The cost of excess baggage
I just returned from participating in the Southern Economic Association’s annual conference in Washington, DC. It was the first time I have flown since the airlines started charging extra fees for checked baggage. As a result of those baggage fees, I fought to smash my bag into the overhead bin and ended up swapping shoes with those in my bag that were keeping the bag from fitting. Prices not only have financial consequences, but behavioral consequences as well.
Well, amid Congressional disaster over the dealing (or not dealing) with the deficit problem, Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu is doing something about these baggage fees. You can see a news story about her proposal here. To keep travelers from getting nickeled and dimed with baggage fees, she is proposing legislation to ban charges for the first checked bag. While this may sound good, especially good to those who waited patiently behind me while I fought with my luggage, it really represents the rather typical lack of critical thinking by those in power in our nation’s capital.
It does not look as if either Senator Landrieu or any member of her staff stopped to consider the consequences of her proposed bag fee ban legislation. It should be obvious as to the reaction of the airlines. They will just charge higher fares, and travelers, whether they checked baggage or not, will pay for checked bags, and more bags will be checked than now. I certainly would have checked my luggage, and probably would have brought a larger bag if I could check it with no additionaly cost.
Notice what happens with charges for checked bags–travelers packing lighter, airlines carrying less luggage, fewer baggage handlers per plane, and less lost luggage problems. And these are just the obvious savings to the airlines from the behavioral consequences of baggage fees. I am sure there are probably some that have not occured to me. Some of these savings are passed on to travelers who carry their own luggage with them.
With first bag checked for “free,” airlines will not be able to make these savings and instead of a separate charge, the fares will rise as a result. They probably would not rise by the baggage fee, but now, travelers would not be able to save those fees. They would not be given the option of saving some money by carrying their own luggage. The airlines would raise fares because they would be carrying heavier loads and paying more to handle the extra luggage.
It looks as if our costliest baggage is the lack of thinking that takes place in Washington, thinking that has given us heavy tax and debt burdens and promises that we cannot financially sustain.
-MC
November 30th, 2011 at 11:21 am
My Comment: I think it’s in the best interest of everyone to have less bags on an airplane. With all of the added weight, this causes the plane to have to use even more gas to go from airport to airport. Its only right that they charge you for all of the things that is making their production costs rise. If they do bring down charges for bags, they will have to increase plane ticket prices simply to make up for the money lost. In order to recieve a revenue that exceeds total cost, they must increase prices as the costs of production increases for them. (fuel)
November 30th, 2011 at 11:28 am
I fly twice a year to New York and every time I pay to check my luggage, and it doesn’t bother me to pay the $35 at all. I agree with you because I know they are charging the fee just to help keep your airfare cheaper along with keeping their luggage handlers employed. If everybody decides to just pack lighter than the airport should just close down their baggage claim.
November 30th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Well, to be honest, you kind of hit just about every point or angle to which one person could attack this blog, but I’ll do my best to comment..
While serving as an active duty service-member, excess baggage was something that I paid very little attention to. While i was on active duty, if I was traveling on official government business, I was able to use my Government Travel Charge Card (GTCC), this is a credit card that is issued to frequently traveling service-members for miscellaneous expenses while handling government business away from their normal duty site. Upon these miscellaneous expenses is more than likely, excess baggage. I personally, never had to pay for it out of my own pockets due to the fact that I had a GTCC, so it didn’t bother me about the expense, but now that I cam no longer serving on active duty and am no longer authorized to use that GTCC for my leisure travels, these excess baggage fees are kicking my butt. And as I said earlier, you pretty much hit everything I would have compared and contrasted about the Senator’s proposal, but to name a few points, it’s great at face value for the waiving of the first bag, but at the same time, that causes such a ripple effect with everything else from having to hire more workers to handle the extra bags, carefully monitoring the weight of the planes, losing luggage and so many more issues that may arise. I’m for attacking this issue, but I’m not sure that waiving the fee is the correct solution to the problem.