I read a commentary this week written by Matt Brownell at Daily Finance, reporting on Samoa Air, a small airline in the South Pacific that is now weighing passengers and their baggage to determine the cost of their price tag. Per kilogram, you may pay $one or up to $4.16, depending on the length of your flight. This is most fascinating as Samoa contains a high rate of obesity.
The airline’s website is taking this tack: “We at Samoa Air are keeping airfares truthful, by charging our passengers only for what they weigh. Your weight plus your baggage things, is what you get. Simple.” In an interview, the airline’s CEO took an analogous stance: “there aren't any extra fees in term of excess baggage or anything – it is just a kilo is a kilo may be a kilo.”
Although this school of thought holds a basic truth, the underlying controversies are several. With the aspects of discrimination that begin to surface when contemplating this for a while, it seems doubtful that such a observe would take hold within the U.S. Remember the hassle Southwest got into when they told an obese passenger she had to buy two seats? As it seems, she flew part of her trip, as planned, but was told when re-boarding after a layover that she would need to purchase a second seat. Her argument was with the inconsistency, not being told at the time of purchase and therefore the embarrassing lack of privacy during the incident. If a private can’t match into one seat while not infringing on co-passengers, then it is sensible to acquire a further seat, but in an exceedingly dignified manner. Otherwise; it’s a flawed policy.
What if you happen to be extremely tall? Or pregnant? Or you have a debilitating medical condition, over that you've got absolutely no management that causes you to be overweight? Such thoughts must not have occurred to the airline after they began touting the claim “you choose how abundant (or little) your ticket can value”.
If the airline is thinking their plan can get travelers to lose weight, they'll wish to reconsider. Individuals who battle problems with obesity would like education, inspiration and support from their loved ones and their communities. For a business to focus their financial structure on a private’s weight appears to require us back a step in cultural progress. This way of thinking is morally and socially wrong. Any airline within the U.S. that would adopt this policy ought to be boycotted by all of us, in unison: “A seat may be a seat could be a seat!” This is one plan that should never have gotten off the ground.
source: http://blog.smartforlife.com/
The airline’s website is taking this tack: “We at Samoa Air are keeping airfares truthful, by charging our passengers only for what they weigh. Your weight plus your baggage things, is what you get. Simple.” In an interview, the airline’s CEO took an analogous stance: “there aren't any extra fees in term of excess baggage or anything – it is just a kilo is a kilo may be a kilo.”
Although this school of thought holds a basic truth, the underlying controversies are several. With the aspects of discrimination that begin to surface when contemplating this for a while, it seems doubtful that such a observe would take hold within the U.S. Remember the hassle Southwest got into when they told an obese passenger she had to buy two seats? As it seems, she flew part of her trip, as planned, but was told when re-boarding after a layover that she would need to purchase a second seat. Her argument was with the inconsistency, not being told at the time of purchase and therefore the embarrassing lack of privacy during the incident. If a private can’t match into one seat while not infringing on co-passengers, then it is sensible to acquire a further seat, but in an exceedingly dignified manner. Otherwise; it’s a flawed policy.
What if you happen to be extremely tall? Or pregnant? Or you have a debilitating medical condition, over that you've got absolutely no management that causes you to be overweight? Such thoughts must not have occurred to the airline after they began touting the claim “you choose how abundant (or little) your ticket can value”.
If the airline is thinking their plan can get travelers to lose weight, they'll wish to reconsider. Individuals who battle problems with obesity would like education, inspiration and support from their loved ones and their communities. For a business to focus their financial structure on a private’s weight appears to require us back a step in cultural progress. This way of thinking is morally and socially wrong. Any airline within the U.S. that would adopt this policy ought to be boycotted by all of us, in unison: “A seat may be a seat could be a seat!” This is one plan that should never have gotten off the ground.
source: http://blog.smartforlife.com/
0 comments: