BA being sued over legroom

Interesting report in the papers today which clould have consequenses to VS and other airlines.

A 6 feet 3 inch tall man is suing BA claiming it brerached his Human Rights by failing to give him enough legroom on lang haul flights he took.
He is claiming that the airlines failure to honour his requests for extra space infringes his rights under EU law.

This precedent seems to have been set on a 29" pitch not sure if it holds for 31"

He's just lost his case

wow I couldn't find the appeal do you have the link?

No link sorry, it was on radio 2 news at 2.00pm

what today[?] wow that is current

[Pete]

I think the most interesting thing from the link posted above is the last line: "A senior aviation industry figure said: 'We can give all passengers 34in, but they would have to pay for it.'"

Pix

I noticed that too..
some carriers already have 34" though ANZ for one..
their prices arent that different from 31" carriers..they are often cheaper.

I surprised knowing the usual level of comments on here no-ones made any extra 3" comments;)

Hi,

OK here goes;

A few inches do make all the difference.

[Comparing the VS suite with the NCW seat] ( what did you think i meant??[}:)]

Regards

TBS

quote:Originally posted by The_Banking_Scot
Hi,

OK here goes;

A few inches do make all the difference.

and my bet was on mcuth!:D not TBS!!!

quote:Originally posted by Jonathan
and my bet was on mcuth!:D not TBS!!!

Sorry - been too busy sleeping today, these painkillers are really knocking me out [:(]

Cheers

Michael

*considers viagra joke...reconsiders*

I'm getting old

they're a bunch of cynics over on airliners.net, they keep saying "if he wanted extra legroom, then he should have paid for it"

ain't too many pensioners who can afford a plane ticket, let alone permium economy.

(although VS could jump on the bandwagon and say that wolling out across the fleet will be greater legroom in economy)

quote:Originally posted by Blythy
they're a bunch of cynics over on airliners.net, they keep saying "if he wanted extra legroom, then he should have paid for it"

Up to a point, I agree with them. Seat pitches have had a lot of focus in recent years, and they're either common knowledge or only take a minimum of research to find them out. When you're buying a car, do you do your research and find the one that best suits your needs, or do you buy the first/cheapest one you see and then sue the manufacturer for not providing enough room in it and "breaching your human rights" (OMG, I hate that phrase, it's used far too much these days)? [:0]

Personally, as a 6'2" & ~280lbs traveller, I try not to fly Economy because of the seat pitch/width - but I know what I'll be getting if I do buy a ticket in that class of travel. If that doesn't suit me, then I either pay for a more suitable class of travel or fly a different airline.

All that said, I do think that the aviation authorities should revise their minimum seat pitch rules - people in general have obviously got a lot larger (both in height and girth) since the rules were introduced (last century? A 26" pitch? [:0]). Unfortunately, whether by higher fares or reduced availability of cheaper tickets, that cost will only be passed on to the passenger.

Cheers

Michael

quote:Originally posted by mcuth
and "breaching your human rights" (OMG, I hate that phrase, it's used far too much these days)? [:0]

Yes, and few people have any idea what human rights are and what they involve; they're far too quick to pronounce "i have my rights". Pet peeve that one!

quote:
people in general have obviously got a lot larger (both in height and girth) since the rules were introduced (last century? A 26" pitch? [:0])

I think the 26" pitch, mandated by the CAA, is measured differently from the general accepted method. The usual method is from one point of a seat to the identical point on the seat behind, while the CAA method is from the inside of the seat (where you touch the seat), slightly diagonally upwards to the seat in front. So, you must add on the thickness of the seat to get an equivalent figure. Upshot is, it equates to about 28" minimum.

Virgin would have a serious competitve edge over BA if it was to increase legroom in economy by a couple of inches.

Onionz - I getcha on the measurement method, but still, 28" isn't really a lot is it? [V]

Blythy - yes they would, but again, your average customer would have to pay for it either by reducing the availability of cheaper ticket classes or increasing the price across the board.

Cheers

Michael

I always feel the "remove seats and the price will rise" argument is spurious.
On this forum we all know that there is a sliding scale of seat prices dependant upon demand and seat availability. Sure, any airline would love to charge premium prices for their seats, but that's not the real world.
The problem is that Virgin is too damned popular especially on the direct B & S routes, which are a cattle class and cattle class mentality of paying for seats. If the B & S routes could not be filled in econ due to seat pitch, VS would follow American etc and increase the pitch, but the majority flying those routes in Cattle class want the cheapest direct flights regardless. Why else would they fly British Airways (ROFL!)
Personally, if I had to fly Economy transatlantic, I would not fly either BA or Virgin, as a 6ft 1" guy with 31" leg length, eight hours in a 31" seat pitch would turn me into an air rage candidate!

[HighFlyer]

I guess at the end of the day its easier said than done isnt it? And many of us here can actually appreciate this.

Id love to see an extra 2/3 inches in Y, although i wouldnt still travel in Y over W. However, i do appreciate that for an airline such as VS, changing the Y seat pitch in all of their aircraft would cost a fortune, and while people are still willing to pay for it they will not change.

We are already seeing an increase in W tickets and pax wanting more room - and paying for it, so things are changing. But the bottom line is that while people are still buying tickets for Y, it wont change. And if people do not like travelling in Y, they shouldnt. Im not intending that to sound mean, i took the decision to not travel in Y long-haul anymore because i feel that my health and comfort are more important than saving a few quid. Yes it costs me more, and i dont fly as much as i could do (or used to) but at least i no longer dread my flights, i positively look forward to them.

I find Y has loads of room

Yeah there are some advantages in being short!:D

quote:Originally posted by mcuth
Onionz - I getcha on the measurement method, but still, 28" isn't really a lot is it? [V]

You're right, it's not. Legroom is a strange one. To me it seems obvious that if you have the money and if you're taller than average, you'd definitely stump up the readies for more comfort. But i have a 6'1" friend who reckons higher cabins are a complete waste of money, and he's experienced a fair few squashed economy flights. Whereas, i don't need the legroom, but i'd definitely stump up the cash (of course you're not just paying for legroom, it's the service thats the main draw for me). Each to their own, on this one.

To backup mcuth's point on pricing, i do recall reading that AA reduced the availabilty of the lower bucket classes when introducing MRTC. They have to balance the books somehow!

Back on this topic, i have no sympathy for people who book economy then complain about space. Everyone can easily obtain details of seat pitch these days, and if it's not acceptable, don't fly - it's not compulsory.

Yep couldnt agree more about leg room it would be nice to have a couple of more inches in econ and i'd be more than happy to pay for it but i prefer to travel in PE as i find its more of a personal service.

Cheers

Phil