The lead story on the front page of today’s USAToday business section is headlined Fliers board faster as fewer carry on bags. The first sentence trumpets “new security rules for carry-on bags are enabling airline passengers to get on and off planes faster, helping flights leave on time.” It then quotes a number of airline spokesmen saying that boarding is anywhere from 4 to 10 minutes faster now that there are fewer carry-ons being stowed. Data quoted from FlightStats.com shows a 3.5% improvement in on-time departures, and it’s probably logical to attribute at least some portion of that to faster boarding times.
All good news so far. They even find some guy who claims to be a frequent flyer to give a supporting quote — “The new carry-on restrictions are the greatest transportation advance since the wheel”. But then, 10 paragraphs into a 15-paragraph story, the rest of the story emerges — “if more flights are operating on time, that isn’t necessarily true for luggage operations. Many passengers report longer waits or other problems with checked bags.”, “Airlines say they’re struggling to deal with the huge surge in bags”. So, people are boarding 4-10 minutes faster but are then waiting 30-45 minutes after their flight to collect their luggage. It doesn’t take complex math — 10 minutes minus 30 minutes equals a negative 20 minutes — to figure that this “greatest transportation advance” is actually moving people backwards. While the airlines may be saving time, there’re doing it on the backs of their passengers.
Recorded in the Courtyard in Northwest Houston, we look at the decisions forced on travelers by the TSA’s restrictions around carry-on liquids and gels. Is it a trade-off between safety and vanity? Are frequent travelers really that shallow? Also, I talk about how “luggage economics” made me trim my technology load when packing for my recent vacaction in Sweden. Here’s a direct link to the podcast file.
At the beginning of the year, there was a lot of noise about rolling out a Registered Traveler program — where, in exchange for a $100 fee and a more detailed background check, a (presumably frequent) traveler would gain the ability to pass more quickly through the TSA security screening. However, the program died from lack of interest because the TSA never said what parts of the screening experience a Registered Traveler could avoid. Indeed, the preliminary indications coming out of the TSA were that a Registered Traveler would be subject to the same screening as everyone else. Then what do I get for my $100 and hassle of a background check? No one could answer, and so the program withered away.
Now, however, I wonder if a way out of the problems with the current carry-on restrictions is a Registered Traveler program. This time, though, the value proposition would be relaxed carry-on restrictions. In exchange for $100 and voluntarily giving up my privacy, I get to carry on 3-4 travel-sized toiletries — small tubes of toothpaste, hair gel, skin creme — and a cup of coffee. With the growing frustration of frequent travelers, I think this idea has legs.
Last week, most of the news coverage about the TSA’s new security restrictions was fairly positive — travelers were inconvenienced, but taking it in stride and soldiering on. However, with the TSA now suggesting that many of these restrictions could become permanent, the coverage is shifting. USA Today, the unofficial newspaper of frequent travelers, put a red roller-board on the Tuesday front page next to the headline – “Veteran travelers find it hard to carry on”.
The article quoted one fed-up frequent traveler — “I figured this couldn’t possibly last and flying would eventually return to normal. But now… I’ve reached my tipping point. I’ve decided not to fly until the lastest Draconian carry-on prohibitions are significantly rolled back.”
Another frequent traveler didn’t go quite as far…yet. “I’ll adjust temporarily by checking in my bag. But Sunday’s 40-minute wait to get back my bag in Toronto was excessive, and needing to get to the airport an extra 30 minutes before to make sure I can get my bag checked in time will take its toll. It’s a touchy subject to folks like myself, and I can guarantee a drop-off in travel if more restrictions are enforced.”
And indeed the drop-off seems to have begun. I’m on my 3rd flight this week — I flew down to Houston Monday night, back to Chicago Tuesday night, and out ot San Francisco this morning — and there’s a significant drop in seat occupany. Two weeks ago, I was happy to score a middle seat in the exit row. On my last two flights, I had the exit row to myself.
It also seems that people have factored in the additional hour caused by checking luggage into their “fly-or-drive” and “train-or-drive” calculus. A colleague who lives in Dallas has started driving to projects in Houston and Austin, while East Coast colleagues are switching over to Amtrak’s Acela service for travel along the Northeast Corridor.
Back in Podcast #42, we talked about record seat occupany levels driving US airline profits in the first half of this year. Full planes allowed the airlines to make ticket price increases stick — the combination of which outweight the impact of rising fuel prices. It will be interesting to see their September results…
At the end of last night’s podcast, I mentioned that I had restocked my toiletry kit with the latest TSA banned substance list in hand. I hit the local Wild Oats natural food store and bought some Eco-Dent tooth powder, Tom’s of Maine natural long-lasting deodorant stick, and Jason Stuck Up! hair styling wax. Even rode my bike rather than firing up the Blazer so I could get the full crunchy-granola experience.
Later that evening, I headed over to O’Hare for my flight down to Houston. I arrived early, but didn’t need to — there were only a couple of folks in front of me in the premium security line. A TSA screener pulled my bag off the conveyor and asked to look inside. He spent a bit of time riffling through all my clothes and then finally asked me where my toiletry kit was. “In the front flap,” I told him. I’d put it there for easy access, expecting just such a search. However, this guy seemed to be one of the Ranger Rick/Barney Fife TSA guys, so asking me for help was the last thing he wanted to do. Read the rest of this entry »
Recorded in the TravelCommons studios, I look back on my trip through SFO as I try to navigate the new TSA rules on the first full day of the new regime and gird myself for 4 trips through the gauntlet this week. A listener tops my Heathrow lines (queues?) story, and we compare and contrast European and US travel experiences. Here’s a direct link to the podcast file.
After dumping my toothpaste and stashing my gel deodorant, I was turned back from the American Airlines’ SFO security line by a contractor saying that no rolling bags were allowed as carry-on. A half-dozen of us were incredulous. We had prepared for the “no-liquids” rule, but no one had heard of a “no-wheeled bags” rule. We trudged back to the counter and waited 20 minutes to check our bags.
I asked the American gate agent about this rule. She hadn’t heard of it, but said “The TSA is changing the rules minute by minute.” Walking back to the security line, I asked a TSA guy about this rule. “Not our rule,” he said,” we’re fine with rolling bags as long as they don’t have any liquids.” I asked the contractor who turned me back whose rule it was. “American Airlines,” she said. I called American while in the security line. “Rolling bags are allowed as long as they fit the dimension limits,” the agent said. No one would claim responsibility for this.
I don’t think travelers have a problem following the rules — we just need to know what they are. I’ll give American Airlines another chance on Monday when I fly down to Houston. If they continue to make random, arbitrary rule changes, I switch to another airlines. Travel is getting bad enough without airlines piling on their own unique hassles.
I woke up this morning in the SFO Marriott to the news of the foiled plot to blow up London-to-US flights. I looked out my window and was relieved to see planes lined up and taking off over the bay. Turning back to the TV, I watched the live reports from SFO, OAK, and LAX. You could see the security lines growing with every cutaway and the frustration growing with every traveler interview. The breakfast crowd in the concierge lounge stared at the plasma screens while eating their eggs and oatmeal — CNN on one wall, MSNBC on the other. There was an air of “here we go again” resigned acceptance, with people trying to figure out how to best deal with the new rules. The folks flying out this morning started eating faster when they saw the lines at SFO.
I’m lucky — I’m not flying out ’til tomorrow morning. I’m hoping that the TSA calms down a bit and gets the new rules figured out. I squeezed out a bit of Mitchum anti-perspirant gel into a water glass and then brought the mostly-full container into my client’s office where I can re-claim it next week. I just can’t bring myself to tossing $6 worth of stuff. My toothpaste tube is almost empty, so I don’t have as much angst throwing it away.
I’m hoping the security pendulum settles a little bit back to reasonability by the end of the day. Those of us flying out tomorrow are staying in touch with people flying today, trying to get a bit of forward intel on how the screeners are reacting.
I was going to record a podcast this evening, but have decided to delay it ’til the weekend so that I can report on my SFO experience tomorrow morning.
Print This Post
