Top

Why airlines should charge fat passengers more


Updated on 04 April 2013 | 20 Comments

As one academic looks at three different ways airlines could charge fat fliers more, Emma Lunn explains why she's a fan of the idea.

Last week saw a pay-as-you-weigh airline pricing scheme suggested by a Norwegian academic.

In the Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Dr Bharat P. Bhatta looked at how airlines could charge overweight fliers more.

It might sound like an idea that has fat chance of succeeding, but it makes sense. For airlines, every extra kilogram means more expensive jet fuel must be burned, which leads to CO2 emissions and financial cost.

And after all, passengers pay more when they have excess baggage, so why not if they’re carrying the excess weight themselves?

The proposals

Dr Bhatta put forward three ideas for pay-as-you-weigh pricing.

The first is a straightforward price per kilogram for both passengers and their luggage. A passenger’s luggage and body weight would be calculated, with the fare comprising a per kilo cost.

The second idea is a 'base fare' plus or minus an extra charge. Airlines would set a fixed low fare, with heavier passengers paying a surcharge and lighter passengers being offered a discount.

The professor's final suggestion is for passengers to have the same fare if they have an average weight, but this could be discounted for weights below a certain limit or added to for excess weight above it. This would result in high, average and low fares for each flight.

His suggestions received the backing of 48% of those questioned in a poll by the website Holiday Extras. 51% of men were in favour of overweight people paying more to fly, compared to 43% of women.

The case for the fat tax

One particular personal incident makes me think an airline 'fat tax' is a great idea. I was on the second leg of a long journey to Costa Rica (not that I’m one to name-drop exciting travel destinations, you understand) and was seated in the middle seat of a row of three.

My hopes of a relaxing journey were cruelly dashed when a very overweight American man headed for the seat next to me. “Can I move the armrest?” he asked - it was clearly impossible for him to sit down otherwise.

To this day I am at a loss as to why I just agreed and dutifully raised the armrest. The next four hours were spent grumpily squashed into half my seat, cursing my lack of assertion, while the fat man spilled over into my seat.

As well as spending the whole flight cramped and uncomfortable, I was angry. I’d paid almost £1,000 for a plane ticket yet had somehow ended up with half a seat. And as for health and safety, this guy wasn’t going anywhere in a hurry, even if the plane was on fire.

The fat issue

Passenger obesity has become a big issue for airlines over the past few years. Around 22% of Brits are now classed as obese, compared to 32% of Americans.

In simple terms, the heavier the flight the more fuel a plane needs. Supposedly that’s why passengers are charged for excess baggage, although obviously it’s a money-making exercise too.

Some airlines already have policies that require obese customers to pay more. US-based Southwest Airlines has a “Customers of Size” policy, which requires passengers to buy a second seat if they can't fit between the armrests. Southwest's seats measure 17 inches across.

Meanwhile Samoa Air charges travellers by weight. Rather than pay for a seat, passengers pay a fixed price per kilogram for the combined weight of themselves and their baggage. Exactly how much they’re charged depends on the route and its length.

Would a fat tax work?

In theory, making passengers who need more than one seat on a plane pay for an extra seat sounds like a good idea. But monitoring and implementing such a strategy is another issue altogether.

Essentially, judging people on weight rather than size is a flawed concept. If scales were introduced at the check-in desk it could result in some perfectly proportioned people being accused of being overweight.

The most widely recognised way to calculate whether someone is over or under-weight is body mass index (BMI).

Your BMI is calculated by dividing your weight in kilograms by your height in metres squared. The trouble is BMI doesn’t take muscle mass and body-fat percentage into account. According to BMI calculations former England rugby player Jonny Wilkinson was overweight when he was at his prime.

Measuring someone’s waist circumference would be a much better way to assess passengers rather than simply making them get on the scales. Or airlines could simply see if a passenger fits in a single seat - and make them buy another seat if they don’t.

What do you think? Should larger people pay more for their airline seat? Let us know your thoughts in the comment box below.

More on travel:

What you need for a perfect holiday

The best debit cards to use on your travels

New rights for airline passengers

Pound falling against many holiday currencies

Most Recent


Comments



  • 09 June 2013

    I agree with an extra charge! I was seated next to an extremely large man on an 11.5hr flight to LA,non stop on Virgin.... for take off and landing he had to be moved because he cudn't do his seat belt up with the extension they use! And come meal times he couldn't use his tray.. and then to top it all his waist/stomach etc was spilling ova the arm rest so much i lost half my seat!! Not to mention his excessive sweating throughout the flight!! If we had had to have left the plane in an emergency i would have been extremely scared!!! I have travelled with budget airlines too and had to repack my case so that my partner and i could distribute the weight,even though the total added up the same,or pay the extortionate excess charges,which would have cost more then the entire holiday!!! So i agree.. maybe it would also start making them think about their health too as flying can cause health issues for anyone.. so why add to it.....

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 23 May 2013

    If we take a 3Kg parcel to the Post Office it costs us more to post than a 2Kg parcel, it's common sense. So why shouldn't the airlines charge based on the cost of the service they are providing. I would hope if the charge by weight scheme was implemented it would be charged per sector. My recent return from a cruise would mean the return journey could be more expensive than the outward leg due to a predictable increase in weight!!

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 10 April 2013

    [I]3. Would the EU human rights acts stick a spanner in the works?[/I] I still have the svelte figure of my youth, and I do not find people with fat bodies offensive. I am though annoyed by people with fat mouths who want to hand away everybody else's human rights, who are too ignorant to know that the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms has nothing to do with the EU. (You can be sure though that no country who has not signed the Convention will be allowed into the EU.) It is ridiculous. You don't charge a fat person a double fare for taking up two seats on a bus. The air companies are supposed to be providing a service, and it is up to them to provide facilities for their passengers, whatever shapes and sized they come in. Are they going to charge a pregnant woman for being overweight? It's just not right.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

Do you want to comment on this article? You need to be signed in for this feature

Most Popular

Copyright © lovemoney.com All rights reserved.

 

loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) with Firm Reference Number (FRN): 479153.

loveMONEY.com is a company registered in England & Wales (Company Number: 7406028) with its registered address at First Floor Ridgeland House, 15 Carfax, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1DY, United Kingdom. loveMONEY.com Limited operates under the trading name of loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited. We operate as a credit broker for consumer credit and do not lend directly. Our company maintains relationships with various affiliates and lenders, which we may promote within our editorial content in emails and on featured partner pages through affiliate links. Please note, that we may receive commission payments from some of the product and service providers featured on our website. In line with Consumer Duty regulations, we assess our partners to ensure they offer fair value, are transparent, and cater to the needs of all customers, including vulnerable groups. We continuously review our practices to ensure compliance with these standards. While we make every effort to ensure the accuracy and currency of our editorial content, users should independently verify information with their chosen product or service provider. This can be done by reviewing the product landing page information and the terms and conditions associated with the product. If you are uncertain whether a product is suitable, we strongly recommend seeking advice from a regulated independent financial advisor before applying for the products.