IT IS INDEED A SLIPPERY SLOPE Somebody will pay for the seat

Posted on 04/26/2016 | About Canada

Delta Airlines' practice of bumping obese travellers or making them buy two seats is discriminatory and should be banned in Canada, says Gabor Lukacs, who advocates on behalf of airline passengers. “The airline is discriminating based on size,” he said in court. “It could be eye colour...It's a slippery slope.” Eye colour? Does this even begin to make sense, unless your eye colour is accompanied by about 350 pounds of bodyweight.

Lukacs from Halifax, appeared Monday before the Federal Court of Canada, telling a three-judge panel that even though he is not overweight himself, he should have the right to file a complaint about a carrier's policy. 

He said the airline routinely asks large passengers to move to another seat, take a later flight or buy an additional seat. 

The Canadian Transportation Agency dismissed his initial complaint in November 2014, finding that Lukacs had no private or public standing in the matter because he wasn't directly affected by it. 

Anyone can file a compaint 

Lukacs said dismissing his complaint simply because the issue didn't affect him personally was akin to disregarding someone's concerns over contaminated food just because they weren't made sick by it. 

“Because what we are protecting here are public and societal interests, not individual interests. It doesn't matter whether the complainant is me or someone who is actually large,” he said outside court in Halifax. 

“The question of who the complainant is should be utterly irrelevant because it affects everybody.” 

He told the court that the agency's own legislation makes it clear that anyone can file a complaint. 

As well, he said he has a demonstrated expertise in the area of passenger issues, having filed more than two dozen successful complaints with the agency and, as a result, bringing about improvements to the industry. 

The 46 mentions of his name in agency decisions show that he has a “long-standing, real and continuing interest in the rights of air passengers,” he said. 

We're not like them - except we are 

“In the US they do many things that we disagree with,” Lukacs said outside court. “There are states that discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation ... We are Canadians. We are different. We don't subscribe to discrimination.” 

As much as we would like to think otherwise, there are lots of Canadians who do discriminate – on any number of levels. Lukacs is himself doing it in this instance. But regardless, what this has to do with paying for additional airline seats was left unexplained. 

The panel reserved its decision on standing to a later date. 

Okay for some 

Lukacs said the airline should use adjustable seats that can be widened for big passengers. 

Hardly a simple or inexpensive process, but while we’re at it – let’s increase the pitch for tall passengers – and the comfort of all passengers. 

“The first thing they should do is leave passengers alone,” he said outside court. “If a passenger can physically fit into a seat, even if they are overreaching on both sides, they should be allowed to occupy the seat.” 

And what of the rights of the passengers sitting beside them who are victim of the “overreach?” They is hardly being 'left alone.'

Apples, oranges and lychees 

Lukacs’ ‘slippery slope’ argument is fallacious if not nonsensical.  To compare eye colour or sexual orientation to obesity requiring a larger, or an extra, seat -  makes no sense. This is a case of comparing not just apples and oranges but throwing in lychees as well. 

The other part Lukacs does not seem to understand is that his efforts have a price – for all passengers. 

Someone has to pay 

When he advocates for “adjustable” or free seats for the obese, the tall, the short, the physically challenged, those needing an extra seat for a minder, a service animal of whatever description, or a guitar, cello or tin whistle – someone is going to pay – and it’s not the airline. The costs will get passed along and other passengers will be made to absorb them. 

This is simply unfair. An airline seat is not some basic human right. It is a commodity available for purchase. It is all very simple. If you want a seat – you pay for it – if you want two or three or four – you pay for them too.   

Otherwise somebody else does.