nyc325

I've got a group of students flying to Kenya this summer to do volunteer work and some of them booked a CO (NYC-AMS) then Kenya Airways (AMS - NBO) before I noticed CO's fairly recent 2nd bag charges. I wrote a polite email asking whether we could have the 2nd bag fees waived if we get a letter from the not-for-profit documenting that these goods are to be given to their schools - especially since Kenya Airways allows 2 free bags on African routes. Short answer - no bloody way, we want that second bag money.

There are exemptions for credit card holders, those with status, and military families. Wouldn't an waiver for documented goods to be donated also be worthwhile? Does anyone have any suggestions on whether I have any hope if I try to take this further and, if so, the best way to proceed? thanks.

In the meantime I've told the other 12 students to book on Emirates instead.

wanaflyforless

I regularily book flights for charities.

We do not expect and do not recieve airline baggage fee reductions!

Continental is a business and does not exempt anyone from any fee because it would be a good deed.

It is the responsibility of the traveller to determine baggage fees and choose airlines accordingly.

I do.

snod08

Yes, it makes sense to waive those second bag fees in this situation.

As a business, they cannot let go of their fees....otherwise, people can come up with various reasons for why their fees should be waived.

i am glad you are going with Emirates the next round!
Hopefully they are cheaper and no bag fees as well!

nyc325

"Continental is a business and does not exempt anyone from any fee because it would be a good deed."

As a matter of fact, yes they do. They exempt military travelers and their families. That's a good deed and I think it's the right thing to do. I just don't understand why the military are the only ones they're willing to exempt.

"It is the responsibility of the traveller to determine baggage fees and choose airlines accordingly. I do."

And now I have too and the others will be traveling on Emirates. That's 12 passengers at $1800pp - so over $21,000 in revenue lost by CO, just like that. Not sure if that's so great for their business.

wanaflyforless

I don't think that is why they exempt military.

I think CO has decided military fares are profitable for them and they want that business. Since most US airlines exempt military from baggage fees, CO needs to if they want that business. I think CO made a business decision they would not have made for the sake of doing a good deed.

CO's competitors in most cases charge similar/higher fees for bags and do not exempt charities. So in most cases, CO will not loose business with their current policy.

(CO gets more of our bookings than other airlines because their charge per additional checked bag is lower than average. )

-----------------------------------------------

If you ever find an airline that does exempt charities from baggage fees, I am all ears!

starflyer

I wonder if contacting group sales and describing the situation would have produced a solution to the baggage fee and reduced ticket prices. Was this tried?

channa

It's not a good deed. Americans have a very vocal pro-military contingent, that many elevate military members to some sort of super-hero status. By not giving every possible exemption, waiver, etc. imaginable to these paid government employees would be chastised by this contingent.

I don't recall who started it, but there was a big hullabaloo before these military bag waiver policies were in effect, when a soldier had to pay some bag fees. The airline was treating him just like any other customer, but the PR that resulted from charging him was enough to intimidate the airlines into waiving the fees for the military or risk the wrath of the vocal, pro-military sentiment in America.

snod08

I have booked tickets through group ticketing on CO. There are some great advantages in ticket pricing, rules and restrictions when you book through the group sales.
however, they did not offer any reduction in baggage fees (we were on humanitarian missions as well).

But, truly speaking, the relaxed ticketing rules/restrictions made up more than any bag fees.

transportbiz

As all things, you need to take the fare PLUS baggage fee into consideration. What is the bottom line? Book whatever airline offers the best deal. Emirates is a great carrier anyways, wish they'd join *A.

ijgordon

Well, not quite -- Kenya airlines would have been getting roughly half of that.

COIAHLGW

So, what was the price of the Emirates flight compared to the other? Was it more, the same or less? If it cost more, there would not be any saving for you even though the bags were "included" in the cost.

raehl311

Military also happens to be a very easily definable and verifiable class of customer. Either they are in the military or they are not, and they all carry government-issued ID to prove it.

"Charity" is a very nebulous term. There are piles of different kinds of charities in the IRS tax code, and then throw in state law on top of that... and what level of documentation does a charity require to count as a charity? Additionally, how does the airline verify that someone is actually traveling for a charitable purpose? Nefarious travelers would simply forge letters saying they were traveling for a charitable purpose to dodge the fees.


To the OP, I question the "charitable" motives of the travel in the first place. Buying thousands of dollars in airfare to send kids to a foreign country is a horrendously poor use of resources. For the price of the airfare of sending one kid over to Kenya, you could hire someone in Kenya to do tens to hundreds of times as much work as that kid will do, having tens to hundreds of times the impact.

Given that your trip is at most 10% charitable (90% of the resources you're spending to do it are being spent on the traveler, not the charitable effort), maybe CO should give you a 10% baggage fee reduction.

raehl311

I'm not in this pro-military contingent. But I think it is poor form to charge people for bags on travel that is essentially not voluntary. We all contribute to the military, whether that's taxes directly, or legally mandated support for employees on guard duty, or slightly higher fares/baggage fees so people traveling on duty get their fees waived.

Plus, have you SEEN the bags some of these guys pull off the belt? I don't think it's even the $30 checked bag fee that's the issue, it's the $300/bag overweight/oversize fee. Have to remember that most of us travel for a week or two. Military folks are packing enough stuff for a year.

nyc325

I've heard this argument many times and while the immediate economics might be correct, the fundamental assumption, in my opinion, is way off. Yes, the cost of the trip exceed the immediate good that these kids can do and yes, just giving money to someone hired might provide a more immediate return for those on the receiving end.

However, in my experience, many of the kids that have gone on this program in the past have come home with a fire in their belly to make a difference in the world. Past participants have raised and continued to send over many multiples of the initial investment in their trip, with a passion that generally only comes from personal experience and understanding. So, baggage frustrations aside, I wholeheartedly disagree with this rationale for just staying at home.

nyc325

Emirates is about the same - so without the bag charges, less. The times of the flights weren't as good, but we'll make them work now.