Forced bag check w a fee
Oct 13, 2013, 1:53 pm
#76
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,340
If the rule forces people to check bags that would reasonably fit on the plane, then it's idiotic. Head to Europe and enjoy the bins stupidly filled at 15% capacity with jackets and loose bottles of duty-free liquor, and the idiotic wait at the baggage carousel. I'll stay here in the US, enjoying sensible use of space and getting off the plane and right out the door of the airport.
Do your carry-ons fit completely in the sizer? Have you checked?
The rule as applied on the hundreds of UA flights I've flown is that gate-checking is free.
Do your carry-ons fit completely in the sizer? Have you checked?
The rule as applied on the hundreds of UA flights I've flown is that gate-checking is free.
All my carry-ons fit in the sizer nicely. If I am in any doubt I just go soft sided and that will fit in any sizer.
Oct 13, 2013, 1:57 pm
#77
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: MDE
Programs: AA EP, CM PP, AV GM, UA Silver, SPG Gold, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt Plat, Marriott Plat, Accor Plat
Posts: 1,002
I must be loathed by many here. I carry-on three bags every time I fly. The third is medical, therefore allowed and does not count as one of the two I carry on.
My hanging bag is often STUFFED because UA is so tight about their weight limits for checked items. As a 1K, I get three bags at 70 pounds, but at 71 pounds I am charged $400 extra per bag for a flight USA-Latin America. That hanging bag wouldn't fit into a sizer if my life depended on it, but it always fits without effort into the bin above my front cabin seat on any mainline.
My laptop case is so thick that I can almost always count on a fight to fit it under the seat in front of me. Ironically, it fits better on the rare occasion that I'm in E, as there is less "stuff" built in under those seats. Under seat storage in J or F has been seriously compromised by all the enclosures for whatever electronics may be offered on any given plane.
Any time I get an offer to check my hanging bag for free at the gate, I take it. I always travel with three checked bags, so I consider that to be a big fat bonus to get it off my shoulder and into the cargo hold.
If the airlines are going to start enforcing the bag size, then I would suggest the far bigger problem (no pun intended) is the passengers who don't fit into their seats. Next to the bag sizer, they could have a butt sizer. "If your butt won't fit here..." would be something I know that a lot of E pax would appreciate. Bags are the last thing on one's mind when the person next to them is taking up the entire armrest and 1/3 of their seat. The longer the flight, the greater the torture.
My hanging bag is often STUFFED because UA is so tight about their weight limits for checked items. As a 1K, I get three bags at 70 pounds, but at 71 pounds I am charged $400 extra per bag for a flight USA-Latin America. That hanging bag wouldn't fit into a sizer if my life depended on it, but it always fits without effort into the bin above my front cabin seat on any mainline.
My laptop case is so thick that I can almost always count on a fight to fit it under the seat in front of me. Ironically, it fits better on the rare occasion that I'm in E, as there is less "stuff" built in under those seats. Under seat storage in J or F has been seriously compromised by all the enclosures for whatever electronics may be offered on any given plane.
Any time I get an offer to check my hanging bag for free at the gate, I take it. I always travel with three checked bags, so I consider that to be a big fat bonus to get it off my shoulder and into the cargo hold.
If the airlines are going to start enforcing the bag size, then I would suggest the far bigger problem (no pun intended) is the passengers who don't fit into their seats. Next to the bag sizer, they could have a butt sizer. "If your butt won't fit here..." would be something I know that a lot of E pax would appreciate. Bags are the last thing on one's mind when the person next to them is taking up the entire armrest and 1/3 of their seat. The longer the flight, the greater the torture.
Oct 13, 2013, 2:05 pm
#78
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
I can't believe that this "rules is rules" bs is coming from adults... and I'm a lawyer!
And, for the record, if a law was really uniformly unenforced, then it's enforcement by a single rogue cop would likely be unconstitutional.
And, for the record, if a law was really uniformly unenforced, then it's enforcement by a single rogue cop would likely be unconstitutional.
Oct 13, 2013, 2:10 pm
#79
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: HaMerkaz/Exit 145
Programs: UA, LY, BA, AA
Posts: 13,167
Oct 13, 2013, 2:13 pm
#80
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,857
This is all well and good until we see the post "the agent was too busy charging people checked bag fees to process my upgrade so I sat in Y while two F seats went out empty!"
Oct 13, 2013, 2:14 pm
#81
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
I would love to be a fly on the wall as you argue that in court.
Oct 13, 2013, 3:01 pm
#84
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,686
Ding ding ding.
Indeed, when a pax drags his 70 pounder to the jetway, he is expending energy that comes from his fat reserves, thus reducing the mass carried by the plane, thereby conserving fuel and further lowering costs. Plus some pax will forget their carry ons at security screening. All in all major win for UA.
Indeed, when a pax drags his 70 pounder to the jetway, he is expending energy that comes from his fat reserves, thus reducing the mass carried by the plane, thereby conserving fuel and further lowering costs. Plus some pax will forget their carry ons at security screening. All in all major win for UA.
Oct 13, 2013, 3:08 pm
#85
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,909
Don't forget the sweat that is now all over the carpet in the boarding area and areas leading to the boarding area. Thus costing UA more in cleaning costs... oh, wait, they don't clean anything. Never mind.
Oct 13, 2013, 3:27 pm
#86
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: where lions are led by donkeys...
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 20,340
Oct 13, 2013, 3:46 pm
#87
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,830
Oct 13, 2013, 3:54 pm
#88
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 223
If its within the size dimensions (and you can lift it into the bin on your own), go ahead and bring it on the plane. And if there's no room, then yes, you should get to gate check it free. Once its beyond the allowed carry-on dimensions, its not a carry-on, it should have always been a checked bag. Just because you got it to the gate yourself, doesn't change the rules,...And I still stand by my position that anyone, elite or not, including myself, should be made to pay the regular checked bag fee if a non-carry-on sized bag gets as far as the gate and has to be checked there.
Add me to all those who want carry on rules enforced. Boarding would be much quicker - and people with legitimate carry-on bags would not be forced to gate check due to full overhead bins. Hopefully gatelice may also be reduced as the "competition" for overhead space is reduced/eliminated
And, reducing the amount of over sized carry-ons would make de-boarding so much quicker.
Oct 13, 2013, 3:55 pm
#89
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oregon
Programs: AA EXP, AS 75K, UA 1MM Gold, HH Diamond, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Plat, National EE, Hertz PC
Posts: 4,001
Hooray! Have been waiting for them to enforce this heavily exploited loophole for some time. I do agree that the 9" dimension on the sizer is too stingy for 80% of bags that actually do fit, however something needs to be done about those sideways bags. I'd support installing partitions in the overhead bin the width of a compliant bag to prevent those who abuse the carry-on space as a way to worm out of their checked bag fee.
Oct 13, 2013, 4:20 pm
#90
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: NYC
Programs: Marriot Am, MU Pt
Posts: 3,092
I think this should be enforced everywhere.
I specifically bought a IATA carry on, so it fits straight in and gives my fellow passengers ample space for their bags.
I don't over pack my bags and I carry what I need.
I hate when I get on the plane and find the guy in front of me with 4 bags, taking up the overhead where I was sitting (and he was sitting further back). Yes, I saw this yesterday. He said, it was his wife and kids stuff and they were in restroom, so the GA let him board. (I late found he was traveling solo, so I passed him going to use the lavatory)
I also firmly believe in first checked back free, because to me that's a reasonable expectation. And have those weights strictly enforced.
I'm glad you're not lawyer. 
I specifically bought a IATA carry on, so it fits straight in and gives my fellow passengers ample space for their bags.
I don't over pack my bags and I carry what I need.
I hate when I get on the plane and find the guy in front of me with 4 bags, taking up the overhead where I was sitting (and he was sitting further back). Yes, I saw this yesterday. He said, it was his wife and kids stuff and they were in restroom, so the GA let him board. (I late found he was traveling solo, so I passed him going to use the lavatory)
I also firmly believe in first checked back free, because to me that's a reasonable expectation. And have those weights strictly enforced.