Go Back  Fodor's Travel Talk Forums > Travel Topics > Air Travel
Reload this Page >

UAL to charge for 2nd piece of checked luggage

UAL to charge for 2nd piece of checked luggage

Feb 4th, 2008, 07:19 AM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 890
UAL to charge for 2nd piece of checked luggage

This is BAD news....other airlines will probably follow!


NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- United Airlines will begin charging domestic passengers for more than one piece of check-in luggage, the network carrier said Monday in a release. Starting May 5, domestic passengers who do not have status in Mileage Plus or Star Alliance programs can check in their first piece of luggage for free and a second bag for $25, the airline said. United will now also charge a flat rate for all customers checking in up to four additional bags at $100 a bag. Previously the airline charged in a range of $85 to $125 a bag. United said the new policy will result in $100 million in cost savings and new revenue
petlover is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 07:27 AM
  #2  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
Is it 4/1 already?

Wow, these guys are crazy. Think about all the 22" rollaboards overfilling the overhead bins.
rkkwan is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 07:49 AM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
I'm all for it.

Anybody that needs 2 50 lbs. bags checked in plus a 21" roller and a personal bag for a domestic flight, should be charged for the extra weight. I never checked a bag for a domestic flight and only 1 on occasion for international.

Why should I be punished by paying higher fares because some people need to bring every piece of their wardrobe for their 1 week vacation in Florida?

This is a direct result of the high fuel prices.

Learn how to pack or pay.

Looks fair to me.
AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:01 AM
  #4  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 25,103
This has been the norm in Europe for a while now, though the European carriers generally go with a fixed weight rather than # of pieces. Indeed, this applies even for long-hauls, except to the Americas and (I think) Africa. Fly a European carrier to Asia, however, and the limit is as low as 20kg.

AAFF - I'm okay with this, as well, but as I've said elsewhere, I'm not convinced these sorts of fees and add-ons are just about high fuel costs. Handling luggage has costs of its own that this will help reduce. And the extra bag fees can be a revenue generator, in and of themselves. I think these sorts of charges will keep coming, regardless of the direction of fuel prices.
travelgourmet is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:06 AM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
It is fair, but not practical. At least not for the US traveling public, and not for a mainstream carrier like UA.
rkkwan is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:11 AM
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
rkkwan I'm missing your point?

why isn't it practical?
AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:17 AM
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 342
rkkwan posted: "It is fair, but not practical"

Why do you think that??
It is nothing more than a continuation of a long term trend to unbundle airfares.

Buy on Board for a FEE: OK by the public.
Skycap Service for a FEE: OK by the public.
Economy Plus for a FEE: OK by the public.

Extra Piece of bagggage for a FEE:
WHY NOT OK by the public??

Best, Dave
Dave is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:27 AM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
Because UA is a mainstream legacy carrier with lots of long-term users. It is not like Skybus when people know it's a LCC and they will check out their weird policies and fees.

It's one thing to find out you have to pay a few bucks for food onboard, but different when you're asked to pay $25 at check-in. That's going to cause a lot of anger and confusion for those who don't know about the charge, and it'll only cause a significant slowdown at the check-in lines, at least in the short term, with agents dealing with money, people repacking in front of the desk, etc...

And as I've already mentioned, it's going to get more people to take more onboard again. One of the good side-effects of the liquid ban is that the overhead shortage problem was kind of relieved. But with this policy, that's going to be reversed, and planes are still at 80% load factor for most airlines.

Plus there are other issues, maybe less significant, but will still cause more confusion. For example, do you charge those who're forced to gate-check? What happens to interline baggage?

If they want to lower fuel cost, a slightly simpler way is to change the checked luggage policy to 20kg/44lb. At least they can say it's the international norm, and they're just moving to that standard practice.
rkkwan is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:44 AM
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
I think you are reaching here....

Interline won't be effected because the pax won't be checking any bags

The few surprises that will happen will teach people a lesson. In majority of cases it's a 30 second CC charge. When they get hit once, I'm sure they won't ask for another hit, unless they have a need to carry a second bag. With any new policy there is a learning curve and I'm sure UA knows it. No biggie. Within couple of months it will be well known policy.

Wasting time at the check in? How about people that have 3-4-5 bags about the size of a house? isn't that holding up the line? In the long run this policy will make people become more rational and they will learn how to pack or if they don't have a choice they will know it will cost dearly.

I just hope the other airlines follow UA on this. JMHO.

I hope the other legacy airlines follow this move.



AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:49 AM
  #10  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 941
The obvious next step is to downsize the acceptable carryons, so people are forced to check two bags.

Celticharper is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:54 AM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
Interline - How about people who book an itinerary with USAirways connecting to UA? When they check two bags with US, will they get a charge?

How about codeshares? Those who buy a US ticket with US flight number but operated by UA... What happens when these people show up at UA's check-in to check bags?

Hey, again, I already said it's fair; and I think the current baggage policy is too generous. I am just questioning about how practical it is for UA to do it on its own right now. I wish them luck, but I'm afraid it's going to fail.
rkkwan is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:54 AM
  #12  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 890
For shorter trips, this shouldn't be a problem for me and my husband BUT we've gone on 2 World Cruises (4 months each) plus a 2 month cruise around South America. These each started and ended in Ft. Lauderdale so the flights were domestic. We have no status with UAL or any other airline....guess we'll be STUCK as it's impossible to go on a long cruise and just check 1 suitcase.
petlover is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:56 AM
  #13  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 890
I wonder if this will be in effect with our tickets we purchased 6 weeks ago but won't be traveling until summer?
petlover is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:57 AM
  #14  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
petlover - You won't be stuck. You just have pay a little more. That's all.

Perhaps you mean you'll be "stuck with the fees".
rkkwan is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 08:59 AM
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
I don't think it's the time of the ticket purchase. It will start on 5/5/08 regardless, so be prepared.

Have a great trip!
AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 09:01 AM
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,075
petlover, the new policy applies to tickets purchased on or after February 4:

http://www.united.com/page/article/0,6722,52481,00.html
ms_go is online now  
Feb 4th, 2008, 09:03 AM
  #17  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
thanks for the correction
AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 10:09 AM
  #18  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 25,103
The obvious next step is to downsize the acceptable carryons, so people are forced to check two bags.

You've been flying SAS, haven't you?
travelgourmet is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 03:12 PM
  #19  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,291
If you are thinking of a camping trip, I'd try another airline. Sleeping bags, tents, sleeping pads, coolers.
wally34949 is offline  
Feb 4th, 2008, 05:12 PM
  #20  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 57
The key thing for me is the part that says non-status. I still get 2x50 and 1x70 for free.
This is just an extension of the absolute lowest price for the passengers. Most of the passengers that are non-status are in the regular economy seats and are more likely (although not definitely) occasional travellers.
I don't necessarily think this is a bad idea but I think the GAs will have to watch carry-ons a bit closer. Does gate-check count for the charge?
Raghnall is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy -

FODOR'S VIDEO

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:27 AM.