United to enforce carry-on size limits
 

This is a huge topic of discussion on one airline travel site right now. United has sent out an email reminding passengers of the carry-on rules. Many frequent travellers are not happy with this turn of events, but others are happy to see something finally (maybe?) being enforced rather than overlooked, as bag after bag (of all sizes) gets carried onto planes these days. And many folks have more than their two allowed bags (one larger bag for the bin and one personal item for storage under the seat in front of you).

I think I'm with the camp of folks who think it is about time something is done. But then, I always check at least one large suitcase, sometimes two, and I am a 1K with United so my checked bags go for free.

I think that there are bound to be some unhappy customers in the next weeks/months on United as this new clamp-down gets up and running. It could be interesting.

I always do carry on only. BUT only one true carry-on sized roll aboard and a handbag. One easily fits in the overhead and the other under the seat. I also object to folks schlepping on all sorts of extra 'carry ons'. I never check a bag . . . unless it is gate checked because the friggin airline allowed others to carry on too many things and the overheads are all full.

So great - I wish ALL airlines enforced the rules.

My preference would be to have all overhead bins removed and passengers limited to what will fit under the seat.

You only have to be on a flight that experiences severe turbulence once to understand why. From a safety point of view, there is no way to justify overhead bins. Unfortunately, no airline has the guts to get rid of them.

I'm also in the camp of being grateful if they actually start enforcing the carry-on rules. As someone who has adhered to the rules, watching all of those people bringing on multiple carry-ons, watching the people stuff the front overhead bins when they are in the back of the plane, having been hit by falling carry-ons... all I can say is AT LAST!

If they actually enforce the rules, both boarding and disembarking with be much smoother and faster.

Dulcius, I'm not so sure about eliminating the overhead bins. People should be able to at least stowcoats and smaller bags.

Kathie, yes! At last!

The root of the problem is the ridiculous amount of time that it can take to have baggage delivered. Used to be that you could count of bags being delivered in 10-15 minutes; now it's not at all uncommon to wait 30 minutes or more. At the same time that airlines were increasing the number of flights, they were reducing the number of baggage handlers. And United is among the worst in this respect (though, to be fair, the other US airlines aren't much netter).

That said, I don't mind the rules being enforced. That would also help in the time it takes for planes to be loaded, when the E+ people are blocking everyone else from their seats as they load the overheads.

From Tom Bihn luggage's site - (they sell a very popular carryon for biz travelers)

"Published carry-on limit: 9"x14"x22"
Actual sizer dimensions: 10"x15"x23"

Published personal item limit: 9"x10"x17"
Actual sizer dimensions: 9"x11"x18"

For the first time, there are personal item sizers at the United gates, not just main carry-on sizers, so it sounds like they might be serious about policing both items now. My travel agent said she got an email telling her to warn clients that both carry-on items need to be compliant with the rules or they will have to be checked. From her perspective, this is a real problem, since business travelers often have nice leather briefcases or computer rolling bags for their over-sized computers, neither of which will qualify as personal items if they do enforce."

Maybe I've just been really lucky, but I've never had to wait for very long for my luggage at baggage claim. I travel very frequently and always always always check a bag. For me the thought of having to wait for luggage is not of any significance whatsoever. That short wait gives me a breather before I have to hike to my car or to the airport car rental/shuttle center.

I realize the inconvenience for some travelers. But everyone will be on the same page if rules are finally enforced!

>>I've never had to wait for very long for my luggage at baggage claim. I travel very frequently and always always always check a bag. For me the thought of having to wait for luggage is not of any significance whatsoever<<

Not me - because I don't check bags . . . but folks I've traveled w/ have had to wait up to an hour several times . . . once didn't get their bags for 2 days . . and once never did get their bag.

For the last 6 or 7 years - folks who want to travel w/ me do carry on only.

Issues like this always result in huge arguments pro and con on forums like Flyertalk.

Whatever rules the airlines choose to put in place (and it is their choice) are the rules everyone will have to deal with. The reason so many people get excited about it is they are looking at it from what suits them personally rather than from what is best for all. Selfishness, in one word. That is of course human nature.

I always remember a person who lived in a condo in which I had a unit who argued for months that they should be able to hang their laundry (swimwear) on the balcony to dry. The rules limited what could be put on a balcony and the intent of the rule was to insure the aesthetics of the building as a whole. Otherwise you have someone painting their balcony bright orange and someone else using it to store old furniture etc. Take a quick peek at how many hits the topic gets on Google. https://www.google.ca/#q=no+laundry+on+balcony

The other issue with carry-on luggage is time. Most people live their life in a rush. Time is money, etc. The concept of doing things at a leisurely pace is beyond their ability to accept. Wow, a whole 30 minutes spent waiting for a bag to arrive on the carousel, the world could end in that much time. There is a reason why fast food was invented. Try telling a Frenchman or an Italian, etc. that they can only have half an hour for their lunch.

I personally, check my bag simply because I choose to carry things that will not get through security screening for carry-on. I put what I want to carry ahead of any other consideration. I'm never in that much of a rush and if I were, I would be questioning WHY I am in such a rush. I also prefer 2-3 hour lunches.

Well said, dulcius!!! (applause)

<<<My travel agent said she got an email telling her to warn clients that both carry-on items need to be compliant with the rules or they will have to be checked. From her perspective, this is a real problem, since business travelers often have nice leather briefcases or computer rolling bags for their over-sized computers, neither of which will qualify as personal items if they do enforce.">>>

And that's part of the problem. The rules are very easy to find before you buy a ticket and saying "my bag doesn't fit those rules but I want to take it anyway so I'm going to" is obnoxious. As long as the rules are clearly published ahead of time people should grow up and follow them, it's really not that hard.

I wish all airlines would enforce this and that they'd also enforce the 'only one bag in the overhead, personal item goes at your feet' idea. I also get annoyed by the ones who put their bag in one of the first overhead bins they get to and then proceed to go back to their seat 15+ rows further back. Stop it. Take it with you or you'll end up forcing someone else to look all over the plane to try to find a place for their stuff. It seems to fall under the same general idea that if you can't lift it into the overhead bin by yourself then you shouldn't carry it on (with some leeway for injuries and the like). If you can't navigate it down the aisle to where your seat is then you shouldn't carry it on.

Airlines should hire retired elementary school teachers to remind people to behave themselves properly rather than act like a bunch of unruly chimpanzees throwing poo at each other.

I'm all for enforcing the existing rules. Or changing the rules to better match reality. Either way is OK with me.

Why does dulciusexasperis think that s/he ought to set <i>my</i> priorities? Dulcius and her claque don't care about waiting 30+ minutes for luggage, and somehow their logic is, "I don't mind waiting, so why should you mind?"

The simple answer: It's no business of yours why I mind. Maybe I have something better to do with my time. Maybe you don't -- I neither know nor care. You prefer to check your bags, and I respect that choice. I choose to pack so that I can carry-on whenever possible, and that's my choice. Not only does that mean that I'm not waiting for my bags, it gives me far more flexibility to change flights when there's a delay/cancellation after I've checked in.

I'm fine with setting up rules and applying them. I'm not fine with someone telling me what ought to be important in my life.

Such thin skin DonTopaz. You are of course free to do as you choose with your life. However misguided. Life life in a rush to your hearts content.

That's the best you could come up with? An <i>ad hominem</i> remark? Really? Maybe you shouldn't have been in such a hurry to respond.

<<I'm not fine with someone telling me what ought to be important in my life.>>

It's all he ever does on this forum. I have not seen one single post that gave actually useful advice or helpful information to the question at hand. He lives to make fun of other posters here.

He has plenty of time to wait for baggage since he retired early and doesn't have to work for a living (like the rest of us fools).

Suze, just curious re " Or changing the rules to better match reality."

I think you're always very logical and wonder what you had in mind?
And I agree with enforcing existing rules.

I don't think anyone here is trying to tell others what they should or should not do when it comes to baggage, whether checked or carried onto the plane. My only hope is that everyone will comply with the rules. There will be lots of unhappy people in the beginning, I'm sure.

Sorry to veer off subject, but....... the truth be known, IMO:
The fast food industry has changed this country immeasureably. "I want it and I want it now" is in play in so many facets of our lives. I was in high school before the first McDonalds moved into my town. There was something rewarding about saving for what you wanted. My husband's and my first house was not our dream home with granite countertops and stainless steel appliances. I still don't have those (not that they are even on my wish list). But had I wanted them, they would have waited until affordable, which would be 4-5 houses down the line and not the very first one!

Now back to the subject at hand.

United is not doing this for our benefit. This is just part of their $2 billion cost cutting program.

In my opinion, these are rules that don't need to be enforced because they are followed well enough. That person with the over-sized bag either has a good reason to carry it or they don't know better. That third carry on might be a medical device and not count in the limit. I don't know and I don't care. :) Do you feel anxious waiting another 3 seconds for that lady to stow her third carry-on? I don't.

You can look at enforcement as preventing a customer from "getting away with something" or as the the airline not giving a customer a break. I choose the latter. It just means more work for FAs who will be gate-checking or plane-checking luggage, all the while explaining that they have to do this per company policy and they will do it without apology.

There is a United bean counter out there that figured that enforcing the rules is going to save a buck per flight and multiply that by enough flights and you got something that sounds like real money.

There is no benefit for you or me in this. We are all just cattle. This is just one more cattle prod to keep us in line and moving quickly.

Waiting 30 minutes for a checked bag is outrageous and ridiculous and preposterous and several other negative adjectives. It is 30 minutes of your life that you will never get back. And all the while you are wondering if the bag is actually going to show up.

I wonder: has the imposition of checked bag fees resulted in any improvement in baggage delivery time or reduced the amount of lost/delayed luggage?

Hi 29Feb,

I only mean if it's OK to drag on a stuffed to the brim 24" bag, then the rules should say that. Not state that the limit is 21" but continually let everyone bring on larger bags.

So just saying either enforce the rules that exist, or change them to match what is actually allowed on board in actual practice.

I'm often amused at how people seem to see a plane as different from a bus. Take a Greyhound bus and they'll tell you to stow your luggage in the luggage hold. Take a plane on the other hand and suddenly you should be able to take half your worldly possessions on board with you. Hilarious.

Mrwunrfl, charging for baggage has miraculously resulted in people learning to check less baggage. Amazing huh. Of course it has also resulted in more people trying to take as much as possible onboard with them.

The most annoying result to me, is the segregating on board of what can and cannot go in an overhead bin. If you board with one small carry-on say the size of a messenger bag you are likely to be told it is not BIG enough to go in the overhead bin and must be put under the seat. Yup, the savvy traveller who truly travels light will be inconvenienced in favour of the idiot who packs 40 lbs. in a suitcase with wheels.

http://www.independenttraveler.com/t...d-consequences

You can find plenty of other articles if you Google, 'affect of baggage fees'.

What people never seem to realize is that however trite and hackneyed the expression may be, 'the people get what the people want' is always true.

People want low airfares. For an airline to remain in business however they cannot operate at a loss forever. So they must find a way to make money while at the same time bowing to public demand for low airfares. Paying for baggage, meals, drinks, bigger seats, are all the consequences of that. Think back to when seat pitch started to shrink in order to get more seats on a plane. That was the start.

Flying today is cheaper than it has ever been in relative cost terms. Where my Father might have paid the equivalent of an average person's monthly salary to fly to Europe and back, I can do it for an average person's weekly salary.

But my Father would have been treated like a human being (if not a privileged person having been able to afford it), provided with free drinks (was always rubber chicken though even then), had elbow room, was given a pillow and blanket, earphones he was encouraged to keep as a souvenir, etc.

Now, you get treated like cattle and charged for everything and anything they can think of. But if you think about it, that is basically inevitable unless people are willing to pay more to fly.

I happened to witness the same affect happening with hotels some years ago (mid-90s). On a particular Greek island I am familiar with, package tour operators had beaten down the prices on hotels so much that the hotels simply couldn't make any money.

So one bright spark had the idea of starting to charge guests for the use of sunbeds by the pool. Why not, it's done on beaches all the time. By the end of the season, pretty much every hotel on the island was doing the same.

Now who to blame? Well the tourists of course were up in arms, it was outrageous, a rip-off by the hotels, etc. etc. The tour companies couldn't have cared less, it didn't affect their profits.

But the tourists never gave any thought to WHY the hotels were doing it. They needed to make a profit and the tourists by demanding cheaper package tours from the tour companies were making that impossible.

So the point is, it was the tourists' own fault the hotel was charging for sun beds. If they had been willing to pay more for the vacation and not pushed the tour companies for lower prices, the hotels would not have had to find another way to make money. The tour companies of course are not exempt from blame either. They wanted to maximize their profits without regard for whether the hotel could make a profit.

For me though the most blame rest on the tourists themselves. Book direct with the hotel, book a flight directly with an airline, cut out all the middle men who are sucking money out of you and the supplier. That's how to save money and still let the supplier make a reasonable profit.

Airline rules and charges have nowhere to go except up unless the consumer allows them to put airfares up. Wait until the pay-toilet arrives. LOL

Here is a good article on the real cost of flying.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...oticed/273506/

I don't agree with all the writer's conclusions but the facts are not in doubt.

dulciusexasperis

If there is a like button here similar to Facebook, I would have clicked like on your comments. Couldn't agree with you more!

If you want a laugh Eschew go onto Flyertalk forum and look for topics like this one. It is amazing how incensed some people get over stuff like this.

The exact same information posted there has over 1000 responses so far.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unite...ar-2014-a.html

Yep, flyertalk has a lot of unhappy posters for sure.

The evil tour companies are trying maximize their profit while the poor supplier is just trying to make a reasonable profit. Meaning the tour companies were not being reasonable and the supplier was not trying to maximize profit.

About the Atlantic article:
The graphs showing the inflation-adjusted ticket prices since 1980 are amusing. We should all be grateful to the airlines for this and stop complaining. Let's forget the fact that transportation has become more efficient. The inflation-adjusted cost of a pound of apples at the supermarket would probably have a similarly sloping graph since 1980. Clip those graphs to show only 2009 and later and the both look like this: /

I have not yet paid a baggage fee. How much do I benefit from other people paying the fees? Maybe a buck and a half on the price of a ticket.

<i>Why do we hate fees if they keep basic prices low? Because we're Americans, Heimlich said: "It's the American way to want a product approaching first-class for a price approaching zero." But cultural selfishness ...</i>

So, trying to save a buck is "cultural selfishness" and apparently thinks that is a uniquely American way. Ok, fine.

The flip side to that quote is: It's the American airline industry way to want a price approaching first-class for a product approaching zero.

That is not selfishness or greed or an attempt to maximize profits by the airlines. They are being reasonable and giving me a savings. I save, you save, everybody saves $1.50. WHOOP! Meanwhile a baggage handler loses his job or retires and is not replaced and the ones left have more to do.

As I wrote regarding the linked article mrwunrfl, "I don't agree with all the writer's conclusions."

Here are my conclusions.

The consumer wants to pay nothing.
The airline wants to provide nothing.
Neither can get what they want. So instead, they both cry about each other's unreasonableness.

Your comments are from YOUR perspective aren't they. I rest my case.

I flew SFO - ORD yesterday and this was being enforced.
Most folks had to put their bags in the sizer. There were 2 United attendants manning the sizer as well as TSA (double checking ID's) to help move the process along.

I was amazed at how angry people were!

One of the big issues was the depth of the bag; many were stuffed and too fat. Tho the 'fatness' of the bag doesn't seem to cause as much problem as oversized length.

We started boarding about 15 minutes early as this whole process took forever.

I have been on several flights since this went into practice, and I have yet to see anyone enforcing it. We'll see again on Wednesday, flying out of ORD.

On my flight to Hawaii a couple of weeks ago, they suggested people use the sizer and if it didn't fit to bring their bag to be gate checked. I saw quite a few people gate-checking their bags. So the process wasn't as much enforcement as per Queenie's account as it was "re-education."

This was enforcement. 100% of folks with carry on had to get an OK nod or put it in the sizer before they were allowed on the jet bridge.

I thought that poor sizer would break the way folks were shoving their carryon (AND their personal item) into the thing.

If they did not fit, per the attendants discretion, they were checked (but no charge). And there was of course, arguing.

I fly about 4x per month and have never seen this.
My issue is this has to somehow be streamlined. The process takes about an extra 30 minutes.

We rarely check bags but did so recently , 21" suitcase on Alaska Air, 25" on JetBlue. Both arrived damaged and unusable and we were told handles, zippers, pockets and wheels are not the airlines responsibility so we were stuck buying 2 new bags. Won't check again if anyway around it.