gooseman13

True, but you can still bring those items as carry-ons as opposed to checked luggage, they are just "planeside valet" or aircraft butlered or whatever ridiculously name they are calling it these days.

soitgoes

If you want to get technical, the 25 linear inches maximum as it is written applies only to a purse.

http://content.united.com/ual/asset/COC20mar09final.pdf

notquiteaff

(bolding added by me)

So how does the bolded part jive with handing over the carry-on to a ramp worker?

Ari

It means that, in order to be considered "CARRY ON", a bag must "MUST BE RETAINED IN PASSENGER’S CUSTODY". The implication is that if, at any time, a "carry on" bag is checked, it is no longer "carry on" but checked luggage (and that limit is triggered).

It does not mean that a passenger in the jetway with any item that purports to be a carry on must be allowed to board with said item; it just means that if said item is checked, it becomes checked baggage and is not carry on any more.

sbedelman

I was traveling on a CRJ with the family (total 4 of us) on a very short trip so we had only two bags total, both well under the max carry on size. As we approached the door going down the jetway the FA told me I had to check the bags because the the flight was expected to be full. I sympathize since if everyone is pushing their carry on limit it can be a problem in this small jet but we were 4 people with only 2 bags total so no matter how you slice it we were using way less than our fair share. I politely pointed this out an she accepted that.

That said I really think this whole carry on situation is a no win for the FA's. They need to get the plane boarded, luggage stowed, deal with the VIP's, self appointed included, police each persons carry on and who knows what else plus get the door closed and everyone legal to depart and do it on time. Not that this is an excuse for those that don't even try to pull it off with grace and a smile but suffice to say that it is one of the more stressful times during the flight with all that is going on.

Unfair as it is some passengers are going to get away with murder while others are going to asked (or demanded) to give up the goods because under the time constraints space more often that not is allocated unequally. Who hasn't witnessed the passenger loaded to the gills drop his bags in an empty overhead and then head 8 rows further on to his seat (with nothing under the one in front of him)?

Some airlines solve this with rigorous enforcement of the carry on limit for every passenger at every boarding but I'm not sure it makes anyone any happier in the end.

HokieEngineer

In Australia, most of the carriers have a metal box the exact size limit of a carry on. Some even have scales built into the box. When people are boarding, if the GA thinks the bag is too big, they make them stuff it into the metal box. Since they only flagged the questionable bags, the whole process went pretty quick and was no slower than I've seen domestic carriers in the US board a plane.

To me, that makes it fair for everyone. If you have a legal bag, no worries. It certainly would cutdown on the road warrier with two huge carryons and his laptop.

I bought my carry on specifically for the reason that it is the perfect legal size. The carry on bag police at LHR are the reason I bought it.. Once I had a small backpack that wouldnt fit into the metal box they use to measure because it was slightly too girthy. I spent 15 minutes rearranging it before it would fit.

emanon256

I had my BP, but we were on separate flights, so if I checked it to mine, she would never get it.

And as far as inches, the bag was well under the carry on-limit. She used to be an FA and it was her on-board bag.

mcgahat

That is a bunch of crap. Quite a few agents are absolutely clueless on what will fit and what will not. I cant tell you how many times I had an agent force a green tag on me when boarding a E170 telling me that my bag would never fit in the overhead.

I am not saying that that there are not plenty of "frequent travelers" that think they know more than the gate personnel and end up looking like idiots when they are wrong but in my experience that knife cuts both ways.

notquiteaff

But that then also means that something I placed in the carry-on (because it's not covered in case of loss/damage by UA's rules, e.g., my laptop) suddenly is no longer "insured" when the appropriately-sized bag gets taken away in the jetway or on the tarmac as in the OP's case.

jetsfan92588

thats correct. thats why most people don't like to do this. i think there was something like this that made the news like 2 years ago, but i wasnt into flying at all then and didnt really pay attention to it. but from what i remember, electronics, books, jewelry, etc... are not insured when they are valeted at the gate. thats why sometimes you see people taking laptops out of those bags even for a 40 minute flight where they know they will not be using the laptops.

fastair

/disagree "SUCH AS A PURSE", lists the dimensions and gives other examples. It does not say 1 personal item that is a purse less than 25 linear incehes or other items of unlimited size such as a laptop or briefcase.

stevenshev

That is the biggest stretch on interpretation of simple English I've ever seen. I will grant you that the first time I read it, as it's written, I said to myself "that can't be right" and reread it several times - but there is *no* question, *no* room for argument: the way it stands, it limits only purses to 25 linear inches. Obviously not the intention, but a unilateral mistake is not the passenger's problem or responsibility.

soitgoes

I have no idea what was intended; all I know is that, like you, I believe there is no other way to interpret the language as written. Maybe when it was written they didn't envision large laptop bags or briefcases, but "purse" can mean anything, so they stuck a limit just on the purse. I have no idea, but I didn't write the CoC.

I can't help that it's written the way it is, with a size limit applying only to the purse.

There is a difference between "i) ONE PERSONAL ITEM SUCH AS A PURSE (MAXIMUM OF 25 LINEAR INCHES), BRIEFCASE OR LAPTOP." and "i) ONE PERSONAL ITEM (MAXIMUM OF 25 LINEAR INCHES), SUCH AS A PURSE, BRIEFCASE OR LAPTOP.". The former is what's written. The latter is what you think is written.

If you want to be strict on the CoC, it needs to go both ways.

t4gyp

Is there even enough overhead space for everybody to use their allotment? I thought that some space was taken up by stuff like first aid equipment/life rafts.

fastair

/agree. After re-reading it, I think it is OBVIOUS to the intention, but the snytax is poorly written. One can assume that there is NO limit to the size of a laptop or briefcase size at all...the sky could be, based only on the syntax. Only purses are limited.

But even in a poorly written sentence, a reasonable person can assume there is a limit to size of a personal item, and since a particular size is given for one of the items, a reasonable person would conclude that since they are all categorized the same, that the size would be about the same.

But it is written incorrectly, and I must realize that not every person who tries to carry on big items as a "personal item" is reasonable. Letter of law and intent it this case are not the same.

As for it not being the passenger's problem, I have to disagree on. If the bins are full, they are full. If a crew member says it doesn't fit, then it becomes the passenger's problem. I mean, seating area 4 almost always can't bring a roll aboard as a primary item on Mon morning biz flights. So regardless of the maximum, not everyone can always bring on the maximum, and if it is not the passenger's concern, then what?