Let's debate this. I can see the "nickel-and-diming" aspect of this, but as the article states, the SkyCap function is great to many who don't want to wait in line, or are late for a flight. In that regard, I don't see a huge drop in demand from people now having to pay $2 + tip for the service as it is still better than standing in line or worse yet - missing a flight. I also am not sure that people will stop tipping Skycaps (such that they lose their cash income) because of this fee. Maybe it's just me, but Americans seem to be very generous in general about tipping. Even if it means $2 less for themselves.

So, from a business perspective, it seems to make financial sense since this is a revenue-generating initiative. Now, of course, there's the customer perception that might affect things overall, but I'm not sure this kind of action alone is enough to turn travellers away from choosing to travel on United.

Lastly, the competitive factor. Last I hear, NW and AA were both testing the same $2 fee at SEA, along with UA. If UA is implementing this with little cost and likely incremental revenue, I would be very surprised to see AA and NW sit by the wayside and not implement this in one form or another. At that point, you've got three of the largest carriers in the country implementing the same thing, and setting a standard that evens the playing field.

Forgive me for being honest, but from a business perspective, I think the airlines started out way back giving too much out for free. When you go to a restaurant and want someone to park your car, you pay a fee on top of a tip. It's a special service and people have gotten accustomed to paying for that service.

This is a recurring theme with things from free headsets to meals to SkyCap service - it's always more difficult to start charging for a service that used to be free, than to have set the expectation early on that extra service = not free. To me, these latest actions are less "nickel-and diming" than it is coming to terms with the fact that things were way too "free" in the past. Of course, for reasons mentioned above, taking away a free benefit is harder on customer perception than never having made it free in the first place.