quote:

Should your grandchildren flying kick other passengers off the plane?

The fact is thatSouthwest admitted that they are in the wrong and they they should have asked for volunteers to take the next plane instead of odrering a passenger to get off the plane.

And for you to take the qoute out of context is dishonest tad...

I do not agree that Tad took that quote out of context. I had the same reaction when I read it.

In the accounts I read, Southwest they could have handled the situation more diplomatically -- and I assume with the bumped passenger when she became belligerent. I agree. IMO they should have taken her to a private area and offered her a free ticket for her trouble, the same as they would for any volunteer. But they have not said they were wrong in keeping the child aboard and they said they did not ask for volunteers to avoid further embarrassment to the child.

I think that's quite sensitive and I applaud Southwest. The woman was flying on business, got home 15 minutes late and she could have cared less about the price of the ticket...most likely her company paid for it.

Peachy

Southwest has procedures in place regarding over booking and the flight crew failed to follow those procedures. And they did it not for the benefit of the child but simply to save time so that they would not be late.
It was wrong to do that to any passenger. They have to ask for a volenteer

quote:

Originally posted by Avenging Peach:

quote:

Should your grandchildren flying kick other passengers off the plane?

The fact is thatSouthwest admitted that they are in the wrong and they they should have asked for volunteers to take the next plane instead of odrering a passenger to get off the plane.

And for you to take the qoute out of context is dishonest tad...

I do not agree that Tad took that quote out of context. I had the same reaction when I read it.

In the accounts I read, Southwest they could have handled the situation more diplomatically -- and I assume with the bumped passenger when she became belligerent. I agree. IMO they should have taken her to a private area and offered her a free ticket for her trouble, the same as they would for any volunteer. But they have not said they were wrong in keeping the child aboard and they said they did not ask for volunteers to avoid further embarrassment to the child.

I think that's quite sensitive and I applaud Southwest. The woman was flying on business, got home 15 minutes late and she could have cared less about the price of the ticket...most likely her company paid for it.

Peachy

quote:

Originally posted by BullDoug:

quote:

Airline seats are way too small.

quote:

As I'm sure you know, weight alone won't give you the answer. Perhaps the passengers should be tested with calipers?

Shoulder to Shoulder I am significantly wider than the current coach seats. That has nothing to do with weight. Sitting next to a man of the same build we can't sit back in our seats. Both of us have to turn sideways. It is very uncomfortable.

I would be willing to pay more for a slightly wider seat but that isn't done until one flys business class or better. At times they have offered coach plus seats with more leg room but not wider.

Should I be penalized for being born big?

Southwest clearly states when their policy for "of size" passengers kicks in and offers several examples of when it wouldn't:

---

• The armrest is the definitive gauge for a Customer of size. It serves as the boundary between seats and measures 17 inches in width. Customers who are unable to lower both armrests and/or who compromise any portion of adjacent seating should proactively book the number of seats needed prior to travel. ...
  
  
• ...Our policy does not focus on weight, and the seatbelt extension is not the determining factor. We use the ability to lower the armrests as the gauge, as the armrests are truly the definitive boundary between each seat.
  
  
• ... If a Customer cannot lower the armrest (and is unable to comfortably travel with it in the down position), he/she is required to pay for the additional seat occupied. Again, we will offer a refund if the flight does not oversell.
  
  
• ... if a Customer cannot lower the armrests, the additional purchase is necessary. Simply having broad shoulders would not necessarily prevent another Customer from occupying adjoining seat. The upper body can be adjusted, but the portion of the body in the actual seating and armrest area doesn’t have this flexibility.
  
  Source

  ---

  
  

Because of Southwest's policy, I'm not only sure the child's Las Vegas-to-Sacramento flight was a connecting flight, but it also can be reasonably determined the child's first flight of the day was not on Southwest... if it had been, the child would've been sold a second seat when she checked in on the first Southwest flight and sold a second seat on all subsequent Southwest flights.

*CJ

quote:

Should your grandchildren flying kick other passengers off the plane?

Yes, and if someone else's child was stranded and scared in a strange city, I should be kicked off the plane. I don't mean to single out my grandchildren -- I'm glad you're not in a position to affect the lives of any children.

Ans you are miss information.

quote:

Originally posted by The Queen:
Captain Obvious to the rescue... he has all the answers.

And who are you to judge that?
A personal attack from a moderator???

quote:

Originally posted by TheOldMole:

quote:

Should your grandchildren flying kick other passengers off the plane?

I'm glad you're not in a position to affect the lives of any children.

quote:

Originally posted by Whyisit:
Southwest has procedures in place regarding over booking and the flight crew failed to follow those procedures. And they did it not for the benefit of the child but simply to save time so that they would not be late.
It was wrong to do that to any passenger. They have to ask for a volenteer

Whyisit...

Southwest has admitted no such thing. This is what Southwest has said in their press releases:

quote:

Southwest Airlines acknowledged it should have managed an "awkward" situation more carefully but stressed that the obese passenger was a child travelling alone.

The usual policy is to ask for a volunteer to give up a seat but the girl was already embarrassed and the cabin crew wanted to sort out the problem quickly.

"Normally, if the passenger were an adult, she would be required to purchase an extra ticket but we did not want to leave the 14-year-old stranded," said an airline spokesman.

Source

Southwest spokeswoman Marilee McInnis acknowledged to the Bee the airline could have managed the incident more carefully. "We know this was awkward and we should have handled it better," she tells the paper.

Still, Southwest spokesman Paul Flannigan tells The 33 News of Dallas/Fort Worth that extenuating circumstances made the situation difficult.

"The passenger in question was a minor who was traveling alone," Flannigan tells the station. "Normally if the passenger were an adult, she would be required to purchase an extra ticket, but we did not want to leave the 14-year-old stranded."

McInnis adds to the Bee that the airline's staff also may have been reluctant to put the teenage girl into a possibly embarrassing situation.

Source

Peachy

quote:

Originally posted by Whyisit:
Southwest has procedures in place regarding over booking and the flight crew failed to follow those procedures. And they did it not for the benefit of the child but simply to save time so that they would not be late.
It was wrong to do that to any passenger. They have to ask for a volenteer

I believe we all agree that Southwest should have asked for volunteers first; they've apologized for this and tried to make financial amends to the bumped passenger.

However, if no volunteers had presented themselves for voluntary bumping, the woman who was bumped would have been bumped anyway.

What is not being agreed upon is that YOU seem to believe the CHILD should've been bumped because she was "late" to the gate, and apparently no one else here agrees that that should have been Southwest's course of action.

*CJ

quote:

I believe we all agree that Southwest should have asked for volunteers first; they've apologized for this and tried to make financial amends to the bumped passenger.

However, if no volunteers had presented themselves for voluntary bumping, the woman who was bumped would have been bumped anyway.

What is not being agreed upon is that YOU seem to believe the CHILD should've been bumped because she was "late" to the gate, and apparently no one else here agrees that that should have been Southwest's course of action.

*CJ

I'd like to add that Southwest does not agree that the child should have been bumped as Whyisit implies and they are quite clear on why they did not ask for volunteers which makes perfect sense to me.

Peachy

quote:

originally posted by Whyisit:
... And they did it not for the benefit of the child but simply to save time so that they would not be late. ...

That's an assumption on your part, and there's no proof this was Southwest's reasoning whatsoever; and it's an assumption that will remain unfounded until such time as we know how "late" the child was and when the plane actually departed.

In the mean time, you seem to saying that Southwest's actions were wrong -and- stemmed from the wrong motives (not delaying the flight's departure)... IOW you want Southwest to have denied boarding to the 14-yo and let the last-minute passenger fly.

The rest of us agree that Southwest's actions were wrong (they should've asked for volunteers first), but they stemmed from valid reasons (not embarrassing a minor child)... IOW, the child should fly no matter what, and if no passengers volunteered for voluntary bumping, then the passenger purchasing the last ticket on the flight should have been involuntarily bumped.

*CJ

I'm not a moderator and haven't been for some time. I don't disagree that Southwest could have handled the situation better. I'm guessing there are many such situations that many businesses could handle better. You make mistakes, and you learn from them. But I don't believe that letting a child be stranded in a strange city would have been a better situation, and while I have no desire to start a flame war, I hope that people who believe this -- and I know there are many, and in or out of context, it's the same point -- are not the ones making decisions that will affect children. I know, however, that many of them are.

quote:

What is not being agreed upon is that YOU seem to believe the CHILD should've been bumped because she was "late" to the gate, and apparently no one else here agrees that that should have been Southwest's course of action.

I prefer flying Southwest.

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Laszlo:

quote:

What is not being agreed upon is that YOU seem to believe the CHILD should've been bumped because she was "late" to the gate, and apparently no one else here agrees that that should have been Southwest's course of action.

I prefer flying Southwest.

Could you clarify...?

Are you agreeing the child should have been bumped in lieu of "an" adult passenger, thus stranding her in a strange city overnight w/out a parent/legal guardian?

*CJ

LD--

I hear and appreciate your concerns over my stand on obesity.

If you saw, every day, what it does to people, young people, maybe you'd more clearly understand my stridency. Obesity robs people of their true potential. It destroys motivation, will, personalities. I have seen it, and it makes me both angry and sad.

It's not okay to let your kids be fat. Period. They will pay for it in their futures, and so will I, and the *I* part of the equation is what concerns me.

I want your (the generic your) kids to lead healthy lives. Obesity won't allow that. Life itself offers enough challenges without those which can be eliminated.

I don't have kids, so I have no dog in this fight, but I care for kids who will grow up and have to deal with this, both personally and financially, when the fat hits the fan.

No public insurance policy can deal with the destruction that an obese society will create. It's just not feasible.

I disagree with a lot of what Lynne says about obese people, including her first post in this thread, but I mostly agree with this. It's not that simple, but she's not wrong.

I agree that nobody seems to agree with Whyisit.

quote:

I hear and appreciate your concerns over my stand on obesity.

If you saw, every day, what it does to people, young people, maybe you'd more clearly understand my stridency. Obesity robs people of their true potential. It destroys motivation, will, personalities. I have seen it, and it makes me both angry and sad.

It's not okay to let your kids be fat. Period. They will pay for it in their futures, and so will I, and the *I* part of the equation is what concerns me.

I want your (the generic your) kids to lead healthy lives. Obesity won't allow that. Life itself offers enough challenges without those which can be eliminated.

I don't have kids, so I have no dog in this fight, but I care for kids who will grow up and have to deal with this, both personally and financially, when the fat hits the fan.

No public insurance policy can deal with the destruction that an obese society will create. It's just not feasible.

Good post. I agree with what you're saying here. You just lose me when you start in on how slothful, piggish, lazy, etc. fat people are. It may be because you're passionate on the subject -- and that's a good thing -- but it just seems cruel. And if it doesn't move things forward, then it seems pointless as well.

I don't understand eating problems in children and it's a subject that pains me greatly.

I loved most foods, ate everything and was tall and skinny as a rail. All of my food was homemade. Never had junk food except for popcorn and coca cola at the movies.

I was also an active kid. But as an adult I had to diet constantly....Because I loved to cook and eat. I am lucky because I like so many things that diet regimens work for me as well.

My youngest son ate voraciously, both as an infant and a little boy.

He began to eat things he shouldn't as a toddler. Once he opened a child proof cabinet, got the "Janitor in a Drum," poured it on a hotdog bun and ate it. I had to have his stomach pumped twice and I kept Ipecac on hand at all times.

My older son was a finicky eater. As a baby he didn't even nurse vigorously or wake for feedings and I gave up breast feeding him.

I had pretty much eliminated snacks, in hopes of getting him to eat his supper but the pediatrician said to give the younger one, who was a healthy eater, snacks to stop him from snacking on the cleaning supplies, the pet food and the vitamins.

Naturally, the younger son, the good eater, began to put on some pounds just before puberty. I think this is normal. The picky eater was thinner.

To me, feeding people is a way of showing love and the younger son loved everything I cooked. One day he got off the school bus crying. He wouldn't say why but when we sat down to dinner, he didn't want much to eat. He cried and told me "Nobody's ever gonna call me blubber again."

He said he wanted to go on a diet. I assure you, my kids knew what DIET meant because I was on one at least half the time. He said he wanted salads. So I made him salads. The rest of us were passing the gravy and he would not waver. He wasn't anorexic. I was proud of his discipline. Of course he slimmed down during his growing spurt. He became active in the marching band, a drum corps (many parades) and soccer and ultimately was voted one of the handsomest boys in his senior class.

Today, he's the same. He's lucky because he likes all foods. He goes to fitness boot camp several times a year. Loves food and cooking but practices moderation.

My older son, the problem eater is overweight and it concerns me greatly. It started as soon as he left for college, was out from under my roof and he was responsible for his own food choices...which was, I am sure, mostly pizza, French fries and cheesburgers. He and his wife eat out a lot and as you know, restaurants just pile the food on plates.

I often worry about whether we responded to him in the right way as parents. Meal time with him was always a struggle. Some have told me it can be a power or control issue with a kid.

Peachy

quote:

I don't understand eating problems in children and it's a subject that pains me greatly.

I think fast food is a huge problem. Probably not the only factor but definitely a big one. A while back I was looking at some youtube clips from day gone by, including some old Everly Brothers and the Turtles on "Where the Action Is" -- and it struck me how thin everyone was! And I was remembering how when I was in grade school and junior high, there were no fast food places. By the time I was in high school, yes, there was McDonald's, but although you might go there after school on occasion, the idea of actually eating something there just wasn't something we did, except maybe occasionally on weekends. And the menu items were all much smaller then too. If you were hungry after school, you mostly just waited till dinner. Or you got a snack at home. Those were your choices, and I don't recall thinking about it much. For kids these days, though, a pang of hunger can be almost instantly gratified. And fast food places are everywhere, including school cafeterias (although that's beginning to change).

Anyway, this is something I've been mostly oblivious to, but I did get to thinking about it when I was looking at those youtube clips.

quote:

You just lose me when you start in on how slothful, piggish, lazy, etc. fat people are.

Well, I think it's being fat that makes them that way.

It's a viscous cycle <wink>

I appreciate all your support, non-support and just plain thinking about this.

It's not something to mess with.

Kids who are fat don't outgrow it, usually. I swear, they don't. Don't be hoping for that.

Tell them, no, you can't have it.

In the end, better. Not so easy now, but in the end..

LD--

I got McDonalds once a week, on fridays, before my softball games.

Cheeseburger, fries, shake.

well ..everyone else having weighed in on this .. my take is:

if the kid was stranded .. getting her home was paramount .. the amount of space .. or ejecting the other passenger has to give way .. pontificating on any other issue involved in this tale is focusing on the "spin " ..and doing so isn't conducive to determining the facts of this .. or any issue ..

i too think fast-food has a lot to do with obese children .. but how do they get obese without mom and pop noticing it .. ?? then too .. i can't ever recall either a big town .. or almost the littlest of towns which didn't have a greasy spoon resturant .. or a local burger-joint drive-in.. but .. eating there was something everyone mostly did on week-ends .. not daily .. and certainly not all-daily ..

imo .. the food has changed as well .. today's hamburgers lack the same quality of flavor and ..hmmm.. good old greasiness they used to have .. anyone else remember when a burger would stain the sack it came in ?? lol

quote:

Well, I think it's being fat that makes them that way.

Well, that might be a reasonable stab at an explanation ... if they WERE that way. We've apparently had different experiences on this point. Is it not possible that when you see an overweight person, you think: "Ugh. What a piggish, lazy and slothful person!" And then, based on that, you conclude overweight people are piggish, lazy and slothful.

You were doing so well with your last post when you were talking about the costs of obesity. But now you're right back to the moral judgment -- which is a completely different issue. You don't need to judge overweight people and find them disgusting to think there's a health problem here that needs to be addressed.

quote:

It's not that simple, but she's not wrong.

If you're talking to me, Lynne, thank you.

It's not simple. It's gonna take some doing to fix--it's going to take a whole new way of life..

quote:

Kids who are fat don't outgrow it, usually. I swear, they don't. Don't be hoping for that.

Tell them, no, you can't have it.

In the end, better. Not so easy now, but in the end..

This too I don't disagree with. At all. It's the moral disgust I disagree with. It's just so unhelpful.