donnyb

It will apply in the sense that if you do not have a single PNR with both your mainland and interisland on the same record, they will not interline the bags.
You may not have to pay bag fees depending on your status, but it will still be a major pain in the butt (bag re-check, double security screen) and possibly missed connections in HNL !

This is potentially a PR disaster for HA. What a stupid move. I am still trying to figure out the thinking here. It seems like a "downgrade" in service to match go! who does not have many interline agreements.

In the past, I often booked my interisland separately because the flight connections offered by CO, UA, AA, DL had longer than necessary layovers in HNL, you could not get the full list of available flights on offer from HA via these other carriers. But now I will have to seriously take a hard look at who I fly and when.

Aloha1

Exactly!! That's why I've always booked separate PNR's for inter island and mainland. What the frack are they thinking??

MKE-MR

Well, the contract of carriage still says nothing about this in the baggage section. This has the potential to really screw our vacation. (Luckily, the return portion only)

donnyb

If its a problem with connection time, you might try to proactively call & request a slightly earlier interisland flight if one exists, at no cost to you of course, since they changed the rules after purchase.

donnyb

I sent an email to our local newspaper here in Hilo with a link to this thread in hopes they will investigate this and write a story. There is gonna be some really upset Big Island residents when this kicks in.

KOADude

There's way more to this than "meets the eye." According to HA's corporate counsel, on April 25, 2011, the US DOT issued a rule (14 CFR 399.87) that requires the same baggage allowances and fees that apply at the beginning of a passenger's itinerary apply throughout the entire itinerary if the journey originates or ends in the U.S. Apparently, 14 CFR 399.87 had a deadline August 23, 2011 that was extended to January 24, 2012 for full compliance. Citing technical difficulties and the lack of a "centralized bag rule database," the International Air Transport Association (IATA) along with several other air transport associations filed a petition on November 28, 2011 to delay the implementation of 14 CFR 399.87 for one year. Unfortunately, the petition was denied on January 6, 2012.

In its response to the petition, the US DOT cited that airlines should be able to comply with 14 CFR 399.87 in situations where "all of the flights on a passenger's itinerary are operated by a single carrier with no code-share or interlining." Furthermore, the US DOT stated that "the vast majority of passengers fly on these types of itineraries" (in which there is no code-sharing or interlining). Here's a link a PDF of the US DOT's response to the petition to delay the implementation of 14 CFR 399.87...
http://airconsumer.dot.gov/rules/Den...on%20Final.pdf

To make matters worse, the US DOT announced that its Office of the Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings is not going to enforce 14 CFR 399.87 for six-month period "if certain conditions are met." At the very latest, this "six-month period" ends on July 24, 2012. HA's "official response" to all of this is to alter its baggage policies to ensure compliance with 14 CFR 399.87 starting on May 1, 2012. I find it somewhat disingenuous that some folks at HA are blaming its change in baggage policies on a rule by the US DOT that's supposed to "enhance airline passenger protections."

Fortunately, not all of the "powers-that-be" at HA support the change in baggage policies. It's going to be somewhat interesting to see how this plays out after May 1st.

Aloha1

Great informative post.

cblaisd

Aloha kakou,

If you wish to make partisan political characterizations or have have partisan political discussions, please start a thread in OMNI/PR.

Thanks,

cblaisd
Co-Moderator, Hawai`i-based Airlines forum

Aloha1

Sometimes laws are passed or edicts issued with unintended consequences. This certainly sounds like one of them .

sullim4

I often take family with me on vacation to the islands that are AA elites. What often happens is that they will book AA tickets to SEA, I will join them on AS or HA to the islands, and then they'll come back to SEA and continue on to NYC.

The current interline policy saved their bacon 2 years ago at SEA, where an HA MX caused a 9 hour delay that barely allowed them to make an overnight connection from SEA to JFK (they made it with 15 minutes to spare). Their bags would have otherwise been stuck in limbo at SEA for 24 hours until the next flight left.

AS is now the no brainer choice to the islands for me. The one thing HA had going for them was the widebody aircraft but I'll put up with a 737 if it means that they won't interline baggage for people traveling with me.

paulmasterton

I received an email containing a press statement/FAQ stating the policy has been delayed until 1 June. So now creep in with my flight on 30 May.

Although when I now look on Hawaiian's website I can see nothing about it...

DTWpistons

Interesting. There now is a statement on HA's site but doesn't say anything about the delay.

http://www.hawaiianair.com/help/Page...Statement.aspx

I find it very disengenuous that HA is hiding behind this rule to extract more baggage fees (which they are effectively doing). No other mainline carrier seems to have issued any other statements about this. I also find it incredulous that they will not accept bags in HNL from other carriers anymore. So even if I through check my bags at my point of origin to my final destination in Hawaii, HA will not transport it there but instead unload it at HNL (yet Delta has always tagged bags to final destinations in my experience at my home airport and I don't see them stopping doing this).. Imagine how many people will be caught unaware by this.

And I also agree that DOT ruling 399.87 that is supposed to "enhance passenger protections" does the reverse in this case. This rule needs to be modified to account for this specific situation.

lkar

So, I have a question related to this issue, which I hope belongs here....

I have split your question out to its own thread:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hawai...if-so-how.html

cblaisd
Co-Moderator, Hawaii-based Airlines forum

bajong

I am furious with Hawaiian Air over this change! I intend to avoid flying on Hawaiian whenever possible and fly United directly out of Hilo. So long Hawaiian, you just lost another customer that flies 60+ segments per year.

Aloha1

I had an interisland flight on HA scheduled in July to HNL connecting to an HA partner mainland carrier flight to DTW (where HA doesn't fly). Called the "Customer (non)Response" 888 number and asked about this policy. They immediately transferred me to Reservations (AKA, Mindanao, Philippines). I stated that if indeed this was the new policy, I wanted an immediate full refund of my ticket. No argument, they just agreed.
So, my conclusion is that, yes, HA WILL do this on 5/1, and two, I'm done with them. No more Premier Club, no more Pualani. From now on, I'm booking mainland carriers direct from and to Maui until this insanity ends. My guess is that the HA "partners" may soon retaliate against HA for this shameless act. I am sending a letter to Dunkerley and suggest any and all on this Board who are upset do the same. Not to Customer Response, but to the Executive Suite.