No Carry-Ons? Time To Redefine RESPONSIBILITY!
 

This is all a matter of RESPONSIBILITY!

The airlines throughout the years have consistantly demonstrated they have very little responsibility when it comes to protecting their customer's property. Then when the "rubber meets the road" and the airlines have to "shell out" the bucks for lost property, they make it so their customers are victimized twice...or even three times. When customers are even allowed to collect on the damages, the compensation generally takes months to get to them and it is usually a fraction of the total loss.

Combine this with some of the most dishonest and irresponsible employees the airlines hire who have been filmed playing "basketball" with people's luggage, pillaging through people's suitcases and stealing electronic items from suitcases (all of these things are still occurring today).

Personally, the technology MUST be placed in the security areas of the airport and on the airplanes. We have the technology to do this. I have absolutely no problem planning my day to get to an airport two hours before my flight departs. I have no problem going through a thorough personal screening and inspection of all of my carry-ons and on my person.

However, I DO NOT TRUST ANY EMPLOYEE OF ANY AIRLINE OR FOR THAT MATTER ANY OTHER COMPANY IN THE WORLD TO HOLD OR PROTECT MY NOTEBOOK COMPUTER! My laptop has my professional life in it. Yes, it is completely backed up but when I travel to do a presentation, if my computer is lost, that means I have to go out and purchase a new $5,000 computer and load it with all of the data. Then because of the arrogance of the airlines, I will only receive $2,000 for my lost or stolen computer.

The moral of the story is that if the airlines or the FAA pulls this nonsense of banning carry-ons and computers on board, I will immediately regionalize my business and completely discontinue any flights and all of my employees' flights. They will lose millions of dollars of our business and I will just sit back and watch this industry go into the tank!

They do not have to ban laptops on planes. Sky Marshalls and better pre-flight screening will work great. In Israel, El Al Airlines allows notebook computers on their flights and they have some of the most rigid screening in the industry. Yes, you have to get to the airport 3 hours before your flight, but you do not die on their planes.

Our government and our airline companies can make this work with some common sense and no panic. I am just sick and tired of seeing things run with "knee-jerk" reactions and reactive reasoning. It would be refreshing to see some proactive behavior and return to the "customer comes first" attitudes in both security and service.

Remember, if things were done correctly in the first place, and the airlines hired the right people who do not get on TV playing games with their customer's property, stealing their valuables and losing their luggage, this might all be a very moot point...but, the reality is 180 degrees different and the points are very vaild.

Let's see the airlines hire the best people to secure their planes. Let's see the pride of America (military, police or National Guard) screen the passengers instead of minimum-wage help who make less compensation and are trained less than a convenience store employee. Let's see armed Sky Marshalls on our flights. Let's keep the cockpit doors closed throughout the entire flight and let's fortify the doors to make them unbreakable (the captain's responsibility is the safety of the passengers and safety starts and ends in the cockpit...you cannot fly a plane from Seat 16B). Let's "bond" all employees who have to handle the customer's baggage and completely eliminate the financial limits on lost, damaged or stolen baggage...and make the airlines and their insurance companies responsible to pay the full compensation in seven days and not seven months...

And one other question...Since airports have been charging expensive PFC's (Passenger Facility Charge) for each person landing at the airport, how much of those billions of dollars have been allocated to airport security? Shouldn't the airports and their municipalities have to pay for the security? I personally think it is ridiculous to make the airlines have to pay for security personnel. This is the reason why one airline has better security than another. Security should be consistant and not based on which company the airline has hired. If the airports find it necessary to charge these stupid PFC's they should use this money to ensure our safety.

Remember, they have only been charging these PFC's since the early 1990's.

There is a lot wrong with our system. Now that we have experienced a tremendous tragedy, it is the best time to fix the system and operate it the way it should have been done in the first place. Let's see a better mix of intelligence, thought, proactive behavior and common sense go into the final decisions...and completely eliminate knee-jerk reactions, panic and stupidity...and rumors and gossip!

Then and only then will people have a reason to get back into the air and pump money back into the travel economy. With the gossip about eliminating carry-ons on flights, banning pre-booking seating, no curb-side check-in and everything else I have heard, we are going to create an environment where the mainstream will never get back into an airplane...and when that happens the problem will be eliminated because there will be no airline companies in business whatsoever.

Who is planning to ban all carryon and computers? I noticed that PanAm -- the small airline that laughingly calls itself PanAm -- has done this. But anything else is idle speculation and fear mongering. I have flown on six flights and two airlines in the past two weeks. And while I have been subjected to varying degrees of additional scrutiny and visual search of my carry-on bags, I have not yet been denied access to the terminal airside areas with a large shoulder bag, and a second smaller catch-all bag or duty-free shopping bag. I have seen other travellers rolling their somewhat larger carry-ons, and with them either a briefcase or large shoulder bag, plus purse if female. These people have had no problems at ORD, SJC, TPE or YYZ, the four airports where I base my experiences from.

I don't mind the extra scrutiny, though thought the removal of a plastic disposable razor was as silly as those who have had to surrender nail cutters and the like. Only in TPE was I required to turn on my computer, though I had expected this at all check points, so kept it on "sleep" for that possibility.

I agree with the notion of responsibility. In the past I have also opposed some of the excesses displayed by those abusing the carry-on rules, either by bringing an excessively large amount onto an airplane and expecting it to fit somewhere in a cramped coach cabin, or by those who stuff their bags in the First Class storage areas and then tromp off to the coach section.

So, please. Until you can prove that all carry-on will indeed be stopped, don't foment idle gossip and panic.

As for the assignment of Passenger User Fees for security, Congress mandated this as the responsibility of individual airlines, not airport authorities. The airports themselves have a large responsibility to ensure the buildings and land are secure airside, so I suppose you can say some of those fees are going to a side of security we don't see much of.

Actually, I wish it was just idle gossip. I saw the articles on FoxNews.com and MSNBC. According to what I read it was the FAA and Congress who were considering the changes in carry-on rules along with prohibiting people from pre-selecting their seats. According to the article, by prohibiting the preselection of seats, this will not permit people to plant weapons to use to hijack a plane.

When I see articles like this, like you, I get quite annoyed. My livelihood is computer and Internet consulting. My notebook computer is my professional life and if I do not have my computer, I am literally out of business. If I am out of business, my employees and I cannot fly.

I firmly believe if these new laws were enacted, it would put the commercial airline industry out of business. As for PFC's...up until the early 1990's they were not necessary. It is money from taxpayers in the local jurisdictions that support what you stated in your previous post...the PFC's have been criticized from day one and are being criticized today as an unnecessary tax on the traveller. Perhaps the PFC's need to be more focused on security and the airlines need to be relieved of this responsiblity.

Congress did not enact the PFC charges, it was a domino effect from local airport jurisdiction to local airport. In fact, several airports do not charge PFC's or landing fees. Perhaps Congress or the FAA should mandate that the PFC's go to airport security. That would be in the best interest of travelers.

There are many public places you can hide a weapon onboard a aircraft. By taking away assigned seats you gain nothing but unhappy customers.

While PFCs were not mandated by Congress, it did take an act of Congress to pass a bill allowing them. It also took another act of Congress to raise the maximum from $3.00 per airport to $4.50. I think it was called the "Airport Food Court Act of 1993" or something.

Friends, we are watching every enemy of the traveller at work. The 9/11 attack has given the airlines and government carte blanche to pull out their wish lists.

2 hour check ins? (check)
eliminate curbside? (temporary check)
eliminate food, no matter how nasty? (check)

restrict concourses ticketed pax only? (check that i might be in favor of)

find a way to seperate travellers from their baggage without having to spend money upgrading baggage service? (pen ready to check)

thats all it is, my friends, nothing more, nothing less....

The Atlanta Journal Constitution ran an online poll recently asking if Carry On Luggage should be banned. The last time I checked 70% said Yes / 30% said No. All this poll tells me is a lot of people with Internet access don't travel very much.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Diver90

Agreed 100% with you Diver!

Let the government take away carry-on privileges and then let them all figure out why businesspeople are not flying anymore.

I can understand knives and sharp objects...but laptops and expensive electronics need to go with the traveler...or there had better be insurance adjusters in the baggage claim areas handing out money on the spot to completely compensate for loss.

Also, it might not be a bad idea to make the consequences of stealing and abusing people's luggage not worth commiting the crime. Right now a slap on the wrist is not enough to stop this multi-million dollar crime wave. In this time of tragedy and war, the consequences must be severe because their actions just add to the public's perception of negativity toward the industry. Also, the industry will not recover with this negative publicity.

I agree with a few earlier posters. This is not a reality, at least today. So,let's not get quite so upset about it.

The negative response would be so dramatic when or if every announced, that it would not happen.

As to the poll, I agree. I doubt most of those people fly often, especially for business. And, I would bet many of them made up their own definition of what "carry on" is and were actually referring to the heavy duty carry ons, maybe even roll ons.

It's the people who carry on what looks like the inventory of a small luggage store that makes the passengers who follow the rules want to ban carry-ons. I've been thwacked in the head more than once by carry-ons that someone just has to take out of the overhead compartment ASAP when the plane lands.

Rigorous enforcement of gate checking on full flights would be a big help.

While we're on the subject of carry-ons, how about:

1. permitting briefcases/laptop cases/purses, but;
2. forbidding wheelies?

I think the person who wrote this thread is somewhat self riteous and self centered.

Listen folks, do you realize WHY they want to ban carry ons?

It's because new regulations may require HAND CHECKING of ALL CARRYONS. So by limiting folks to a briefcase or purse (and nothing larger) you allow this to happen while still allowing security to move quickly. This is because it doesn't take very long to check a purse or briefcase as compared to a roll on, garment bag, or laptop case.

This means you may have to check your bag, BUT you will not face a long line at the security checkpoint.

Personally, I think if they allow briefcases they should allow a MODEST size slim style laptop case (not the huge ones that double as a laptop case and briefcase).

That'd be great if the airlines could guarantee your luggage would arrive on time with some level of certainty.

I travel with a laptop, and uniforms that are both required when I reach my destination. Neither one gets there, I cannot accomplish what I need to do.

I am more than willing to check my uniforms and wheelie when returning home, but cannot afford to do so on the outbound leg.

BTW, I had a bag "lost" for about a week, and was going through the reimbursement process when it was located. Let me ask you, how many receipts do you have for your luggage? With just the cost of my bag, I was well on the way to the reimbursable limit...If I could find all my receipts.

So....take away my carry-on, and I will have to drive from ATL to DC/VA/etc.

It is too easy for any of us to agree to do without something that is critical to a minority of the population. But don't be surprised when that minority finds other means to travel/conduct business.

Today's version of the news seems to be offering the idea of one carry on per person plus a 'purse size bag'. I can do that! No problems. As far as laptop computers are concerned, that are we supposed to do with all that time? Waste it?

I wouldn't ban all wheelies, just the big ones. I have a 16" TravelPro that works real nice.

If they make it too hard for us to fly on commercial airlines, we'll figure out another way to fly or for trips of under 300 miles, drive, as that's about the break even point now.

Why not install locks on all overhead bins and other luggage storage areas. No carry on allowed under your seat.

If the airlines do ban all carry-on except for a purse/diaper bag, I would be the first to start carrying a rather large purse on all of my plane trips.

i think i'll have to invent a nice black leather "diaper bag". maybe one with a laptop sized pouch inside it? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Thank you for your most insulting and tactless comments.

Personally, you do not know me well enough to make a remark like you did on the quote above, and if you did, you would realize that I am the kind of person who does not write a comment unless my conviction level about what I am saying is at the highest level.

I am very open minded and my mind could be changed by a convincing argument that would ensure the safety of all passengers and their property on board a flight. Also, I am more than willing (I just went through this yesterday in CLE and OAK) to undergo a thorough inspection of my property and possessions before every flight to achieve the piece-of-mind that what occurred on September 11th will never happen again...even if it takes an "Israeli-type" screening system requiring long lines and background checks. Also, I am willing to give up many of my civil liberties in the screening to ensure the plane and my fellow passengers, my family and myself are all safe and do not become victims of what just occurred.

If it always requires that we get to the airport early, so be it. I have no problem with that...if the security lines are long and the checks are extensive, it is well worth it!

Personally, on three occasions (the last one being 11 months ago), my property was stolen by airport ground personnel. On two of those instances, my lock on my suitcase was broken and my cameras were taken. The second camera was purchased a week before it was stolen to replace the first one that was stolen at MIA ten days earlier.

There is nothing more violating than giving your property to someone in good faith and expecting everything to arrive in good condition on the other end...and just the opposite happens.

I suppose being a 3-time victim of this over the past five years qualifies me to write this letter. Combine this with the documentaries on 20/20 and 60 Minutes, along with the drug problems and the alleged employees smuggling weapons on board airplanes.

There are genuine problems out there.

It certainly is not being "self-righteous" " (by the way, that is how "righteous" is spelled) or "self-centered to have a concern over a basic fiduciary right of having my personal property protected when I entrust it to someone else. Then, after my property is stolen, I have to become a victim a second time when I have to wait 8 months to receive a check for 60% of what I paid for the property because that is what the airline thought my loss was...And the endless paperwork, letters and hassles I was subject to.

If you had your property stolen out of your checked baggage in the past and had to experience what I went through, would you feel comfortable placing your laptop computer with all of your company secrets and strategies in your checked baggage?

All of the frequent flyer miles in the world could not replace the thousands of hours of work I have in my notebook computer.

If worrying about my livelihood and my personal property after being a victim more than three times in the past five years is being "self-centered" then you can go ahead and consider me "self-centered." Personally, I strongly believe there are much better remedies to this problem than the over reactive proposals of banning all carry-ons.

I can certainly live with the one carry-on rule and many of the other changes being proposed. In fact, AA closed my local Admirals Club in CLE because of what happened, and I can live with that if it will help them get through this.

After what I personally experienced, if I had to check my computer into my baggage to take a flight, I simply would not fly for business anymore.

I did like the one suggestion of locking the overheads and banning the baggage under the seat...even your suggestion of smaller computer bags is fine with me (I carry my computer in a small computer bag over my shoulder when I fly). The locking overheads would prohibit us from using our computers in flight but I could live with that if the FAA came up with that solution...the key is to keep your valuable property with you at all times.

The travel industry contributes over 10 percent to the overall economy in this country. This is over a one trillion dollar chunk! There needs to be some compromise to build a solution that will ensure the safety of each and every traveler and provide us with the piece-of-mind in knowing our personal property is going to arrive safely with us, and in one piece.

If they start to make it impossible to do business and making flying a miserable experience, consumers will do what they are doing right now and speak with their pocket books...and the industry will be doomed.

Our president, congressional leaders, governors and chambers of commerce are all asking Americans to fly, stay in hotels and get back to normal. Personally, I have done this by resuming my business the first day I could get back on a plane. But, I need my computer to do business and without my computer, my employees and I cannot make a living...Try making a live Internet presentation without a computer...it doesn't work!

More careful thought needs to go into the final decisions. Happy mediums and common ground will go a long way to arrive at the decision. But, there will be a point where you can take something away and it will make it so people do not want to do something (like spend their money)...that could certainly happen here if the incorrect decisions are made. I do not envy those people who have to make those decisions. Also, I am a huge proponent of the philosophy that was made after what happened on September 11th, Americans have to make sacrifices for the good of our country...I have absolutely no problem with this and I am more than willing to make most sacrifices...but I have to stay in business too!

The reason I posted this thread was to obtain the response from my fellow frequent travelers regarding all of the recent talk on the news about the proposals to ban all carry-ons including laptops. I am sure my fellow FTers all have their opinions and I would be very interested in hearing from all of you whom I have the highest amount of respect for...Let's just keep the personal comments, insults and flaming remarks to ourselves… please...especially if you do not know anything about the person you are accusing.

I hope you had something good to say Bob, but most regulars here probably will not read it due to length.

Sorry 'bout the wordiness of the last post...just had to get that one off of my chest. I will keep it brief and to the point from now on.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

I read your post Bob.

Though I hate carrying it around, my laptop never out of sight. Never. However, it usually is inside of my briefcase, rather than in a Laptop case. True, it is a nice Coach briefcase (that I picked up at their outlet). There are padded sleeves that you can insert into any briefcase to protect the computer. Now, if they extend the rule to say "No Briefcases," Then I would have a problem. However, I don't see that happening, as I can just imagine the scene as they try to take Hillary Clinton's briefcase and put it in the belly of the plane. Likewise, I can just imagine the legal battle of "Purse v. Briefcase." ...not to mention the fact that the Lawyers on that case would have to check those big cases of motions, depositions, and other legal mumbo jumbo. Can't wait for some lawyer to get a summary judgement because their opponent's required documents were mis-routed to Missoula, MT.

Let the fun begin.
C.

Any airline which bans my laptop as a carry-on will immediately lose my business for all trips. I live with this bad boy, and need it every day for work, even when on vacation.

I guess I'll be forced to drive, or at least buy a cheap, slow one to check, and rent a fast one for presentations when needed. That isn't cheap, though.

It is worth reading.

This would only work if it was ensured that the pax did not transfer any luggage contents to their person during the time interval from security screening to boarding. One may imagine the possible use of the type of luggage plastic-wrap and security-band equipment that is occasionally used for international customs purposes, but that would be quite cumbersome to implement for routine domestic travel, and still not guarantee that the pax has not accessed the contents of their bags prior to boarding.

I think, as stated earlier, that we're all getting upset about something that is NOT going to happen. Think about it. The airlines only survive because of business travellers and almost NO ONE will fly if they can't carry on certain items. BA announced today that they are in trouble because "1 in 3" of their Trans-Atlantic business passengers have cancelled since Sep. 11. Four airlines bankrupt in the last three weeks! This happens and we wouldn't even have to worry about it, there wouldn't be any commercial airlines left in six months.

As a traveller with over 6,000,000 miles on AA alone, I know I won't be checking my laptop, EVER!

And Bob, it was a good post and worth reading!

Airlines love carryons. Think about it -- it's like self serve gas stations. Customers handle their own baggage, stow it, remove it, are completely responsible for it.

It's another way of offloading an expense onto the customer -- the traveller.