02-16-2010
08:28 PM
1 Love
Note to all: Read both blogs b4 commenting. I believed in what Kevin said and think that he's definitely fair. He didn't get booted b/c of his size b/c he fitted fine under SWA's own rule but b/c of a mistake by SWA employee(s). In this case, SWA's blog is wrong and indeed self-serving. SWA, if you don't apologize, correct the blog and state the facts, then don't brag about being customer service oriented again, ever.
For those that are not fat due to medical condition(s) and believe that "I am fat, thus" -> Airlines' seat must be bigger, cars must be bigger, chairs must be bigger the 'world' should be bigger ... I say 'no', you are the problem and you should be thiner! Here, I have a better idea, stop complaining and start your own airline. Call it FatA** Air. I want to see how many of you can all fit into one plane and how much each ticket will cost for your airline to turn profitable.
For those that irrationally just sold their SWA stocks, I say 'thank you'!!! I just bought the stocks you sold!!!
For those that vow not to fly SWA again and go United. I am sorry to tell you that economy seats on United (and most traditional US airliners) are even smaller than SWA. But hey, there's always Business and First Class!!! I am sure you can afford that all the time from here on out.
I am a frequent United customer. Do you know United charges $175 for an overweight luggage? So, for some of you that suggested the airfare should be charged based on weight, how cool would this be?
I agree that the rule is vaguely written. I think it should be crystal clear and we should have a 'flab meter' seat in front of each gate for people with questionable size to sit and see if they fit or not. Or, how about a dimensional scanner to precisely measure your 'girth' down to the millimeters so there won't be a mistake whether you are 'too fat' or not. This way, we all can be sue-happy and make those blood sucking lawyers even richer!!! Yippee!!!
... View more