QF Baggage Handlers Want Reduction In Baggage Weight

[Ash W]

I personally cannot see what the issue is, but with other world airlines dropping their max bag weight I knew it wouldn't be long before the call came in Australia. As others have said 32 has been fine for some time, and unless I am mistaken all bags over a certain weight (is it 25kg Marty?) are marked as such and handled appropriatly. So provided Qantas is doing the right thing by their workers, providing them with the tools and the procedures to do their job safely why is it such a problem?

One thing though some people are getting worked up over baggage allowances, I would just point out that even if the unions get Qantas to drop to a 20KG bag limit it doesn't mean the allowance has to drop.

Shameel, you are close with your comments about US baggage allowances. The US regulations say 2 bags (for Y pax), but they don't mention weight. With Qantas you are right the max is 32Kg per bag, but as I said the Americans are only concened with the number of bags. BA for example have a 2 bag limit with max weht of 23kg on their US flights now. I know this question is O/T but why does the US dictate to airlines baggage allowances. I would have thought it should have been a commercial decision of the airline as to what the limits were not the regulator.

[Daniel F]

US Airways has somehow managed to get around the 2 bags regulation. They are now charging to check in a 2nd bag... http://www.usairways.com/awa/content...epolicies.aspx

[Marty H]

Originally Posted by Ash W

I personally cannot see what the issue is, but with other world airlines dropping their max bag weight I knew it wouldn't be long before the call came in Australia. As others have said 32 has been fine for some time, and unless I am mistaken all bags over a certain weight (is it 25kg Marty?) are marked as such and handled appropriatly. So provided Qantas is doing the right thing by their workers, providing them with the tools and the procedures to do their job safely why is it such a problem?

One thing though some people are getting worked up over baggage allowances, I would just point out that even if the unions get Qantas to drop to a 20KG bag limit it doesn't mean the allowance has to drop.

Shameel, you are close with your comments about US baggage allowances. The US regulations say 2 bags (for Y pax), but they don't mention weight. With Qantas you are right the max is 32Kg per bag, but as I said the Americans are only concened with the number of bags. BA for example have a 2 bag limit with max weht of 23kg on their US flights now. I know this question is O/T but why does the US dictate to airlines baggage allowances. I would have thought it should have been a commercial decision of the airline as to what the limits were not the regulator.

Im unsure what QF requirements are but DJ the bag has a heavy tag for 20kgs +

I would assume yes it would have to drop either that or their excess baggage charges go out the window.

[D Chan]

Originally Posted by Scott Loveday

Hi there,

I read some months ago on another forum that industrial action was likely soon because over the years the number of handlers in a team loading an aircraft had gradually been reduced by the airline in question

If manpower is the main concern, the union official on ACA should have expressed that point or emphasised it more (I might have missed that bit, but the bulk of that ACA segment was focused on the 'weight' issue). I would tend to think the issue of manpower in itself is a more probable / susceptible cause of injury on baggage handlers, rather than the weight of bags because more bags = more repetition and lifting bags - more movement of limps / twisiting etc.?

Originally Posted by Raymond Rowe

Why is it the younger generation is trying to strip all working conditions that have been hard fought for.People have to live and if anyone should be worried about the future working conditions it should be all you younger ones.

Baggage handlers 20 or 30 years ago managed to do the same job / task, but probably with almost no OH&S awareness. Nowadays there are significantly greater OH&S awareness amongst workers and management, e.g. lifting techniques, stretching before work to warm up, how to prevent injuries ..... etc. Companies are aware of the hidden costs of Lost-time injury / workers compensation / workers not being able to work etc. - So in a sense working conditions should have improved (because of the greater understanding / awareness in OH&S). OH&S theories and practices probably work because according to ACA, Qantas's LTI figures did drop.

Would also like to mention that the US / Canada etc. follow the 'piece' system, while the rest of the world abides by the 'weight' system for checked-in bags.

[Shameel Kumar]

Originally Posted by Daniel F

US Airways has somehow managed to get around the 2 bags regulation. They are now charging to check in a 2nd bag... http://www.usairways.com/awa/content...epolicies.aspx

Not just US Airways, United has implemented a 2nd-bag surcharge for domestic flights, and Delta will do so from May onwards.

Virgin America's policy for Y-pax is that they can check-in only 1 bag for free (32kg/70lbs.)...and a $10 surcharge for the 2nd bag. Makes me wonder how they can have this 1-bag policy if the FAA's policy is that all carriers must allow 2 bags free...


Just curious though, wouldn't it be to Qantas' benefit if they agreed to lower their baggage allowance? The lower the bag weights, the move weight savings they make, and the more money they make from overweight baggage fees. Sure the weight savings may not be that noticeable, but every little bit helps when fuel prices keep rising... or am I missing something here?

Let's assume:
- A QF 744 with 300-pax onboard
- Use an average weight of about 25kg per bag (since most don't take a 32kg bag with them, and their 2nd check-in is most likely not as heavy as their first)
- 2 bags per passenger (disregard increased weight/number of bag allowances for premium-class passengers)

Total baggage weight is: (25 x 2) x 300 = 15,000kg = 15 tonnes

If, the limit was lowered to 20kg, then: (20 x 2) x 300 = 12,000kg = 12 tonnes


If Qantas agrees to ..say a reduction in weight limit to 23kg, then the airline saves baggage weight, it gains extra money from overweight baggage surcharge fees, keeps the workers happy and the pesky unions off their back, ..and eventhough passengers may moan and groan at first, they really can't complain much since V Australia's free-of-charge weight allowance is 23kg and many other international carriers limit is also 23kg. ... So why hasn't Qantas supported this? (I must be missing or overlooking something here..)

[NickN]

I read some months ago on another forum that industrial action was likely soon because over the years the number of handlers in a team loading an aircraft had gradually been reduced by the airline in question, essentially to generate cost savings and allow the said department management chain to achieve performance incentives. The result was that individuals were really having to flog their bodies to get aircraft turned around on time.

That at least seems plausible. If the team members have been reduced and the reduced team is expected to do the same work in the same or less time to turn around an aircraft, I would accept that QF has something to answer for. That would be the the equivalent of fielding a 6 man football team and expecting them to score the same points as the full side.

As someone mentioned previously, if this was the case it certainly wasn't raised on ACA.

[NickN]

p.s. As for the comment that young workers are trying to erode the working conditions that their previous generations have battled hard for. I have to disagree. I believe the younger generation better understands the business environment of today, the reduced profits associated with certain industries and are prepared to work under conditions which share a middle ground with their employer.

[Ash W]

Originally Posted by Shameel Kumar

Just curious though, wouldn't it be to Qantas' benefit if they agreed to lower their baggage allowance? The lower the bag weights, the move weight savings they make, and the more money they make from overweight baggage fees. Sure the weight savings may not be that noticeable, but every little bit helps when fuel prices keep rising... or am I missing something here?

Not quite, people will bring what they want and need. Lowering a per peice bag weight to 20 or 23Kg would bring a minor saving in weight, but bring in extra as excess baggage. Just look at non US International flights where the Y limit is already 20kg, which in reality is really 25kg. How many bring that much.

Originally Posted by Shameel Kumar

Let's assume:
- A QF 744 with 300-pax onboard
- Use an average weight of about 25kg per bag (since most don't take a 32kg bag with them, and their 2nd check-in is most likely not as heavy as their first)
- 2 bags per passenger (disregard increased weight/number of bag allowances for premium-class passengers)

Total baggage weight is: (25 x 2) x 300 = 15,000kg = 15 tonnes

If, the limit was lowered to 20kg, then: (20 x 2) x 300 = 12,000kg = 12 tonnes


If Qantas agrees to ..say a reduction in weight limit to 23kg, then the airline saves baggage weight, it gains extra money from overweight baggage surcharge fees, keeps the workers happy and the pesky unions off their back, ..and eventhough passengers may moan and groan at first, they really can't complain much since V Australia's free-of-charge weight allowance is 23kg and many other international carriers limit is also 23kg. ... So why hasn't Qantas supported this? (I must be missing or overlooking something here..)

Why do they need to lower it to 23Kg? As many have said the safety issue would appear to be a furphy and the airline

The thing I dislike about the BA 23kg is when I travel for a work trip I always have around 20-22kg. There are times it is more, times it is less. Without scales at home how the hell do I know if I have too much. Remember the 23kg is a hard bag limit, so if you are over you need another bag. At least with 32kg I know that provided I don't put lead (or several hard back books) in the case I will always be under 32kg.

[Shameel Kumar]

Originally Posted by Ash W

Not quite, people will bring what they want and need. Lowering a per peice bag weight to 20 or 23Kg would bring a minor saving in weight, but bring in extra as excess baggage.

Well still, wouldn't Qantas then gain additional revenue from countless excess baggage fees?
As much as I roll my eyes at unions and their constant demands, it seems like win-win situation for them and Qantas if the baggage allowance weight is dropped to 20/23kg. For those passengers who would abide by the new lower weight level Qantas would save weight (I know, not much), and for those who simply want to bring along everything but the kitchen sink.. well Qantas can charge a decent fee for overweight bags.

Why do they need to lower it to 23Kg? As many have said the safety issue would appear to be a furphy and the airline

I agree that these 'safety' issues voice by the unions are rather trivial, and as I said earlier in the thread, if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen..and let someone who can cope with the job do it. So I'm not trying to convey my point from the unions point of view, but rather from the airline's point of view whereby lowering their maximum free-of-charge weight limit to 20 or 23kg will lead to either a decrease in the collective baggage weight each aircraft has to carry or an increase in revenue from excess baggage fees.

The thing I dislike about the BA 23kg is when I travel for a work trip I always have around 20-22kg. There are times it is more, times it is less. Without scales at home how the hell do I know if I have too much. Remember the 23kg is a hard bag limit, so if you are over you need another bag. At least with 32kg I know that provided I don't put lead (or several hard back books) in the case I will always be under 32kg.

I totally agree with you Ash! With my trips to the US West Coast over the past couple of years I've mostly travelled with either QF or NZ, and I have never had to worry about if my bags were overweight because there was no way I'd ever pack 32kg in one bag alone...but on my latest trip there I flew SYD-HNL-SFO with the HNL-SFO leg flown with Hawaiian Airlines. Their free-of-charge weight limit was 50lbs per bag (= 23kg)..so I was forced to pack less than I normally would. I didn't like having to plan out what to pack rather than just stuff it in my bag like I would normally do with QF and NZ....but hey, rules are rules, and you have to abide by them. If the baggage limit is 23kg, then you just gotta accept it and stick with it (or pay excess baggage fee)... so it guess in the end it doesn't matter what weight you prefer to have, what's more important is the limit that you have to abide by.


At the beginning of next year I will be migrating to The States, and I've booked to fly with V Australia. Their free-of-charge weight limit is 23kg each for 2 bags (50lbs) for Y-pax. If I were to fly QF or NZ it'd be 32kg (70lbs). So this will mean I'll have to very carefully watch what I pack, and ultimately leave a few things behind that aren't vital to take with me on the move over there. Sure that'll suck because I'll want to take as many of my possessions as I can, but I made the choice to fly V Australia, so I can't really complain.