croberts134

That's definitely not true. AA's policy is 1 personal item and 1 carry on.

Personal items must fit under the seat in front. Carry on items do not have to fit under the seat in front. The dimensions allowed for a carry on are larger than those for a personal item and larger than fits under the seat.

dulciusexasperis

Umm, ok croberts134, I agree the personal item and carry-on item have different size requirements as you say.

However, who defines what is a carry-on vs. a personal item? I carry on only 1 bag (a small backpack around 20x16x9 when relatively full). It is my 'carry-on' bag, it is not my 'personal item' as far as I am concerned. So as long as it conforms to the maximum carry-on dimensions, I would argue that it should receive equal treatment as someone else's roll aboard or whatever. If I were to carry it on and also carry on say a camera bag as my personal item, what then would you say should happen if there were a dispute as to whose 'carry on' should be moved to under the seat or off loaded and checked?

Do you really think that my carrying on only 1 bag should mean that it is a 'personal item' simply because it is smaller than the maximum carry-on size restrictions? The issue to me is not really about OH space, it is about foot space. I want my under seat foot space empty, just like everyone else does. I believe I am equally entitled to have that space free if what I carry on will fit in the OH space and space is available when I board. To have to give up that foot space because I happen to have a carry-on bag that is smaller than someone else's, means that I would be punished for carrying on a smaller bag while the other person would be rewarded for carrying on the maximum size bag allowed. Should I then start to add to the problem of not enough OH space by making sure I use a bag that is the maximum size allowed?

I am not aware of any definition of 'carry-on bag' that insists on any particular type of 'bag' or that it must be of the maximum dimensions. My 'carry-on' is equal to anyone else's carry-on is it not?

croberts134

I don't feel strongly enough on this issue to have an opinion either way and didn't express anything different in my post.

I was simply pointing out that you repeatedly said that ALL bags brought into the cabin must fit under the seat. That statement is demonstrably false and required correcting.

dulciusexasperis

And do you think that correcting that point was more worthy of doing than perhaps considering having an opinion on who should be penalized for what they carry on board? My intention was to have people perhaps consider that point. As it currently seems to stand, those carrying on less are the ones being penalized. So come on, have an opinion, who should be the ones being penalized?

Duke787

Hard to make this a rule when many planes don't even lend themselves to fitting all the bags needed for that row which in turn pushes everything back.

For example, the regionals rarely have space for all the F bags in the overhead (since only one side is useable) so then people in F have to go back into C+ and it's a knock-on effect. Same with the MD88/90 and 717 on DL where only one side is big enough for rollerboards.

In theory, DL reserves C+ bins for C+ passengers, I've never seen it enforced but I rarely see people who aren't sitting in C+ put bags in there unless the plane is finished or almost finished boarding (the act of putting the label automatically prevents some portion of people from putting bags in those bins out of respect for the "rule"). I think AA does something similar with MCE and UA with E+ though it has been a long time since I've flown either airline

Often1

You are also incorrect in your assertion that you get to choose where your cabin bag -- whether personal or carry-on -- goes. At least AA, UA, and DL will all remove smaller bags from the OH to make space for larger bags. The smaller bags are handed to the owner and, if not claimed, off-loaded (that is a security issue).

There are countless arguments about this, but the hard truth here is simple.

So -
1. Not all cabin bags must fit under the seat.
2. The passenger does not have the final say as to where either or both bags go.

gobluetwo

The implication in your previous post is that you, on your own, would have removed any bag above your seat that was not claimed. Perhaps that isn't what you meant, but it appears that is how many, including me, interpreted your previous comment.

You wrote:

LTBoston

3. No one is "entitled" to overhead space, no matter how large or small the bag is.

TGarza

I have seen FA's hand smaller bags to passengers to stow under the seat for larger bags in the OH.

dulciusexasperis

Which is my point TGarza. This has become quite common over the last few years. But if OH space is common and on a first come first served basis, then whatever someone chooses to put in the OH bin should stay there and the person for whom no overhead space is available, should have their bag put under the seat or taken off the plane and gate checked.

That last point is where I think it goes wrong. The FAs don't want the hassle of telling someone their roll aboard will have to be gate checked and instead penalize the person who has a smaller bag in the overhead space. It is in fact a form of discrimination that favours those with bigger bags over those with smaller bags.

I think the reason we don't hear more about this is that the majority bring roll-ons and it is only a minority who travel with a smaller bag as a carry-on bag. Especially here on FT.

It's noticeable that in this thread, no one has tried to defend bigger bags getting OH space preference but instead have only made comments like, 'it's up to the FA to decide' or 'I've seen them move smaller bags' as you say. The question of whether this is right and fair or not has been avoided entirely.

rbwpi

Also, I think that in many instances the FAs assume that a small bag is a pax personal item along with a carry on in the OH, in which case it should be removed if need be. However, if the small bag is the pax only item in the OH, then it stays. If the FA insists that it be removed, it would indeed be discrimination in favor of the pax with a larger carry on. I would not want to sacrifice my foot space if I only have a small bag in the OH.

saffy66

dulciusexasperis

It seems to me rbwpi, that part of the problem is that there is no real definition of what a 'carry-on bag' vs. a 'personal item' actually is but there is a perception that a 'carry-on bag' is a suitcase with wheels and everything else is then by default a 'personal item'.

When an FA arbitrarily removes an item from the OH and asks, 'who does this belong to', the passenger who it belongs to needs to stand up and say, 'that is my carry-on bag, please put it back.' FAs need to be taught that what constitutes a 'carry-on bag' and is therefore entitled to equal priority in the OH bins, can only be determined by the passenger, not the FAs. I think too many passengers just meekly allow the FA to define their bag as a 'personal item' rather than as their 'carry-on'. As I've said earlier in this thread, I've had my backpack tagged for 'under seat' a couple of times and just removed the tag and put my bag in the OH bin. It hasn't been challenged but I am prepared to have that conversation if it is.

On a recent trip, my wife chose to take as her only carry-on bag, a Coach handbag similar to this one: https://ca.coach.com/en_CA/coach-rog...women&start=21

It contained all her essential, not to be put in a checked bag items, such as jewellery, iPad, etc. It fit in the overhead standing up but would not have done so under the seat. You don't jam a $1000 bag under the seat and then let it be scuffed, scraped, kicked, etc. As it happened, there was no issue but if an FA had suggested it be put under the seat to allow someone's roll-aboard to be put in the OH bin, you can bet I would have raised a strong objection.

catcher1

This is off-topic, but I don't understand the concept of booking a rear seat. Seems a bit masochistic to me.

the phoenix