
41 Percent of Fliers Think You’re Rude If You Recline Your Seat - kitwalker12
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/airplane-etiquette-recline-seat/
======
Someone1234
I'd love to see this cross-referenced by leg length.

A lot of shorter people literally don't seem to understand why reclining could
be "rude" when as they like to parrot "I paid for this seat! I'm entitled to!"
Try being someone with long legs and having the person in front of you bounce
up and down on your knees for several hours, let me tell you, it is as fun as
it sounds.

That being said, the problem isn't with short people, or people who recline in
general. The problem is with a race to the bottom that the government should
have regulated several inches ago.

Airlines keep making their seat pitch (distance between your spine and the
spin of the person in front) narrower and narrow, year upon year. It started
out to add extras rows, now they just do it so they can sell that seat pitch
back to people as "Premium Comfort" or "Premium Economy."

Airlines are now only judged by the economy price on ticket comparison
websites. So if one airline takes 2 inches of seat pitch but also reduces the
price by $10/flight, then another has to do the same to remain competitive.

Ultimately at some stage we need to just sit down and decide what the minimum
seat pitch should be, and then have every airline in the country stick to
that. It effectively ends the race to the bottom we have now, as there is now
a lower bar (and one that doesn't have passengers fighting in the isles about
reclining).

I'd also like to see airline seats redesigned. They've barely changed in many
years, and only one major company manufacturers them.

[http://www.independenttraveler.com/travel-tips/travelers-
ed/...](http://www.independenttraveler.com/travel-tips/travelers-ed/the-
shrinking-airline-seat)

~~~
jessriedel
90% of your problem can be fixed by you ponying up for the "extra leg room"
seats. For the other 10%, it seems a lot easier to just have Kayak give the
option of a "seat size penalty" which each flyer can set for themselves. If
it's a matter of getting the info, then by all means require by law that data
to be given as part of the ticketing search process as well.

But please don't pass legislation that prevents me from saving the $10. I want
the money, and I'm willing to sit in a smaller seat.

~~~
eevilspock
Yes, make tall people pay more. And to be truly free market about this,
airlines should charge flyers both by volume and weight. Just like UPS.

~~~
jessriedel
You're right. Let's legislate to require that clothing prices not depend on
size either. What are we, cattle?

------
hrez
It probably includes 37% self-obsessed asses that think it's rude to wake them
up to go to the bathroom. You agreed to get into a tin can with reclining
seats and bathrooms. Deal with it.

------
eqyiel
Isn't it kind of a fake olive branch / placebo that airplanes have reclining
seats anyway? It gives a little extra space to the recliner but takes space
away from the person sitting behind, so to reclaim it they need to recline
their seat and so on. If everybody reclines then everybody ends up with the
same amount of space and no one is better off, except maybe the people in the
front or back rows.

~~~
DanBC
reclining isn't about gaining space, it's about being able to sleep.

~~~
Someone1234
By that logic, seats shouldn't recline on short haul flights. Nobody needs to
sleep on a <4 hour flight.

I will say sleeping on flight isn't easy. I've flown a lot and have been lucky
enough to be in real business class three times (British Airways, Virgin
Atlantic, and a budget airline) and I've only slept once ever in all that
flying. Virgin Atlantic's completely flat beds got me snoring (the other two
airline's "almost flat" chairs did nothing).

~~~
zardo
>Nobody needs to sleep on a <4 hour flight.

What are you the nap police? Flying sucks and I need to lose consciousness to
deal with it.

------
AnimalMuppet
I have ridden in some old (1950s) American passenger railroad cars. If I
stretched my legs out full length, I could just _barely_ touch the back of the
seat in front of me. (I'm 5'8".) At that point, the person in front could
recline their seat to their heart's content without causing any issues.

Oh, yes, there was an adjustable leg rest, too.

I'd love to be able to travel like that today (but of course I probably
wouldn't be able to afford it...)

~~~
nostrademons
Amtrak still operates, and AFAIK the seat pitch is still the same. Prices are
quite reasonable too: I just checked and a cross-country train ticket is about
half the price of a plane ticket this time of year.

The big question is whether you're willing to spend 72 hours in one of those
roomy coach seats (more like 80+ hours if you include connections). People fly
because 5 hours of extreme discomfort is usually preferable to 72 hours of
mild/moderate discomfort.

------
Facemelters
Yes, because it is rude. The marginal increase in comfort does not outweigh
the massive impact it has on the quality of life of the individual behind.

~~~
squidfood
As someone with lower back pain, for whom 1-2 inches back is a huge
improvement, I'm not sure why you'd privilege the person in back, while saying
the one in front is required to suffer. The person in back may find it harder
use a laptop, but I'd save "quality of life" for talking about genuine pain,
not moderate inconveniences.

That being said, this is pitting two victims of an airline's policy against
each other, not particularly constructive.

~~~
Someone1234
First off, nobody is using a laptop in economy regardless of recline. The
keyboard is too close to use well. Tablets work fine, laptops are more
business or first class conveniences.

Secondly: If the person behind you has long legs it damn right hurts when the
person in front reclines. As in "popping painkillers" level of pain. When you
recline, their knees have nowhere to go, so they end up being compressed
between the back of your seat and the cushion of their seat. Oh and every time
you move your seat bounces up and down, straight onto their knees pressed
firmly against your seat back.

So to be entirely clear we're talking about "genuine pain, not moderate
inconveniences" for the person behind you. I take extra strong painkillers
onto flights so that the 5' person in front of me can feel mildly more
comfortable.

~~~
squidfood
I have both problems, actually, long legs so the knees take it, and then the
back. So I sympathize. But I won't call the person in front "rude" and the
person behind "right". And I certainly wouldn't presume to judge whether the
person in front "doesn't deserve" the space based on, say, them being 5'. You
could just as easily call the person in back rude for having the temerity to
have long knees poking into the seat back.

~~~
waterlesscloud
>You could just as easily call the person in back rude for having the temerity
to have long knees poking into the seat back.

Given that it doesn't hurt the person in front of them, no, you couldn't.

------
eimai134
This is pretty crazy. I'll continue to be "rude" then.

I've also learned to lower the armrest as soon as I sit down. If an overweight
person sits next to you, it will be impossible to lower it and they will be
taking up part of your seat.

------
kitwalker12
the funniest thing I found was the range of divisiveness over who gets the arm
chair rests on the middle seat

------
zecken
This is water.

------
BostonEnginerd
41 Percent of Fliers are correct!

