably the strangest reason for a diet that any of my friends had ever heard), but I have flown several times nervous about being asked to purchase a second seat.

The main problem is that this situation is SWA's doing. Just like all of their other antiquated policies, their refusal to step into the 21st century and reserve seats creates this need to force someone to purchase a second seat. Since they cannot guarantee you sitting with your party.

I would definitely write to SWA and let them know how you were treated and let them know you will not be flying their airline. I did this April after some other issues I had with them and their staff.

The only way to get them to change their ways is with our pocketbooks.

 

[ktink]

I'm sorry this happened to you. I think this should've been handled in a more discreet manner. And with the flight not being sold out or anywhere near sold out I think they should've allowed this. I can see on a sold out flight how this may pose as a problem so I understand why the policy is there for them to inforce. We fly SW when we fly due to the wonderful $39 fare that we get and fortunatley we've never encoutered anything other than good service. I hope that when we fly out 3 weeks from today that we will have the same kind of service that we have received in the past.

 

[jultomzach]

Perhaps airlines should start offering larger seats (at more cost) in their coach class to passengers that need more than the standard seat. The last flight on USAir to Disney, my sister sat beside a woman that was so large that she used 1/2 of my sister's seat. I have to support that the passenger that paid for the seat is entitled to the ENTIRE seat and that this overrides the larger passengers "rights" to only pay for one seat. However, the issue of passenger size and cost of seat should be addressed during the ticketing process (not at boarding). Airlines would only need to address the larger passengers that had not indicated their large size at ticketing upon boarding. (especially since boarding passes can often be printed off from a remote computer). But obviously this is a business risk as airlines prefer to encourage rather than not discourage passengers at the point of purchasing a ticket. It needs to be addressed though as my sister and I agreed after the last flight, never again will we keep silent about the discomfort. My sister's back bothered her for a few days after that flight!

 

[C.Ann]

The main problem is that this situation is SWA's doing. Just like all of their other antiquated policies, their refusal to step into the 21st century and reserve seats creates this need to force someone to purchase a second seat. Since they cannot guarantee you sitting with your party.

The only way to get them to change their ways is with our pocketbooks.

---------------------------------

"Their refusal to step into the 21st century" is what keeps their airfares down and makes it possible for them to offer special rock-bottom deals that other airlines can't - or won't.. For those who have their pocketbooks in mind, the trade-off is worth any minor aggravations they may encounter.. If passengers have issues with their policies, then indeed the best thing to do is fly with some other airline.. Not everyone has those issues though and would not be happy to see them go to assigned seating if it will make a significant increase in airfares..

 

[CarolA]

---------------------------------

"Their refusal to step into the 21st century" is what keeps their airfares down and makes it possible for them to offer special rock-bottom deals that other airlines can't - or won't.. For those who have their pocketbooks in mind, the trade-off is worth any minor aggravations they may encounter.. If passengers have issues with their policies, then indeed the best thing to do is fly with some other airline.. Not everyone has those issues though and would not be happy to see them go to assigned seating if it will make a significant increase in airfares..

BINGO!

And the story I told and the one told by jultomzach indicate part of the problem. These passengers are not telling the airline that they are going to use more then one seat....

Actually several airlines have attempted to have a sort of "economy plus" with more spacious seating.. the facts are that not enough of us paid for it.

 

[DonnaL]

The gate agent did handle this in the wrong way, however, I do agree with the policy as a whole. If someone is forced to share their seat with a larger person who can't fit it the standard seat it is very unfair to that person and now becomes discrimination against the non large person. As far as customer service within SW in general goes, my family and I have always been very happy with them. I personally feel the SW people I've come across in both
PHL and MCO (usually the only two places I'm able to use SW) have been among the best in the airline business. On the other hand, several years ago we had an issue with Delta over my grandson's VERY expensive stroller, which was broken by Delta people after being gate checked enroute from AVP to MCO via ATL. The customer service people at both ATL and MCO were extremely rude and it took almost four months and numerous phone calls to receive reimbursement for the stroller. One gate agent at ATL went so far as to say the stroller ( three wheel jogging stroller) wasn't approved by the airline industry as a stroller, but, was actually a bike and should be charged baggage fees as a bike would. I asked her to please show me in Delta's policy that this was so since I had checked prior to traveling on gate check policy for strollers, jogging or otherwise, and was told the stroller was fine. She couldn't provide an answer and said she would get back to me, and she neede to wait on the next person. Needless to say, she didn't get back to me before we needed to board our flight.

 

[bicker]

Whether Southwest's policy is right or wrong or discriminatory they should be able to talk to people and deal with the situation in a discreet manner.

I suspect that that is always their intent and purpose. Employees who operate differently don't work for any airline very long. It is more typically the passenger who escalates these situations, and understandably so, since they're being singled-out for something they feel is beyond their control, and are being told that they have to spend more money than they anticipated.

New employees will often follow the rules & regulations to a "T" until they are more familiar with "extenuating" circumstances or little things they can let slide.

That is a very good point. Beyond familiarity, very often newer employees are not permitted the same latitude to bend the rules as veteran employees. Probational employees could even be terminated for actions that veteran employees could get rewarded for.

it is obviously being applied inconsistently

That's really often the problem. However, it cuts both ways. Apply the rule consistently, and it seems excessive. Apply professional judgement, and it appears inconsistent. Don't have the policy, and you leave many customers dissatisfied. They have to choose the least negative of the three, and I believe that would the application of professional judgement, i.e., the inconsistency.

 

[seashoreCM]

Making a larger person buy a second seat on the spot is a useless move except to harass.

If the second seat rule applied, that means the flight is full and there are no more seats for the larger person to buy.

If there was a vacant seat available for purchase at the time, the larger person would not be obligated to pay for it under Southwest's existing policy.

A smaller person inconvenienced by someone taking up part of his seat needs to be pro-active in complaining before the flight departs. It's a simple and standard request, ask to be reseated anywhere else on the plane. Included in the available arsenel of tools is requesting the complaint resolution officer. It behooves the airline to solve the problem before it gets that far, asking for volunteers if needed, since once the CRO is summoned the plane is going to wait and it's going to be a late departure, something the flight crew wants to avoid by trying to slough off the smaller person in the first place.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

 

[bicker]

Perhaps airlines should start offering larger seats (at more cost) in their coach class to passengers that need more than the standard seat.

It's been considered, I know. The problem is that the market wouldn't sustain it. Customers will choose the lower-cost seat, unless some draconian policing system is in place (which would be unfairly exploited by those who are adversely affected by such a policy, resulting in horrendous PR).

However, the issue of passenger size and cost of seat should be addressed during the ticketing process (not at boarding).

Unfortunately, our electronic age has removed the personal contact that used to be necessary during the ticketing process. It is not only possible, but rather is becoming the most common case, now, that the first time a human being from the airline will make contact with a passenger is when their row (or zone, or boarding card letter) is called, during the boarding process.

If the second seat rule applied, that means the flight is full and there are no more seats for the larger person to buy.

That's simply not the case. Please understand that the Contract of Carriage already requires passengers of size to identify themselves as such prior to purchasing a ticket. They're supposed to voluntarily purchase two seats, and then file for reimbursement after the flight, if the flight wasn't full. The airline personnel aren't supposed to be involved in that process at all. They only get involved when a passenger doesn't self-identify, doesn't voluntarily purchase two seats for themselves in advance, etc.

(Here's the exact wording: "Customers who are unable to lower the armrests (the definitive boundary between seats) should proactively book the number of seats needed during initial reservations.")

But obviously this is a business risk as airlines prefer to encourage rather than not discourage passengers at the point of purchasing a ticket.

Y'know, that is normally an overriding concern, but I bet that Southwest would forego that if there was a practical way of accomplishing their policy's aim, in some manner other than how they do so today.

like all of their other antiquated policies, their refusal to step into the 21st century and reserve seats creates this need

Actually, their policies are anything but antiquted. They're, perhaps, well ahead of their time -- for some of us, their policies are so revolutionary that we hope their day never comes.

A smaller person inconvenienced by someone taking up part of his seat needs to be pro-active in complaining before the flight departs. It's a simple and standard request, ask to be reseated anywhere else on the plane.

It doesn't work well that way, because if there are no other seats on the airplane, once passengers are boarded and seated, the only choices available are to "live with it" or to take the next flight -- if they haven't taken the proactive action to address larger passengers who didn't purchase two seats in advance, prior to boarding, then it is the smaller passenger who loses.

 

[seashoreCM]

Making the larger person to get off and take a later flight for not purchasing an extra seat does not entitle that passenger to compensation.

Giving the smaller person only the alternative of getting off and taking a later flight subjects the airline to paying compensation in excess of the bump compensation required by law if the airline did not follow its bump procedure from start to finish.

 

[bicker]

How so? At that point, it is the smaller passenger who is voluntarily electing to leave the airplane (since, at that point, the airline was willing to let both passengers fly), so no compensation is warranted, AFAIK.

 

[CarolA]

Having been in this position. I am only willing to fly if the airline gives me what I paid for... A FULL seat with the armrest down. After my one AA experience I did stand my ground on another flight. I got up before the boarding door was closed and said that I wanted to be moved to a different seat. Talk about a tizzy... they kept trying to convince me to take my "half" seat. I made sure we were well out of the way and attempted not to embarrass the passenger, but..... I was upgraded and moved to first class. However, when they said "you can take a later flight" I asked for denied boarding compensation.. The gate agent just hemmed and hawed... I had no intention of getting off the plane and had not intention of taking that seat. I suppose if security had been called I might have done something, but since I was very polite and just kept saying "Do you want to fly three hours this way?" they really were stuck.

 

[jultomzach]

My comment about addressing the issue at the ticketing process simply meant there needs to be a question about the size/weight of the passenger at the point of ticketing, this could be done electronically.

 

[Disneyjosh229]

Bottom Line Is,

If you know that your too large for the seat you are sitting in (using extentions, etc..) you need to get 2 seats at the time of purchase. Dont be rude and inconsiderate of the person sitting next to you (regardless of who it is) just to save money. You shouldn't infringe on the rights of another person, just because you choose to be overweight.

As far as the gate agent goes...

Rules are Rules. They were just doing their job. Some policeman will pull you over for 5 over, some won't. Either way, your speeding, so why don't you get pulled over 100% of the time? Its called "JUDGEMENT!". If you are doing 5 over in a residencial area, you are much more likely to be pulled over, then on a freeway. Possibly the op "looked" larger then she was on the way from MCO, because of clothes or other factors...

I agree with the other poster, often times these stories get "bluffed" up to something they totally were not.

 

[inkkognito]

While I fully agree with SW's policy because I refuse to "share" my seat, I think it's insane that they would make you pay for another seat on a flight that wasn't even close to being full! In that case, it's pretty much obvious that you will be able to sit with your family members. The rule is a fair one, but it should be applied with common sense.

Interestingly enough, it's not always weight alone that determines whether you will encroach on the seat next to you. On a recent SW flight, I sat next to a woman who wasn't a lightweight but wasn't huge either (maybe a bit heavier than me; I can stand to lose 30-40 pounds). While her upper body didn't spill over, I could feel her hips/butt under the armrest. It wasn't to be point where I was uncomfortable or felt like she was taking up my space, but I found it interesting that body weight distribution can play such a big role.

Barb

 

[Mykelogan]

As someone on the larger sized end of "Pooh sized", I must say that I fly Southwest all of the time because they do make their policy public. I would much rather book two seats for myself during the trip planning process than be on a plane, encroaching on the person next to me to the point that they have to complain for the airline to ask me to purchase the second seat. I plan my flights at off peak times so that I am pretty sure that I will get the refund, and have gotten it every time. Even if I did not, many times two tix on Southwest are cheaper than one on many other airlines. I do empathize with the OP as I feel the GA could have been more tactful in their discussion.

I have found that the SW staff is 99% of the time friendly, discrete and accomodating. The first time I flew SW I did see the nervous look on the employees face when approached the check in desk. Before the person could say anything I handed them my idea and said, "I have booked two seats for myself per the Customer of Size policy." I did see relief on the person at that point as I am sure it is not easy to have to enforce the policy. I respect the people that actually do enforce it and feel like it is the SW staff that lets the policy slide that causes most of these problems. During each of my trips this year, to a person, each member of the SW staff I interacted with made sure I knew that the flights I was getting on were not full and that I should apply for my refund. One gate attendant I was chatting with actually said thank you to me for following the policy and booking my seats ahead of time so that any awkward situations could be avoided for everyone. I appreciated that.

My butt takes up more than one seat (at the moment! LOL) so I think I should have to pay some kind of extra charge for that. I appreciate that SW makes it easy for me to get the second ticket refunded. I am amazed that most "regular" sized folks can fit in plane seats these days! They are getting tinier and tinier!

Just wanted to add a voice to the discussion!
Mike

 

[bicker]

And that's really the way it needs to be: Customers have to know what they're buying and comply with their side of the bargain. It isn't practical to adress the issue of larger passengers after they're already boarded. Given that Southwest prides itself on its on-time performance, and given that they deliberately set their flight schedules with very minimal time between arrive of one flight and departure of the next, to keep costs down, to better serve their customers' desire for low-fares, I don't think that's very practical.

Interesting disussion; nice chatting with y'all.

 

[DiscussDisney]

This is very interesting post. As a former "pooh-sized" person, I definitely feel for the OP...it brings back bad memories from my school days . The FA was definitely out of line on how she handled the situation...I mean, come on, dragging the other agent to see the "mistake" he/she made??? She definitely made it into an unnecessary spectacle, especially when she new the plane was empty! New or not, common sense needs to come into play here and she clearly had none. While I agree with the SW policy, it really only needs to be enforced if the plane is full.

 

[Mich Mouse]

While I fully agree with SW's policy because I refuse to "share" my seat, I think it's insane that they would make you pay for another seat on a flight that wasn't even close to being full! In that case, it's pretty much obvious that you will be able to sit with your family members. The rule is a fair one, but it should be applied with common sense

Barb

This is so well said.....The SW employee did not use any common sense!
I'm sorry that you were put in this situation, however, if you continue to fly with SW, I would hope you might consider just purchasing the extra seat. It is their policy, and I do agree with it. I do not agree with the way you were treated, however! If you fly JET BLUE, or another airline with guananteed seating with your family, your size will not cause anyone discomfort during the flight.