US airline to charge passengers extra to use overhead lockers

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/us-airline-to-charge-passengers-to-use-overhead-bins/

by walterbell • 10 years ago

17 75 10 years ago

telegraph.co.uk

draw_down5• 10 years ago

The nickel and diming is one thing but now boarding will take even longer. People clogging up the aisle fucking around with the overhead bins is why boarding takes so long currently, and soon people will somehow have to "authenticate" that they're allowed to use them so it will take even more time.

Also if people traveling together have their seats broken up, they will just bother other passengers to switch seats so they can sit together. (It's implied that if you say no you're an asshole.)

Air travel just keeps getting crappier bit by bit.

saint_fiasco• 10 years ago

On the other hand maybe people will choose not to use the overhead bin now that it costs money. Wouldn't that save some time?

draw_down5• 10 years ago

That could happen, but I doubt it because the alternative is checking bags which also costs money and takes more time.

jccc• 10 years ago

I would guess that enforcement would just mean at the gate you couldn't take through anything bigger than specified in the article.

Most people in that situation would prefer to keep the item with them or under the seat rather than up in a bin.

draw_down5• 10 years ago

You can't fit much under the seat though. It's not much of an alternative

garduque2• 10 years ago

Generally I'd say that if it encourages more people to check luggage and reduce the shit show that boarding has become I'm all for it. But then it doesn't affect me personally because I don't pay for bags and only carry a backpack on board. I definitely see how the move might encourage more people to sign up for United credit cards with baggage perks that "pay for themselves."

Also, if you pay a lower fare or don't book early enough and your party is broken up that's your problem. Maybe I'm an asshole for saying no. But unless it involves children or some other extenuating circumstance, or you just need me to move an aisle or two back and I still get my aisle or window or whatever I chose that day, I'm not giving you my seat and won't feel even a little bad about it.

coldcode2• 10 years ago

Someday you will handled like luggage, you are put into a pod with 20 other people and one toilet and the pod is stuffed into the plane. At the destination they pull the pod out and stuff the next one in while you are exiting. You can utilize a 3d packing scheme to optimize the pod space. Perhaps they will offer free paralytics to ensure you don't move much.

ssharp2• 10 years ago

I'm pretty sure the CEO of Spirit airlines said something along the lines of people not caring how they're treated as long as the fares are cheap. I believe this was said in response to them having the worst legroom in the industry.

spraak• 10 years ago

Ugh.. it was coming, wasn't it? says my cynicism. But that's unfortunate. I wonder how long until there are more alternatives to the big airlines..

ryanackley• 10 years ago

Just don't fly United. Of all the major carriers, they usually have the lowest prices.

IMO, the reason they are the cheapest is that they suck really bad. No legroom, antiquated planes, and terrible service. I always avoid flying on United. If I get booked through work, I offer to pay the difference on the next lowest airfare from a different airline.

jghn3• 10 years ago

When I fly for work it is typically United due to them being th cheapest. I do not enjoy those flights one bit

wmeredith• 10 years ago

This headline is a blatant mischaracterization. US Airlines is offering a new lower fare tier for passengers who don't care where they sit and don't need the bins. It's not a new fee. A less rage-baiting version would say, "US airline to offer lower fares to customers not using overhead bins." But who the hell would read an article about that?

reustle• 10 years ago

Did you read the article?

United expects the changes to raise around $1bn by 2020. Those choosing a standard economy fare, it is therefore reasonable to assume, will be expected to pay significantly more than they do now.

rashkov• 10 years ago

The problem with that is that no one shops directly on the airline websites any more, at least not at first. Now this company's fares will appear at the top of the list when you search kayak or google flights or whatever. Then you order your ticket and don't realize the restriction until you're about to put the order through. This works effectively well.

Then the rest of the industry feels pressure to do the same thing to remain competitive. It's a race to the bottom and I think it's how we wound up in the present situation of frequently paying for checked bags and not getting meals included.

This is going too far though -- who travels for even a few days without an overhead bag? And have you noticed how much smaller the size restrictions on the overhead bags are now?

farzadb82• 10 years ago

Agreed.

I don't have a problem with airlines creating cheaper seats that they can market to a segment of customers.

What I do have a problem with is the lack of transparency of what you're getting when you attempt to research and compare fares. In my opinion, this is what the government should focus on.

bitwize2• 10 years ago

It's a fee disguised as a "new lower fare". Basic economy seats will cost as much as economy seats do today, with standard economy costing much more.

garduque2• 10 years ago

Doesn't Spirit do the same thing, too? Start barebones and keep selecting add-ons until your fare is the same as a regular airline?

ddoran• 10 years ago

Did you read the article? The no-bag fare will be equivalent to today's lowest fares. People carrying bags will pay more. This is not a new lower tier.

But those who choose the cheapest fare are unlikely to be making any savings. According to Reuters, basic economy fares “will be comparable to low fares it now charges for the economy cabin, but with more restrictions”.

madengr• 10 years ago

What's the deal with liquids being in plastic bags? Something to do with x-rays interacting with the plastic to change the contrast of liquids?

I'm 6'5" with size 15 feet. I can't fit a damn thing under the seat in front of me, much less my legs behind a seat. So sick of flying.

I'm sure fuel costs are at an all time low too, but profit still not enough.

PaulHoule4• 10 years ago

It's because they are afraid of substances like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acetone_peroxide

Note that that stuff is an explosive that contains no nitrogen, so it can't be detected by common explosive detectors.

guitarbill• 10 years ago

someone is going to figure out how to weaponize lithium ion and then those will get banned, too. oh no, wait... that kind of, accidentally already happened.

Apreche• 10 years ago

GOOD. They should force everyone to check their bags already. Hell, just remove the overhead bins entirely. Why do they even exist? All they do is make boarding and deplaning take 20 extra minutes each. The time you have to wait for the luggage carousel will be no big deal if you can just get off the plane immediately.

awqrre• 10 years ago

They temporarily lost my luggage before... I would much rather have it with me. And it is much quicker then going to the carousel, especially if you choose a seat close to the exit.

falcolas• 10 years ago

This exactly. Not to mention they (United) already charge $20 to check a small bag. This nickle and diming sucks.

jghn3• 10 years ago

Thing is, half the time I carry on my luggage I end up having to gate check it due to lack of room or other factors. On some airlines I don't mind because you pick it up at the gate but on some, like United, it's as if you checked it in fully. That's the worst of both worlds since I had to deal with the extra security hassle to boot.

knz3• 10 years ago

I assume you have never travelled long haul with small children.

It's in everyone's interest for children onboard to have access to entertainment, food, diapers, comfort objects, and clean clothes. That all takes space.

dagw4• 10 years ago

It doesn't take that much space. Certainly not more space than that you can fit under the seat in front of you.

ygra2• 10 years ago

Considering how checked baggage is thrown around I'd rather keep photography gear in my cabin baggage and have lenses unbroken, thank you.

PaulHoule4• 10 years ago

And you can pay extra for that privilege.

Most people would be happy to take a camera phone which could go in a purse or small backpack. I pack a tracfone, a heavy desktop replacement laptop, a power brick, and a USB cable to charge the phone from the computer. I'd pack exactly the clothes I need for a few days. When I am in a big city I will browse vintage clothing shops on Hollywood Boulevard or get socks and underwear at Niketown in Manhattan. I throw away as much packaging as possible to reduce weight. I might even buy a bag at my destination and fill it full of plushies from Japan Town in San Francisco or something like that.

Traveling light also makes life easy getting away from the airport, or travelling by bus, train or foot.

If you want to take your skis or are going backpacking in the wilderness you need to take a lot of stuff. In an urban environment, though, there are huge benefits to being light.

PaulHoule4• 10 years ago

I try not to use the overhead compartments and will check a bag if it all possible because I don't want to be a part of the chaos.

dagw4• 10 years ago

The time you wait at the baggage carousel is unrelated to how long it takes to get off the plane. If it takes them 25 minutes to get your bag from the plane to the carousel, then saving 20 minutes getting off the plane will only mean a 20 minute longer wait at the carousel.

sundaeofshock• 10 years ago

But it saves 20 minutes for the person who does not use the overhead bins and dies not check luggage.

technofiend2• 10 years ago

You say that, but United made my boss take his laptop out of his checked luggage and carry it onto the plane. Considering the phalanx of gear some travel with these days, would it really all fit under the seat? Maybe not.

cr1895• 10 years ago

In some situations the risk that a bag doesn't make it to your destination is too great to take, and therefore it's necessary to carry on.

If checking a bag gave the same assurance that it would make your destination with you as carrying it on person, fine: make checking a back the only option. But in reality your checked bag is less likely to meet you at your destination than if you'd have just carried it along with you.

bogomipz2• 10 years ago

"Why do they even exist? All they do is make boarding and deplaning take 20 extra minutes each."

How is that different then taking another 20 minutes to wait to get your luggage at the carousel?

Its still 20 minutes of lost productivity for all passengers.

detaro2• 10 years ago

You won't get your luggage from the carousel any minute earlier (at least I've never arrived at the carousel after my luggage), so the only thing you are doing is shifting your waiting time from a plane seat to a loud hall where you have to stand around. I generally prefer my plane seat + the knowledge where my important stuff is and how it has been handled.

electic• 10 years ago

Next on the docket:

1. Basic Air Fee. If you are obese, you pay more since you breathe more.

2. Regular Seat Fee.

3. USB/Power Adapter fee. Charge per watt-hour.

4. Under seat storage fee.

5. Bathroom Usage Fee.

6. Pre embarkation cleaning fee.

7. Post embarkation cleaning fee.

arethuza• 10 years ago

Ryanair announces crazy schemes like some of those, which it has no apparent intention of actually implementing, apparently just for the publicity:

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/17/travel/ryanair-money-savin...

drewg123• 10 years ago

I have mixed feelings. I hate the nickel and diming, but ever since they started charging for checked bags, the boarding / deplaning process has been a nightmare. So if this speeds up boarding, it could be a good thing.

The other thing that they could do, which would garner good will, and speed up boarding/deplaning would be to offer a checked bag for free to everybody. But I bet they are contractually locked out of that, as a free checked bag is a perk offered by most airline affiliated credit cards.

jghn3• 10 years ago

I always wished they had charged for overhead instead of checked. Yes, there are some conveniences to carry on but as you note it really breaks down when everyone decides to use it

MiddleEndian• 10 years ago

If there were an airline without any overhead bins at all I'd use that one for 100% of my flights.

ygra2• 10 years ago

Admittedly, I only flew on United once (coinciding with how often I've visited the US so far), but in my eyes the complete boarding process was a horrible inefficient mess. They seem to regularly overbook flights to 150 % or so and then first ask any passengers whether they want to go on a different flight maybe since there are too many passengers. Then seemingly everyone brings baggage that should have been checked (like, gigantic suitcases and bags) as carry-on baggage, so they ask whether anyone of those would rather have their bag put on the flight as checked baggage. All that takes plenty of time already since usually no one seems to be willing to volunteer. And then comes boarding in five different classes, most of which are distributed evenly across the plane, so the different boarding classes seem to be more about who likes to get their head bashed with baggage while they're already sitting, getting up to let people through to the window seat, and, perhaps the most useful, overhead storage bin space.

Admittedly, boarding in groups is common everywhere, although I haven't seen that many different classes until then. But I haven't ever seen overbooking to that extent or the fight for every bit of cabin baggage space to that degree.

lintiness3• 10 years ago

if they offer a checked bag free, they can't quote a ridiculously low fare on the popular travel search sites.

technofiend2• 10 years ago

No I think the $6 Billion in fees Unites is racking up every year prevents that. :-)

cyberpanther2• 10 years ago

Airlines are so stupid. They are basically going to force all the families to Southwest with free bags. Southwest needs to market the crap out of this so people know.

pawadu• 10 years ago

Nope,

this will cause people to bring less garbage with them onboard which means much faster boarding times which means more money earned which means Southwest is sure to follow.

cyberpanther2• 10 years ago

If you can convince my wife to bring less garbage you should win a nobel prize. I agree with you logically, that is what should happen, but in real life and especially with families it doesn't happen. And when you sell to one person in a family you get 2, 3, 4, 5 more tickets that come along. So that's a big loss if you can't sell to families.

Also think about other groups that need to bring garbage. Musicians, sports teams, high school trips, etc. They are giving away group business to other airlines.

By definition when we travel, we usually want to bring something with us. Very few people fit the use case of being able to exist from just one small bag on a trip.

netfire• 10 years ago

United isn't the first US airline to do this. I believe Spirit, Allegient and Frontier all charge for carry-on luggage -- but you can get flights for $20-40 one way, if you buy direct. You get what you pay for though...

nunez2• 10 years ago

They are the first "legacy" carrier to do this. That's significant because it means that every other major airline will likely follow suit if this works for them.

PacketPaul• 10 years ago

One more reason to fly SouthWest.

ssharp2• 10 years ago

It's not like Southwest doesn't have it's price issues. If you want to avoid their seat lottery system, you have to pay $15 each way.

edwhitesell4• 10 years ago

This is some of the best travel news I've heard in a while. The entire boarding process is the second biggest annoyance in US air travel today (TSA being the first).

bitwize2• 10 years ago

After flying United to Australia and having a miserable time of it, I used to joke that soon United will introduce a fee structure in which for an economy ticket, they will pack you in a cubic crate 80 cm on a side, and for an additional $180 they'll upgrade you to a full cubic meter.

Now it seems much less an absurd joke.

bogomipz2• 10 years ago

"United claims the move, announced last month, does not amount to a new fee. Those who want to stow their hand luggage overhead can still do so if they choose the standard economy fare, it says."

Until they artificially restrict the number of standard economy fares and you have no choice but to buy the basic fare and be subject to this new level of absurdity. This is how it starts.

Rather than innovate and make more money by selling a better product the airlines in the US anyway have settled on a strategy of removing basic provisions and then selling them back as an "upgrade." It's insulting.

I'm tempted to say I just will vote with my feet. But the airline industry at least in the US has seen massive consolidation in the last decade and the choices for the consumer are becoming less. It's often just not practical to "vote with your feed" and the airlines know this. United merged with Continental which gave us this behemoth who is instituting this policy.

kalleboo• 10 years ago

As long as people keep picking tickets solely by sorting by "lowest price" and no other variables, this kind of thing will keep on going.

dingaling• 10 years ago

To be fair to 'people', the flight search engines do a really poor job of permitting sorting by any other variables.

British Airways recently announced that they're modifying their 777 fleet to ten-abreast seating, instead of nine, to bring them into line with other airlines like Air France and Emirates. But if you were browsing similar flights between those airlines you'd never have been told that BA offered an extra two inches of seat-width, so why would you have chosen them?

wink• 10 years ago

A hundred times this. If you're flying very rarely and your dates and destinations are set... in my experience there's not even much choice between a lot of airlines, usually 1-3 for a given time. So price is more like 'can I move this one to one day later to save x%' - I don't recall ever just shopping around for different airlines.

nunez2• 10 years ago

People will bitch about this as they already have, but Spirit and Allegiant Air's massive profit margins have shown that the only thing people care about is the price of tickets and this helps lower it.

Eventually, airlines will follow the single aircraft model (meaning aircraft manufacturers will merge and jobs will get cut), aviation jobs will largely be contracted out and, once the American airliners win their flags of convenience battle, the glory days of being a pilot will finally be over.

Enjoy your snack packs.

hsod• 10 years ago

Interesting to compare the reactions to this with the prevailing attitudes about cable bundling.

"Stop nickel-and-dime-ing me!"

"Stop making me pay for things I don't want!"

draw_down5• 10 years ago

Ehh, this is more like if the cable company started charging a monthly fee to use the remote control.

US airline to charge passengers extra to use overhead lockers

Related Stories