aristoph

No wonder you're a fan of the new policy then - it looks like it was written with you specifically in mind!

Dave Noble

Indeed. It seems to me that whoever wrote the policy must be a diver 69Kg base plus 45Kg bonus gives 114Kg theoretical max in business/first with a paltry 91Kg in WT+

Dave

Gaza

Correct me if I am wrong but the first incarnation of this a few months back mentioned DfT (or HSE), requirements.

Stewie Mac

Dave,
Thanks for pointing that out to me - seems very clear.


What he said

SLF

So, back in June we'd already given up any belief that BA were listening...what has changed since?...what hope is there?

hfly

Yes Gaza, that is correct along with several other LIES which have all now been completely eliminated.

Kiwi Flyer

I doubt this is correct. The operating airline controls check in process, rules and procedures. Some flights may have six or more codeshares. Is check in (who may not even be employees of the operating airline) really going to check which of six or more sets of rules applies? No - cant see it happening. In some originating airports it is difficult enough for contract check in to apply the operating airline's rules correctly.

cmtskier

How is it that travellers from N America can carry on luggage that now must be checked from LHR! I had this experience in Nov, with a wheeled bag that was 2 in. too large for those metal size boxes with the goons there to enforce checking. Whose idea is this BA or BAA ( I see BAA may be out for managing UK airports - good ridance). Now the weight limit. Whats next scales for each passenger with an obesity charge??

Dave Noble

Neither. The size limitations are a directive of the DfT and are being enforced by the airport. If it exceeds 56x45x25 cm, then it is not permitted as cabin baggage.

Dave

leaveamessage

56x45x25cm

Dave Noble

whoops....indeed....10cm would be a bit small

Dave

PUCCI GALORE

Sorry - I insult no one. I ignore them. What I say and permit myself to say here is one thin, what I say and do at work is another matter.

Vote with your feet? Yes to those who think that this is the straw that actually breaks your back - fine. I would. Problem is...what are the other carriers doing? It is a rhetorical question as I am not that interested - but I am sure that there is a list somewhere and I am sure that someone else is not nterested.

The odd thing is that I have had a PM from someone who has posted here and to whom I was speaking. The PM was charming and witty beyond belief - and he had every right to be vexed.

Aristoph - if you chose to lay your battle lines down over the barmy policy of only allowing one cabin bag per person, of this even crazier notion that everyone on the plane can have the same, that no notice is taken over which cabins these passengers are in, of the craven capitulation of Little Willie (God was any man better names) over the BAA threat to evice BA from LHR and at the sme time prove that he is not even close to being in O'Leary's league (like him or loath him he is afraid of nobody and more than is the Bearded Wonder) then I will be by your side. If you complain aout the shaby treatment that our Elite Executive Card holders get booking MFU, and the shambles that is the BA website I will be right by your side. If, however you expect an ounce of sympathy over packing a suitcase at under 23kgs (truthfully that is already 50lbs which is a lot) then I will not.

For the gentleman who's company sends him on a three week trip without paying for laundry, I wonder what sort of organisation that is? Is this normal ? Now that answer I am interested in. I for one intend to chat to some passengers tonight and ask the question - after Ihave roundly insulted and humiliated them of course as I am informed that this is the way to go.

Cargo Cult

I really don't understand your position here, as there are plenty of situations where those wanting to check in a bag over 23kg should be treated with some sympathy (IMO of course ). We've heard in this thread from those travelling with children who only have so many hands to hold onto things and offspring; we've heard from business travellers with heavy equipment - and there are others. It's not all about people who are unable to decide which of 6 pairs of shoes to leave at home for a weekend break.

It is the very inflexibility of this policy which is so iniquitous. The phrase "computer says no" has already been used in this thread, and it's a poor reflection on BA. It's not easy to weigh luggage on a set of bathroom scales - I know, I've tried recently - yet we seem to be expected to do so to prevent us accidentally turning up with 23.5kg or (heaven forbid!) 24kg and being told to repack/throw something away/buy new bag and pay extortionate fee.

I can see why BA is doing this, so they can cut out still more staff at T5, but disagree entirely with their approach. By all means encourage pax to use self-service mechanisms, but try to provide them with incentives for doing so rather than penalties for not doing so (for example "OLCI and try and get a good seat" is a better message than "If you don't OLCI you'll be in a middle seat at the back", but that's another thread). Also, people need somewhere to turn where things go wrong - SSCI can fail, the government might decide to impose an additional tax that has to be collected at checkin and, yes, your bag might turn out to be heavier than you realised.

BA is heading down the route where they are overly dependent on automated systems and run the risk that as soon as something significant goes wrong, or the unexpected happens, there will be hundreds of pax forlornly queueing for the 2 or so real people on duty in T5. I work in IT, and I'd describe myself as a geek (but not a nerd ) - I love it that I can use computers to make my life easier - but I like to know that there are actual real people there who can help me when I need it. I suspect I'm not alone in this.

As for the baggage policy, by all means try and encourage people to keep their bags under 23kg. The H&S arguments have strong merit after all. But keep the flexibility and give the poor pax some incentive to keep the weight down. My suggestion of a fair compromise is to allow the automated machines to accept bags only up to 23kg but still allow bags of up to 32kg. Those wishing to check heavier bags will have to use a Slow Bag Drop and queue a little to do so. Light packers can just breeze through.

I know I've gone on a bit, but I'm really unhappy about this policy and need to vent a little I can't remember the last time that my 'normal' travel has resulted in checking a bag of 23kg, but I do have two specific examples of where this policy will hurt me:

We recently took a cycling trip in SQ J. Our luggage consisted of a bagged-up bike (with various cycling gear and kit in the bike bag) and a single heavy suitcase plus hand luggage. So, two checked in items for the two of us but each weighed 25-30kg. Manhandling a bike bag, suitcase and luggage around three airports and various hotels is difficult as it is - an additional bag would have made it pretty awful. Under BA's policy, the bike would have had to go on its own, with none of the clothing in the bag helping protect it, and we would have probably had to notify them the night before and make special arrangements (the previous incarnation of the policy allowed for heavy items that could not be broken up at all, but made it difficult and probably expensive - I assume this hasn't changed). Coupled with having to break up the stuff in the other case, we probably would have been left with maybe 3 cases plus bike bag plus hand luggage. We probably would have been forced to leave the bike at home

Another example is snowboarding - we have a bag that takes our two snowboards and various kit that will weigh in at between 25-30kg and a second bag that will be less than 23 kg. Under the policy, the snowboard bag would not be permitted, as it can technically be broken down by splitting out the two boards, taking out the boots etc. This will result in several extra items to check in, much more hassle, and probably an excess payment to BA How is this an acceptable way to treat customers?

Generally, I think that a piece-based system is unfair. Weight-based is inherently more fair and reflective of actual fuel costs etc.

This policy will probably be the straw that breaks my back. I'll be renewing Gold for next year because of the flying I've already done, but all of these many cuts and bad corporate attitude have ruined my previously strong loyalty towards BA. I'll probably fly enough with them to stay Silver, but that's it - time too reluctantly cultivate my relationship with Lufthansa and Star

One of the great things about BA has been the staff on the ground, and the way that they can and will sometimes show a little flexibility to help you out when you need it. It's a loyalty-builder and a selling point for the airline and a great shame that management don't seem to recognise that.

flamboyant 1

As I am rather busy nowadays, just a short simple question:

What's the maximum allowance for BA Gold in paid First USA-Europe?
3 bags of 23kg each?
additionally, will a golfbag be allowed as a fourth bag?

How much handluggage?

terpfan101

Very well said about everything. This last part stood out and I agree, its that empowering employees so that they can use their discretion to solve problems goes a long way towards improving customer service. And the whole issue of flexibility and now their soon to be lack there of is something that is beneficial to customers.

I really hope somebody at BA is reading this thread, but from what everyone has said it seems like they could care less about what their customers think.