6 ms·

41 Percent of Fliers Think You’re Rude If You Recline Your Seat

20 points by kitwalker12 11y ago

BostonEnginerd 11y ago
41 Percent of Fliers are correct!
eqyiel 11y ago
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 11y ago
  reclining isn't about gaining space, it's about being able to sleep.
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    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 11y ago
      >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.
  - lsaferite 11y ago
    For me it's neither. It's about not flying in excruciating pain due to the seat back angle. I need a few extra degrees of recline or my lower back is in absolute agony even after a short 1 hour flight. I flew Jet Blue (no recline) once and it was the most painful flight of my life. Never again. If they'd recline the seats by several degrees, all of the seats, then I'd personally have no problem with them removing the adjustable recline. Until that day, I will recline my seat.
Facemelters 11y ago
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.
- kitwalker12 11y ago
  isn't it a marginal discomfort as well
- squidfood 11y ago
  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 11y ago
    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 11y ago
      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.
kitwalker12 11y ago
the funniest thing I found was the range of divisiveness over who gets the arm chair rests on the middle seat
Someone1234 11y ago
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/the-shrinking-airline-seat http://www.independenttraveler.com/travel-tips/travelers-ed/...
- squidfood 11y ago
  Alaska airlines recently did a seat-redesign to seats that don't recline, but supposedly have ergonomic improvements. The in-seat cards advertise that the designs are by Recaro (a well-known premium baby car-seat maker). Didn't seem to make much difference at all: the biggest variance was still absolute space: the "premium economy" seats were no worse, the non-premium economy were no better. As someone with both lower back pain (a slight recline helps a lot) and long legs (the person in front bumps me) it was pretty much a wash.
  - dc_gregory 11y ago
    Isn't Recaro primarily well known for their racing seats? Rather odd to see the company referenced for its baby seats, is that a local thing for you?
AnimalMuppet 11y ago
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 11y ago
  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.
hrez 11y ago
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.
zecken 11y ago
This is water.
eimai134 11y ago
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.

20 points by kitwalker12 11y ago

41 Percent of Fliers are correct!

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 11y ago
reclining isn't about gaining space, it's about being able to sleep.
- Someone1234 11y ago
  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 11y ago
    >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.
- lsaferite 11y ago
  For me it's neither. It's about not flying in excruciating pain due to the seat back angle. I need a few extra degrees of recline or my lower back is in absolute agony even after a short 1 hour flight. I flew Jet Blue (no recline) once and it was the most painful flight of my life. Never again. If they'd recline the seats by several degrees, all of the seats, then I'd personally have no problem with them removing the adjustable recline. Until that day, I will recline my seat.

Facemelters 11y ago

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.

kitwalker12 11y ago
isn't it a marginal discomfort as well
squidfood 11y ago
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 11y ago
  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 11y ago
    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.

kitwalker12 11y ago

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

Someone1234 11y ago

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

squidfood 11y ago
Alaska airlines recently did a seat-redesign to seats that don't recline, but supposedly have ergonomic improvements. The in-seat cards advertise that the designs are by Recaro (a well-known premium baby car-seat maker). Didn't seem to make much difference at all: the biggest variance was still absolute space: the "premium economy" seats were no worse, the non-premium economy were no better. As someone with both lower back pain (a slight recline helps a lot) and long legs (the person in front bumps me) it was pretty much a wash.
- dc_gregory 11y ago
  Isn't Recaro primarily well known for their racing seats? Rather odd to see the company referenced for its baby seats, is that a local thing for you?

AnimalMuppet 11y ago

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 11y ago
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.

hrez 11y ago

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.

zecken 11y ago

This is water.

eimai134 11y ago

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.