QANTAS Discriminates Against Tall People
May 26th, 2009 by Ingrid Cliff
In a down economy businesses scramble to find ways to cut costs and raise revenue. But in doing so, over-zealous cost-cutters can make some really dumb decisions. QANTAS is the latest in a long line of companies that have demonstrated smart people make dumb decisions when under stress.
They have decided to levy an additional $160 if you want to book an exit row seat. So what? It just so happens that exit row seats are the only seats on their planes that have enough leg room for taller people. By making this decision they have in effect levied a “tall fee”.
Tall people have two choices when it comes to flying. Take a regular seat and spend the flight either with their knees belting the back of the seat in front of them to the everlasting joy of the passengers in front of them, or tripping the air hostesses by stretching their feet into the aisles; or they can book an exit row seat to grab an extra 3 centimetres of leg room. Most choose the exit row option for the comfort and safety of both themselves and other travelers. Thanks to this decision by QANTAS, they now have to pay an additional $160 for doing the right thing.
In making this decision it could be argued that QANTAS is breaching Anti-Discrimination legislation. While it is true that this fee does not directly discriminate against tall people as other people also book the seats (mums with babies for example), what it does do is indirectly discriminate against tall people as it effects people with that attribute more than it effects other people.
QANTAS also has created a PR “challenge” for themselves, garnering a pile of negative publicity in the process.
It is important that all businesses are aware of the rules and regulations that govern their business … including Anti-Discrimination legislation. I suspect we will be hearing more about this less than smart decision in coming days.
In the meantime, watch tall people raise themselves to their not inconsiderable height and vote with their larger than average feet by flying with other providers. So, if your business needs to cut costs, you may want to learn from QANTAS’s mistakes and consider how your actions negatively effect groups within the community.
What do you think? Did QANTAS make the right decision?
Ingrid Cliff
We put your business into words
This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 26th, 2009 at 8:07 am and is filed under small business tips. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
May 26th, 2009 at 9:04 am
HI Ingrid,
The biggest problem is that other airlines have already implemented this……like everything in this world..things are done by stealth for personal gain rather than actually what the consumer really wants.
This impacts so many tall people to the point some will stop flying given the economic crisis, the average person just can’t afford to fly let alone pay extra because God blessed them with extra length.
As I said to 3AW this morning, this is about discrimination against the tall and short due to leg length as many a shorter person can have longer legs….I personally am 178cm tall but my leg length is equivalent to a 6’3 woman…..I can’t fly unless I get exit seats or an airline that gives additional leg room….
My cofounder has had to walk the entire way to LA due to not having the right leg room in his seat and the woman infront slamming her seat back into his legs continually so he walked the aisles and slept in them…
SO I guess the next question is….how else are consumers gonna be penalised????
May 26th, 2009 at 9:08 am
I know they looked at a fat tax on flights, as well as a loo tax – but both were withdrawn from debate after public outcry. Most airlines now have a section where you can check out the legroom of each of their seats, so perhaps we need to publicise the airlines that are doing a great job at giving their customers space.
May 26th, 2009 at 11:08 am
I agree, it was a dumb move by Qantas.
I guess it was a way they could still keep advertised prices for flights look lower, while looking for excuses to slug people with ‘extras’. And instead of making sure all seats have enough leg room, they put an extra ‘tax’ on the few that do.
Airlines have already scrutinised other things they justify charging extra for – extra baggage, food and drink, personal size, use of facilities… I’m waiting for a surcharge on people who breathe heavily, because they might use up extra oxygen in the plane.
On the other hand, people are probably shopping solely on price, for economy class, right? So other than imposing surcharges, how can an airline look competitive on pricing? And if it did impose surcharges to sneak in a buffer for the bottom line, what’s an acceptable basis for the surcharge?
Or have they just missed the point completely? Should their selling point be “we don’t make you queue for two hours to check in your bags even after you’ve checked in online.”?
May 26th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
You are right – Jetstar charges $30, Virgin Blue $25 and QANTAS $80 for domestic flights. You won’t find this printed anywhere on their websites or marketing material – you only find this out when you try and book a seat. Nothing like hidden prices to get your attention!
The bigger issue is that no other seat on a flight other than first or business class has a levy. Mums with babies in basinettes are not required to pay more when they request a bulkhead seat; people who request an aisle or window seat are not charged a levy. But exit row seats now attract the additional payment.
To sit in an exit row the airlines have a large list of rules. You must be over 15 to sit in an exit row. You must not be caring for people who need assistance. You have to be able to follow instructions and have no disabilities. In case of emergency you are required to assist people out of the aircraft. One person so rightly said that in case of emergency you are acting as an employee of the airline – and for this privilege you now have to pay an additional fee.
May 31st, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Hi,
Just thought I would let you know, and you may want to print a change, mothers with babies are not allowed to book exit row seats, as children are not allowed in them. I always have to travel seperately with my children if we can get an exit row seat for my husband who is 6’6″. We have been told to get to the airport at least 3 hours early to do this & there are no guarantees if the flight originates in say, Perth. This is not good with young children, we had this happen when we visited family in NZ. Will Qantas give you a refund if this happens – I bet not.
May 31st, 2009 at 2:19 pm
You are right – anyone under 15 is not allowed in the exit rows (and anyone caring for someone such as a child or even someone elderly is not allowed in exit rows). Parents with bubs in bassinets can request bulkhead seats but there is no guarantee you will get them. It will be interesting to see if QANTAS guarantees an exit row seat if you pay for it – the other airlines don’t seem to offer that guarantee.
June 1st, 2009 at 2:15 pm
Good job mum 2nd on google search list. I found it while reearching for my english debate
June 1st, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Thanks Rachel – Good to see you doing research (that is not Twilight related)
September 15th, 2011 at 9:14 am
I am 194cm (6’4+1/2″) and am so pleased that this has finally been highlited as I have made many complaints to the various airlines which has fallen on deaf ears. My point is that being tall should be regarded as a disability as I am not this height by choice. If one had a broken leg for example you can inform the airline and you automatically get a seat with legroom plus a wheelchair ride at no extra cost, I therefore think that in order to get a seat with extra leg room you would have to qualify for it. These seats should be reserved for these cases and only sold to the general public if there are unused seats, they could be sold on a standby basis.