Sign in to follow this  
FA@AC

Ac To Try Again At Enforcement Of Cabin Baggage Size Limits

Recommended Posts

about bloody time......

the overhead bins are certified only to a certain weight so .... Then of course the standard "triiple seat" is also weight certified..... Maybe time to enforce that also......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People would gladly check their luggage as cabin space around one's feet is already crowded and the boarding process is a mess because people are always hunting for space near their seat and often those boarding last don't find it, delaying things even further.

Most of those passengers taking stuff on board dont' actually need it for the flight. Passengers don't check luggage because of price and because they are insecure about their luggage arriving at the same airport they do.

Drop the fees, (and the fuel surcharge...), offer checked luggage service at the gate, staff it appropriately or start boarding earlier - that way, those concerned know their luggage has an almost-100% of being boarded on the airplane at their gate, and the bonus is leg-room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When certifying an aircraft, evacuation drills are demonstrated over a 90 second period with half the exits blocked.

Wouldn't it be more realistic to pretend half the evacuees have been injured by carry on bags that are flying about inside the "blender" and finish by having the pax climb, crawl and step over and around all the clutter the bags etc. create in the aftermath?

The airlines should not be using the cabin as a baggage hold. They should instead be doing whatever is necessary to eliminate pax fears with respect to the loss of their luggage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re, "Agents will tire of the abuse/lack of support and it will peter out like the previous efforts. If the tags aren't auditable they will end up on oversized bags of staff, friend$ and family prompting awkward 'how come' questions from denied pax, Gotta include all the major carriers to work."

Well, I think that may be a company's culture and not a procedural matter. The process works well at Delta (as a paying psgr) and at Air Canada & AC Jazz (as both a paying and pass-travelling psgr), where we've used the gate-check process a number of times. Westjet doesn't have the international route structure or widebody aircraft both of which bring in other elements into the equation when considering whether to take on-board or check. Not dissing, just stating experience - the 73's don't have the room so people check; done it to Maui many times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The process works well at Delta (as a paying psgr) and at Air Canada & AC Jazz (as both a paying and pass-travelling psgr), where we've used the gate-check process a number of times.

Don,

I think there may be a possibility you've (or I have) misinterpreted the policy that is to be introduced. All cabin bags are to be scanned visually at security and those meeting standard will have an 'approved' tag attached, those that do not will be kicked back to check-in area for expedited handling. My understanding is that gate agents/FA's will only permit bags with 'approved' tags on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't sympathize with people whose baggage doesn't make the cut. "But the last time..." Save it, buddy. There is a limit for a reason, and it will be enforced now. It's a fairly generous limit too, a whole small suitcase AND a shoulder bag each. Hardly limiting. The consternation around this issue is to my mind made worse by lax/uneven application of a long-existing policy. Tightening up the officiating benefits everyone because you always know what to expect and happiness is the meeting of expectations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nail the ba*****ds I am so fed up with some self entitled ah talking up others space.

:cool::cool::cool:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always felt that the carry-on template luggage displays at the gates should never bare the AC-WJ-SW-CJ logos,

but rather a Transport Canada sign, so the argument could be de-escalated with the "carry-on abuser" by simply stating

..."IT'S NOT OUR POLICY, IT'S THE GOVERNMENT'S"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always felt that the carry-on template luggage displays at the gates should never bare the AC-WJ-SW-CJ logos,

but rather a Transport Canada sign, so the argument could be de-escalated with the "carry-on abuser" by simply stating

..."IT'S NOT OUR POLICY, IT'S THE GOVERNMENT'S"

But that's not exactly the case. TC regulates the volume. Each airline sets their own dimensions for length, width and height.

If the carriers could all just agree on the dimensions and acceptable weight, the manufacturers can get behind a consistent size and sell it as 'carry-on approved' and the expectations of customers can be managed.

The convoluted policies and inconsistent enforcement are the issues here, not the passengers trying to save a buck and play the system that the airlines created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDN airlines have failed for years to enforce their own carry-on bag standards at point of check in and again at point of boarding. Now, they are choosing to do so coincident with implementation of a checked bag charge. Poor timing and there will be a backlash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CDN airlines have failed for years to enforce their own carry-on bag standards at point of check in and again at point of boarding. Now, they are choosing to do so coincident with implementation of a checked bag charge. Poor timing and there will be a backlash.

Not sure why you zero in on Canadian Airlines, the same thing could and should be said of most airlines in the world except perhaps Ryanair :Grin-Nod:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kudos to AC for taking on this challenge.

They will inevitably take carp in the media, (ie the CBC) for having the cajones to deal with inevitable "yes, but my circumstances are so unique that I'm special / a victim" crowd.

Sometimes I actually wonder if folks from the two airlines get together in YWG and discuss all the mutually annoying issues they need to deal with over a few beers, flip a coin and the loser has to lead with these sorts of initiatives.

If that isn't what happens, I'll bet they wish that's the way they wish it would happen.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

deal with inevitable "yes, but my circumstances are so unique that I'm special / a victim" crowd.

..

...........and a bunch of complaints from employees who cannot carry-on all of their crap also.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I carry a Laptop bag and another bag containing a medical device. Neither one is going in the belly EVER.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Agents will tire of the abuse/lack of support and it will peter out like the previous efforts. If the tags aren't auditable they will end up on oversized bags of staff, friend$ and family prompting awkward 'how come' questions from denied pax, Gotta include all the major carriers to work.

'WestJet spokesman Robert Palmer said WestJet has no plans to tag cabin baggage, noting passengers have been adjusting their packing habits, just as they did when the airline introduced a second checked bag fee.

“If we had issues with excess carry-on bags, we would be taking delays. We’re not,” Palmer said, noting the airline is seeing strong on-time performance numbers.

He added that on full flights, staff in the boarding lounge will seek out volunteers willing to check their carry-on bags for free.'

WestJet does (at least last time i checked) have a carry on bag tag procedure in MBJ where carry on luggage containing everything including the kitchen sink is typically hidden from the gate agents until the exact moment of boarding. if I'm not mistaken, they even have some sort of hole punch system to make the tags non-removable as there were issues with carry-on bags being tagged at check-in and then the tags being transferred onto much bigger carry-on bags before the guest went through security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that airlines are getting away with this practice. Most airlines, AC included, are doing it. Customers who intend to check their bags,as many prefer to do, must generally arrive at the airport earlier, pay the baggage fee and then wait in line for bag drop.

I'd be annoyed if I paid $25 to check a bag in the terminal and had needed to get there earliy to do it only to see others checking bags free of charge once airside. The policy, while necessary given the amount of cabin baggage we see now that checked baggage fees are here, seems counter productive when the fees are waived anyway. The only circumstance in which I'd see it necessary to pay a checked baggage fee for a rollaboard sized bag would be if the bag contained liquids that wouldn't make it past security screening.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower the price of tickets and add a carry on fee. The equilibrium of checked and carry on baggage will balance itself back out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that airlines are getting away with this practice. Most airlines, AC included, are doing it. Customers who intend to check their bags,as many prefer to do, must generally arrive at the airport earlier, pay the baggage fee and then wait in line for bag drop.

I'd be annoyed if I paid $25 to check a bag in the terminal and had needed to get there earliy to do it only to see others checking bags free of charge once airside. The policy, while necessary given the amount of cabin baggage we see now that checked baggage fees are here, seems counter productive when the fees are waived anyway. The only circumstance in which I'd see it necessary to pay a checked baggage fee for a rollaboard sized bag would be if the bag contained liquids that wouldn't make it past security screening.

Delta does it because when the flight is operated by a CRJ with a full pax load, the "free carryon allowance" can not be accommodated in the cabin.. If they do not get enough volunteers then they arbitrarily force folks carrying baggage within the size and weight limit to yield their bags during the boarding process. We got caught once in this sham and had to quickly remove our valuables, medicines etc. from our now free checked baggage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't sympathize with people whose baggage doesn't make the cut. "But the last time..." Save it, buddy. There is a limit for a reason, and it will be enforced now. It's a fairly generous limit too, a whole small suitcase AND a shoulder bag each. Hardly limiting. The consternation around this issue is to my mind made worse by lax/uneven application of a long-existing policy. Tightening up the officiating benefits everyone because you always know what to expect and happiness is the meeting of expectations.

I certainly sympathize with people frustrated with the inconsistency. I have a carry-on that fits in the United sizer at YYC, SFO and DEN, but not LAX and SNA. Is that my fault?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower the price of tickets and add a carry on fee. The equilibrium of checked and carry on baggage will balance itself back out.

Or just end this whole farce and go back to what worked for damn near a century.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this