Stealthy does it

By N.B. | WASHINGTON, DC

WHEN airlines began charging fees for checked bags, travellers' behaviour changed dramatically. Flyers started trying to jam everything they could into large carry-on bags, overhead bins filled up faster and more often, and more people ended up having to gate-check their bags. More problematically for the airlines—since every extra minute at the gate costs them money—boarding times slowed.

Spirit, an American discount airline that chose to run against the pack by charging slightly more for carry-on bags then for checked ones, brags that it can board a 174-seat Airbus A320 in about 20 minutes, notably faster than the industry average. Gulliver, no fan of Spirit, has in the past defended the airline's carry-on bag fee, which two senators once talked of trying to block. It's arguable whether faster boarding or "free" overhead bins are better for passengers.

Though most carriers have yet to follow Spirit's lead, the New York Times noted recently that its competitors have figured out a way to charge passengers for overhead space without explicitly charging for carry-on bags: by charging those who want to move up in the boarding queue so they can get a better shot at an available bin.

This revelation is presumably supposed to stoke outrage, but charging passengers who want to jump the queue seems well within the bounds of fair business practices. Personally, I don't want to have to worry about paying fees for carry-on bags. But that's a far cry from saying that governments should block airlines from implementing such fees. The most important thing, as Gulliver has consistently argued, is disclosure: passengers should know before they buy their tickets what sort of fees they can expect to pay. As long as there's full disclosure, travellers will be able to make smart choices. Limiting fees has been good for Southwest Airlines' reputation and its brand; big airlines that move towards charging for carry-on bags can expect some travellers to take their business elsewhere.