You do not need to worry about it any more than anyone who has no status. Whatever the ticketed allowance is is what you are allowed to take

The 90% of people with no status and may travel rarely manage to cope successfully; someone who is a frequent flyer should have no hassles

It is consistent in that there is no special allowance over ticketed allowance = Not broken

Dave

And for the vast number of frequent flyers (ie those with status) - who are businessmen/women on relatively short trips -- carry-on is the general rule.

Great but notice in my first post I talk about taking long trips or having to work between seasons...

If this isn't such a big deal, then why does star have this policy?

Star and OW have various different benefits and are not identical in what they offer. For those that have baggage as a critical issue, then perhaps Star is a better choice.

The complaint raised in the 1st post is that OW doesn't have a bagagge policy; OW does have a baggage policy in that there is no additional allowance for OW status which is pretty simple as policies go.


Dave

I agree with the original poster here. Definitely something which could be worked out between the paticipating airlines in my view. In my case I do not have great problems with the checked-in luggage differences but with the carry-on allowance. Finnair for example has 8kg, only one piece. Many others allow more than that so it is not easy to pack for multi-carrier trips if I only want to take carry-on luggage.

Carry-on allowances on the other hand is harder to standardize. Japan has standardized rules on carry-on luggages. Unless all carriers adopt Japan's standards AND their own country does not have similar rules, I don't see that coming

Dave, what would be the harm to make a competitive baggage policy similar to Star's for top tier members?

The claim was that there is no baggage policy for "elites". There is a policy; the policy is that all persons have the same luggage allowance regardless of status. It is hardly complicated and seems to be easily handled by the vast majority that have no status at all. Those that travel frequently should be more easily able to cope with it

I have no care one way or other whether it was offered as a benefit but would rather keep things as they are than perhaps lose something else

For those who predominantly travel in first class, such Alliance wide elite baggage provisioning is not really an issue.

That is not the claim; the claim, as per the thread title, is that there's no uniform one.

To avoid, for example (and I can't find the thread), the incident when someone flies out on a transoceanic trip one airline with X baggage, and when he checks in with the same X baggage on the return trip on another oneworld alliance airline he's asked to pay some monstrosity (we're no talking $25, but several hundreds, more than the value of the baggage itself) in fees.

Incidents like these completely erases the effectiveness of most marketing budgets of oneworld (and is something that both Star and Sky already understand).

Baggage allowances are not identical on Star Alliance carriers either. For instance for SQ the allowances are 20k/30k/40k whilst on NZ long haul it is 1 piece 23Kg economy and 3 pieces of max 23Kg a piece ( which would allow 69K)

someone travelling on a journey NZ-SQ would have different allowances in each direction which is the same situation as can occur on OW

If starting on NZ and taking 3x23 on the outbound trip could be in for an expensive shock when checking in with 69Kg when having a 30K limit on the return

With *A, *G get: (http://www.staralliance.com/en/benef...silver-status/)

You are missing the point

The baggage allowances on different Star airlines are not identical. It is quite possible to book a journey where the allowances are different in each direction. There is no Star policy of uniformity on allowances and gives the same situation as OW

Star has a policy to grant additional allowance to those with status with a star airline

OneWorld policy is also pretty straightforward in that there has been NO additional allowances granted to those with status

Looks like both have equally understandable policies .

The first post asked the question in regards to comparison with star

Does anyone in this forum think its about time OW got a baggage policy together?

I think it is clear that there is a policy ; across OW the allowances for baggage are simply those which the airline offers to ALL passengers

In another post ( post 25 ) it was said that with OW there can be differing allowances depending on which direction of a multi carrier itinerary is being taken as if Star was better in that. Again there is no difference there

If there was a decision to have complete uniformity in allowances across OW, ending up with all carriers offering the standard 20K/30k/40k could be the outcome. Very easy to understand but a loss to what is offered currently depending on carrier

A uniform allowance would not necessarily mean that the outcome would be beneficial

I am not missing the point of the OP.

The crux of the matter is additional allowance over the standard. As per the OP:

I fly first class all the time but what happens if your first sector is an RJ business class sector and your next flight is a First Class sector on CX?

With Star Alliance, the problem is alleviated because the 30kg allowance you normally would receive on the first business class sector flights magically becomes 50kg, which is 10kg over your standard 40kg F class allowance.

The point is - ALLIANCES are there to make things seamless. Right?

And do you really think that because they match Star's baggage allowance for elites policy that you would have to give something else up? What could they possibly take away? F class lounge access for Emeralds? Hardly...