BA says one-bag rule to go
Nov 2nd, 2007, 08:39 AM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA says one-bag rule to go
The unpopular controls have been blamed for adding to delays at busy airports like Heathrow, and BA chief executive Willie Walsh is optimistic that the "hassle factor" of the one bag limit may be ended by the government before Christmas.
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2204057,00.html
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2204057,00.html
Nov 2nd, 2007, 09:46 AM
#2
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It could be the other way round. Think how much longer security will take when people have at least twice as many bags with them. Boarding will take longer as passengers struggle to find space in overhead bins, and have not got the strength to lift their bags.
Nov 2nd, 2007, 09:58 AM
#3
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two main reasons. One is that BA's losing business to other airlines with non-UK hubs, particularly for connecting traffic.
Second is checked baggage problem at LHR. They don't have T5 yet this Christmas, and another baggage meltdown will be pretty bad news for BA.
Second is checked baggage problem at LHR. They don't have T5 yet this Christmas, and another baggage meltdown will be pretty bad news for BA.
Nov 2nd, 2007, 10:32 AM
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some passengers need to be able to carry 2 bags during their travels.
Business needs - hope you can understand that part. I'm one of them.
I never carry on anything above stated limits and nothing that I can't lift myself. I don't expect anybody to help me nor do I take forever to put my stuff away, only because it's within size limits.
I don't have any problems with authorities sticking to size rules and I will agree with you and the authorities on that point, but I, like many folks that will abide by the rules, still need to carry on 2 bags. The planes have been designed for 2 carry ons.
Since the UK gov established the new restriction, BA, just by virtue of being the biggest UK based carrier, has lost more bags than just about any airline in the world and had to pay out record amounts for the lost bags. The system was/is overwhelmed, so in a way the 2 carry on rule helps airlines and keeps the costs down.
Also, it doesn't take any longer to board a BA plane that's flying from foreign destinations to UK where the passengers are allowed 2 carry ons than it does to board a BA plane flying from UK airports. AFAIK, most international flights allow 45 minutes to board and it has worked. It's not like the airline can close the door 20 minutes early just because the people that boarded are sitting down. They have to wait for any passenger(s) that is not at the gate until the scheduled door closure time, so please explain to me how 1 bag makes a difference? I have never been on a flight that was delayed by the boarding process only.
At the end of the day it should be the passengers own responsibility to know the rules, abide by the rules and boarding will be smooth whether it's 1 or 2 carry ons.
Business needs - hope you can understand that part. I'm one of them.
I never carry on anything above stated limits and nothing that I can't lift myself. I don't expect anybody to help me nor do I take forever to put my stuff away, only because it's within size limits.
I don't have any problems with authorities sticking to size rules and I will agree with you and the authorities on that point, but I, like many folks that will abide by the rules, still need to carry on 2 bags. The planes have been designed for 2 carry ons.
Since the UK gov established the new restriction, BA, just by virtue of being the biggest UK based carrier, has lost more bags than just about any airline in the world and had to pay out record amounts for the lost bags. The system was/is overwhelmed, so in a way the 2 carry on rule helps airlines and keeps the costs down.
Also, it doesn't take any longer to board a BA plane that's flying from foreign destinations to UK where the passengers are allowed 2 carry ons than it does to board a BA plane flying from UK airports. AFAIK, most international flights allow 45 minutes to board and it has worked. It's not like the airline can close the door 20 minutes early just because the people that boarded are sitting down. They have to wait for any passenger(s) that is not at the gate until the scheduled door closure time, so please explain to me how 1 bag makes a difference? I have never been on a flight that was delayed by the boarding process only.
At the end of the day it should be the passengers own responsibility to know the rules, abide by the rules and boarding will be smooth whether it's 1 or 2 carry ons.
Nov 2nd, 2007, 02:30 PM
#6
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 8,247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never understood the assumed benefits of the one-bag-rule.
Every other time I squeezed all my stuff in just one bag (just for my own convenience, not because I was using an UK airport), I got asked at the checkpoints to unpack a few items because the x-ray did not get a clear picture when too many metal items were close to or on top of each other inside the bag.
Since we all need extra time at checkpoints to strip to our bones these days, I doubt that the additional 10 seconds a second bag needs to pass the scanner really matter.
Every other time I squeezed all my stuff in just one bag (just for my own convenience, not because I was using an UK airport), I got asked at the checkpoints to unpack a few items because the x-ray did not get a clear picture when too many metal items were close to or on top of each other inside the bag.
Since we all need extra time at checkpoints to strip to our bones these days, I doubt that the additional 10 seconds a second bag needs to pass the scanner really matter.
Nov 2nd, 2007, 02:45 PM
#7
BAA instituted the one-bag rule after the liquids scare last year, and it was justified because of the additional time required for liquids searches at the security points.
Of course what happened was that the resulting sudden increase in checked luggage overwhelmed the already inadequate/reduced baggage handling scene (with BA at LHR in particular) which led to BA's lost luggage crisis. Unintended consequences and all that.
Of course what happened was that the resulting sudden increase in checked luggage overwhelmed the already inadequate/reduced baggage handling scene (with BA at LHR in particular) which led to BA's lost luggage crisis. Unintended consequences and all that.
Nov 2nd, 2007, 04:15 PM
#9
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although I can fully accept that lifting the on bag rule will be good for BA's business and for UK plc, as a passenger I prefer the status quo. I realise I am probably a lonely minority in this respect.
Even with the 1 piece rule, it is sometimes potluck as to whether I can cram my own small backpack into the overhead locker. I would sooner see the liquids nonsense sorted out.
Even with the 1 piece rule, it is sometimes potluck as to whether I can cram my own small backpack into the overhead locker. I would sooner see the liquids nonsense sorted out.
Nov 2nd, 2007, 04:26 PM
#10
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The hapless Irishman who's running BA has been blaming the government's one bag rule for his company's underperformsance for the past 15 months.
And the government keeps telling him to piss off, because - believe it or not - we don't organise our country's security around the whims of Mr Walsh. And guess what: because we don't mess about here, or let a local airline run our policy in the way Walsh's former employer ran his country's policies, we don't have people blowing up planes over Heathrow or central London.
Wnen the US has a record on airline security (how many American Airlines flights have crashed or allowed intending bombers on board since September 10, 2001?) that comes within a lightyear of ours, we'll think about listening to you all.
But you don't.
And Walsh's wishful thinking is just that. We run our airline policy to keep us safe - not to improve Irishmen's performance bonus. And if a policy of security means fewer foreigners use our airports, who cares?
We fly out of our airports confident they're protected.
And the government keeps telling him to piss off, because - believe it or not - we don't organise our country's security around the whims of Mr Walsh. And guess what: because we don't mess about here, or let a local airline run our policy in the way Walsh's former employer ran his country's policies, we don't have people blowing up planes over Heathrow or central London.
Wnen the US has a record on airline security (how many American Airlines flights have crashed or allowed intending bombers on board since September 10, 2001?) that comes within a lightyear of ours, we'll think about listening to you all.
But you don't.
And Walsh's wishful thinking is just that. We run our airline policy to keep us safe - not to improve Irishmen's performance bonus. And if a policy of security means fewer foreigners use our airports, who cares?
We fly out of our airports confident they're protected.
Nov 4th, 2007, 11:57 AM
#14
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The liquids restriction and one bag rule were reactions to a threat. All the new rules are reactions. No proactive measures in place really.
I'm waiting for someone to put 4oz of some liquid into her bra and try to get thru. Then they can ban bras.
I'm waiting for someone to put 4oz of some liquid into her bra and try to get thru. Then they can ban bras.
