Ski boots - hand baggage or checked in

Grrrrr. Surely they realise that people will simply adapt rather than give them money?

As for standing up in court - who knows. They seem to be able to set whatever rules they like.

Smokey Barr wrote:

pauljames wrote:why cant i have the same sum of weight to MrX who is 6'4" and 100kg without any bags?

I've been challenging this for years. If airlines are so particular about weigh, a passenger's weight should be taken into consideration, for the very reasons you've stated. It is of course though a massive money spinner…

I'd love to know, if someone took it that far, how the argument would stand up in court.

I agree! I was checking in some years ago with a companion who was 5'2" and as light as a feather. Her bags were overweight, and she kicked up a fuss - the check in supervisor let her through, saying something along the lines of - you are right, but don't tell anyone.

To be honest in today's world there is no way that the airlines could have a policy based on a person's weight. They'd be trashed in court because of possible connections to disability legislation etc and potential claims of discrimination.

I agree! I was checking in some years ago with a companion who was 5'2" and as light as a feather. Her bags were overweight, and she kicked up a fuss - the check in supervisor let her through, saying something along the lines of - you are right, but don't tell anyone.

I think as with most things of this nature, it generally comes down to the discretion of the check-in staff, or whoever you're dealing with, and your own powers of persuasion and perseverance.

I generally find the crazier the rule, the easier it is to bend.

I can see the point of a large person having a much greater effect on the weight of the aircraft. However a tall person cannot help weighing more than I (a short person) do. It is unfair to single someone out because they are tall. Then you're onto whether someone can help being fat. Do we calculate a person's BMI at the check in desk?

Mekka wrote:I can see the point of a large person having a much greater effect on the weight of the aircraft. However a tall person cannot help weighing more than I (a short person) do. It is unfair to single someone out because they are tall. Then you're onto whether someone can help being fat. Do we calculate a person's BMI at the check in desk?

At the end of the day this all boils down to the cost of fuel. I don't think the issue is with people who are skinny, fat, tall or short, it's the baggage allowance given to people of differing weight. It's hardly fair that someone who weighs 40 kgs is penalised for having a bag weighing 30 kgs, where as another passenger weighting 80 kgs is fine with a bag weighing 15 kgs.

Planes could take off with every passenger weighing 20 stone but it would cost them a hell of a lot more in fuel. Airlines know as well as you and I that they can not charge extra for people over a certain weigh, so they slap that cost onto excess baggage. And given the nature of their kit, skiers seem to be an easy target.

Ho hum ......
Look what I just found - If you're planning to book a flight with Air France next month you better watch your weight. Starting from the 1st of April 2010, people who are too big to squeeze into their seats will have to pay for two seats instead – calling it 'Fat Tax'.
United airlines and Southwestern airlines in US are also reported as charging for two seats.

and all we wanted was to know whether to carry ski boots or stick them in the hold :shock:

I really must get on with work !!

I have no problem with someone who cannot fit into 1 seat having to pay for 2. Why should I have my seat encroached by someone who can't fit?

I heard of a case years ago where someone suffered this and developed DVT. I can't remember the specifics but the airline refused to move her as the flight was full.