This issue is always controversial. What's fair, and what's not?

---------

Thursday December 13

Canadian Tribunal Rules Obesity Isn't a Disability
TORONTO (Reuters) - Obese Canadians cannot claim to be disabled because of their weight alone but airlines should consider offering extra seats to the obese, the Canadian Transportation Agency has ruled.

Linda McKay-Panos, a University of Calgary law professor, lodged a complaint against Air Canada for allegedly doing little to accommodate her obesity during a 1997 flight from Calgary to Ottawa.

``I could barely force myself into the seat. I was practically in tears,'' she said in a written complaint against Canada's largest airline. The 44-year-old professor suffers from Stein-Leventhal syndrome, an ovarian disease that causes obesity.

The Canadian agency heard more than a week's worth of evidence before ruling on Wednesday that obesity, as a general case, is not a disability under the Canada Transportation Act.

``No evidence was presented which would support the conclusion that obese persons necessarily experience participation restrictions in the context of the federal transportation network,'' the agency said.

The agency did say extra seats or reduced fares should be considered on an individual basis for obese passengers. Air Canada charges obese customers half the regular fare for a second seat.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/200...tribunal_1.html

I listened to an interview with Ms. McKay-Panos earlier this evening on CBC (As It Happens) ... she stated that since her original complaint against Air Canada was lodged in 1997 .. she has flown with "another Canadian airline, now defunct" .. and never had a problem -- was given seats to herself, and not once was she charged extra.

What accomodation do they make for very tall persons I wonder?



Doreen

From all my travels, sitting next to tall people makes you want to cry. I am not all that tall but my knees would hit the seat in front of me.

Thank goodness American Airlines and others have started pushing the seats back to give the clients more leg room. There is nothing worse than long flights where your knees are wedged into the seat in front of you.

and the announcer was debating this issue. He said that as far as he was concerned obesity was not a disability say like being a quad. Why, because we open our fridge and cause our own problems unlike people who end up in wheelchairs.
I was so ticked off. I was a nurse and worked in ER and let me tell you, many, many quad put themselves in that chair driving like idiots or doing dangerous stunts. We would never fail to provide them with healthcare or other needs such as ramps. Should each person of disability justify his or her injury or illness?
Maybe we should stop helping them!? I think not, and there would be pubic out cry if we did.

This is a very controversial topic. Like all true "controversial" issues - there are many sides.

A good service provider, would do just that - provide good service based on the individual needs of the clients. It shouldn't rest on a "classification" allotted to you by the government that determines whether you get good service. And if they can provide extra service to those who need it more power to them, if they can't then it shouldn't be presumed that they are just being stubborn or obstinate or crappy service providers. Many service providers spend a lot of time and energy balancing the needs of the many against the needs of the few. The resulting formula is often the basis of their customer service approach. Most companies would go out of business if they truly had 100% happy customers all the time.

I have RLS (Restless Leg Syndrome) and I often have an attack after being immobile for a period of time - airlines are the worst. I suppose I (and others like me) could require that exercise areas be set aside on an aircraft.... Would the other passengers mind paying for it?

Let's put the topic of assigning "disability" aside for a moment: An airline is a specialized travel service. Weight and size factor into everything on an aircraft - not just the passengers. I've seen luggage being tossed off because the aircraft was too heavy. I've been asked to change seats on an aircraft in order to more evenly distribute the weight - and I was 134 pounds at the time. If I weighted 184 then, I would have been insulted and felt discriminated against- but stilll asked to move all the same - because it wasn't about discrimination.

EVERYONE is restricted in how much luggage they bring and EVERYONE is charged extra for more pieces and if they're too heavy. Musicians must pay extra for another ticket if they choose to bring their instrument on board and put it in a seat and many do. The space you take up in the air is charged for by weight and cubic inch. There are so many restrictions in the air industry... we can't be too shocked and appalled when they don't always jump at the chance to accommodate passengers.

I always considered "comfort" to be something I give up when I fly - regardless of my weight. I give up a lot of regular "rights" and "freedoms" when I fly. So do all the passengers. If I want true comfort, I'd charter my own Lear.

I travel a lot and see passengers given extra space when extra space exists to be given. When it's not there, it's not there - period. If all the seats are filled, then all the seats are filled. What is the expectation here?

I'm just saying that accessibility is something that is easily arranged in some venues and more difficult to arrange in others. And what appears to be discrimination based on handicap or poor customer service isn't always so.

PS if anybody is going to jump all over me for this post, be sure you read the WHOLE thing first.

Well said LC.

Very nice response.