In 2012, Samoa Airways introduced a pricing scheme that charged passengers based on their weight. The company operates from Pacific islands that have some of the highest obesity rates in the world. Instead of charging for each seat, Samoa Airways started weighing passengers along with their luggage, and charging them a fee reflecting the total, depending on the length of the flight. In 2015, Uzbekistan Airways experimented with a similar pay-as-you-weigh pricing.
I debated the issue with myself.
Makes sense. Arguing in favor of charging passengers by weight is the fact that the heavier the object, the greater the amount of energy that is required to move it. For airlines that means the heavier the object, the more it costs to get the object from point A to point B.
No way. (pun intended) A primary argument against charging passengers by weight is that it is unfair and discriminates against larger people who, for purpose of argument, we will assume have little control over their weight.
While I’m not suggesting that airlines start basing ticket prices on weight, charging by weight has some appealing aspects and the discrimination argument seems invalid. It could be argued that not considering weight discriminates against smaller people who are subsidizing the cost of flying heavier people.
And discrimination is what airline pricing is all about. When I pay $200 for a ticket, I may be sitting next to someone who paid $1,000 for the same type of seat.
If airlines go to weight-based pricing, they could adopt one of three basic models:
- A straightforward price per kilogram or pound,
- A fixed fare with heavier passengers paying a surcharge, or
- A fee for people of average weight, with extra charges or discounts for people who weigh in above or below the limit.
Charging by weight builds in discounts for children. And as a general matter, women would not subsidize men.
Some airlines address the issue of weight together with the issue of space. Very large individuals have difficulty fitting in an economy class seat. So some airlines require passengers who are unable to lower their armrest or need seat belt extenders pay for two seats. Other airlines will charge very large passengers for a second seat only if there is no empty seat available for the person to be seated next to.
Forcing very large individuals to buy two seats is akin to the way airlines charge for cargo. The price for cargo is based on the greater of weight or volumetric weight, the objects volume times a standard factor. In this age of “cram as many onboard and provide as few services as possible,” the joke is that passengers are treated as self-loading cargo anyway.
What are your thoughts on this topic? Weigh in (ha ha) in the comments below.
All photos are from Samoa Airways
Some of pros and cons (mostly cons) and the pros only start being worth considering with including the luggage and hand baggage. And while we are at it, I wish airlines with follow their own rules about excessive carry-on luggage. Very frustrating to board a plane and find all the overhead bin storage taken with other’s people’s multiple and bulky items.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Total weight would be the only way the scheme could make sense. It seems airlines have given up on trying to enforce the rules for carry ons. Incidentally, were you directed to the post by another source? Thanks.
LikeLike
Link came via my inbox.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks.
LikeLike
I hope they try it. I would be the first in line to start the boycott. The average American woman is plus-size. It would be the end of the first airline that begins such blatant discriminatory practices.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I get that charging by weight would be unpopular. But why would it be discriminatory?
LikeLike
Great puns Salsa Traveler! Yes! I love it and it could mean that I’d almost be paying nothing for air travels because I weigh nada. Lol.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sounds fair to me.
LikeLike
Yaaasss
LikeLiked by 1 person
Charging by weight might be a great incentive for people to lose weight.
LikeLike
I hope so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So punny, I love it. It’s a tough question and there are arguments to make for either side. I’m not going to lie, I always groan when I’m seated next to someone who is extremely overweight. And don’t even get me started on people’s carry-on …
LikeLiked by 2 people
There are a lot of drawbacks to charging by weight. Still, it seems to be the “fairest” method to equate price to cost. Most people, including me, don’t object to requiring people who don’t fit in a seat to pay for two seats. That is in effect charging by weight/size.
LikeLiked by 2 people
If people need to take over a second seat..i think they should be charged extra .
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree. When I’ve flown economy on long distance routes, I’ve thought about buying two seats just for the comfort sitting next to an empty seat provides. Very large people will be much more comfortable buying two seats. And in a pandemic, space between passengers is important for everyone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes it is best to have a space between passengers..during this time.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I would completely support this; they already charge extra if your luggage is over a certain weight, not sure why it should be any different with people…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Charging by weight and size seems to make sense from an economic standpoint. I think airlines won’t do it. But if airlines ever impose a fee for carbon emissions, those fees should definitely be calculated by weight. A passengers emissions for a flight is totally dependent on their weight plus baggage weight.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t think there’s any chance the airlines would do this. The backlash would be through the roof. But I like your idea about charging the emissions fee by weight; a good compromise…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Charter operators that fly very small airplanes might be the only ones who would ever consider charging by weight, but I don’t know any that do so. In a small plane weight matters much more than in a commercial airliner. One passenger weighing 300 pounds could prevent filling all of the seats because of payload capacity and weigh and balance issues.
LikeLiked by 2 people
seems only fair to the airline if they cannot have as many paying passengers because some of the passengers are heavier than others
LikeLiked by 2 people
i think you look it from a stand of what it costs the airline in fuel primarily, and the more weight some one has – be it body weight or luggage, the more it costs. but at the same time some people are small and some are large, lets not talk about being ;overweight’ but a very tall person whos healthy could weigh twice as much as a healthy short person. or more.
in that respect it doesnt seem 100% fair. what you could consider is a total weight including passenger and luggage. just thoughts. but i doubt we’ll ever see this approach adopted widely
LikeLiked by 2 people
Fair is always in the eye of the beholder. 😄 Because it costs more to fly people who weigh more than it does to fly those who way less, smaller people subsidize larger ones. There is some unfairness there as well it seems. I totally agree that charging by weight is very unlikely to be adopted except by airlines or charter services that operate very small aircraft where weight and weight and balance issues are more significant than on jet airliners.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The weight issue is more germane for people’s luggage than their bodies (unless a person requires two seats for comfortable travel) Too many passengers hog overhead storage bins with huge backpacks and such that should be checked baggage instead. Of course weight is a valid concern for all modes of travel, especially aircraft.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Samoa Airways weighed people and their luggage together to arrive at one price. That would at least make people pay for it if they want to hog overhead bins.
LikeLiked by 1 person
♡ My View is that it’s Tough Enough for Larger Folk in Economy; yet Premium Economy, Business and, of course, Declining First Class tend to be OK for Larger Folk so I Suggest Discounting a Second Seat for Larger Folk
…♡♡♡…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Discounting a second seat for large people is a good idea.
LikeLiked by 2 people
An interesting question you pose. I can see both sides of the argument, but I lean toward charging the customers the same amount despite their weight differences. It’s easy to jump to the conclusion that people should control their weight if they are heavy, but many times their weight may not have anything to do with diet. I think once we begin to go down this road, we’re opening a whole can of worms. Should we have different prices on buses or Uber for different-sized people? It seems inevitable that someone will take this issue to court.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t see airlines switching to pricing airline tickets by passenger weight anytime soon. It would add additional complexity to already extremely complex airline pricing schemes. And there is the threat of lawsuits. Although weight is not a protected classification like race, sex, age, etc., it could be argued that there would be a disparate impact on groups more prone to obesity and disability could be an issue as you suggest. On the other hand, is it sex discrimination to not charge by weight because women are subsidizing the cost of flying men currently?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think that – with the current state of affairs and airlines struggling to even get people to fly at all….this is going to be a non-issue for a long time. They’re too happy with customers to risk offending any right now 🤣.
I always thought the two seat rule was fair though. If you can’t fit – you’re becoming a burden to the people sitting next to you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t see airlines making a change like this anytime soon either. The two seat rule is a form of pricing by volumetric weight. Thanks for providing your perspective.
LikeLiked by 1 person