The European Union has just finalized some new regulations that will impact airline passengers. In a separate post, I covered how we’re going to see positive reforms to Europe’s (already) generous flight delay compensation scheme. That came as a surprise, since the belief was that the policies were going to become less generous.
Continue reading: European Union Adds New Carry-On Bag Rules: How Will Ryanair Market Flights?!
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Good on EU for trying to help consumers. Wish we had better leaders in the US who cared more for their constituents than the airline lobby.
In other news, the EU proposes that McDonalds may only advertise the price of a Big Mac inclusive with fries and a drink. Of course if you don’t want a drink or fries you may receive a discount at checkout.
So instead they'll display $50 EU Regulatory Fare in small text and then in big text say "$17 Super Saver!" Which is the opposite of how it's marketed now - the continue with basic fare is in small text and then the upsell options are, you know, huge and marketed and obvious in terms of what is included.
If this is about how flights are displayed in Google etc., the bag with the line through it would seemingly indicate whether bags are included or not.
Not opposed to consumer protection, just not sure folks are confused at this point. What seems much more unfair to me is a 55 euro airport check-in fee if you don't check in 2 hours in advance of your flight.
It's difficult to feel sympathy for the yobs and slappers who fly Ryanair - they clearly don't love themselves enough.
Reagan (and Thatcher) lied to a gullible generation who gave away their pensions so that a few a the top could get rich at all our expense. It was never 'government' that was the problem; it was those who convinced the public that a collective safety net was a form of bondage, rather than the foundation of a stable middle class.
I get your point and I agree with it to some extent. However, it's increasingly common for airlines to market fares they know no one will buy, just to end up on top of search results and something needs to be done about it, because it interferes with the fair advertising.
Personally, I'd prefer having a search engine (or an option when searching for fares on airline's website) that lets you enter exactly what services you want, and display prices for what you actually want to buy. But this would be much harder to implement, and I guess the accusations of government overreach would be even bigger, especially when airlines outside the EU would be affected.
This is a decent compromise, although it doesn't go as far as I'd like (for example, I don't care about carry-ons, but I always want to check a bag).
I don't think this will be legal. EU law already requires you to display the final price, and this should not be in smaller text than any other advertised prices. If the regulation is written well, the final price will be considered one with the carry-on included. The airline can still show both prices, but the price without the bag can't be larger than the price with it included.
For example, Ryanair used to have some bogus "EU261 fee" of 2 EUR per trip in the price breakdown, but the price they advertised always had to include this "fee".
I'm with Ben on this.
Airlines should be allowed to include whatever they want in the fare - just disclose it.
There are plenty of people that can and do travel without anything, esp. if they call home one city and work in another - which is common between western and eastern Europe.
I think the dissenters are missing the plot here. It would’ve been brilliant if an airline had the prowess to implement this concept in the US back when bag fees were introduced. Because at the end of the day, airlines could have gotten around the GDS wars and full content agreements by discounting ancillaries rather than creating add ons, since they had to provide all ‘fares’ to the GDS’ and allowed for price comparison. But airlines are greedy and didn’t want the associated tax burden to pay. It will be interesting to watch, because this would make price shopping easier for consumers.
The proposal doesn't remove the right to include whatever airline wants in the fare. It just establishes a baseline on what should be advertised as a fare in order to allow consumers to have a fair comparison of various offers.
and I agree with Ben that it is not necessary - and perhaps not even accurate of what consumers want - to dictate hand luggage but not other things.
Just require fair comparison by noting exactly what is included in the price and what it costs to add on something
This is actually good because otherwise currently to get the price with luggage you need to enter all of details and click through several screens to almost payment page.
I don't understand what's not to like about this proposal. It doesn't change the ability for an airline to charge what it pleases nor does it dictate what can/can't be included in the fare.
All it does is make it easier for people to compare the cost of products on a like for like basis. There's a certain set of people who wish punish customers who aren't as savvy which i don't agree with. The basis for customer protections is that the customers with lower sophistication should be protected to a degree that more sophisticated customers aren't.
Why are you so desperate to “Agree with Ben” and be “With Ben on this”?
I do enjoy a good game Wayne.
All of the airlines in Europe allow a free carry-on below a certain size. I fly then often and generally do not pay for any additional bags. This change will make it hard for me to comparison shop for flights since I won’t be able to use google flights etc to see the prices without additional bag fees, or the price if I choose to check a bag instead. It’s a poorly thought out plan. The problem is that all the airlines seem to have different dimensions and they are constantly changing which makes it difficult to purchase a bag and keep using it. I would have supposed a law that defined the weight and dimensions of the small bag so that I could buy one once and use it each time I fly.
I travel on short flights in Europe all the time and I usually don’t pay extra for a full-size carry-on since a small carry-on is usually included in the fare. When I do need to take more luggage I usually pay to check a bag because it is often cheaper than paying for a carry-on. In fact Aer Lingus includes a free checked bag but no carry-on bag in their cheapest fares.
I think this will just cause confusion.
Carry-On bags are stupid and are a problem for everyone . Just stop the carry-on bags .
The worst part of it all was that it was most championed by the children and grandchildren of the generations who had worked hard to gain it all.
That same generation then complains that the youth of today are entitled to complain about a world that is much harder to progress in than the one they inherited. They then fight hand over tooth to extract their last pound of flesh out of the welfare state, even if it breaks for those after them due to it (see the triple lock for an example of this)
I think the proposal is eminently sensible.
I don't think there is a lot for Ryanair to worry about. You have to remember that AFKL and LHG are in the process of introducing fares which don't include carry on luggage, but they offer different fare families depending on who operates which flight (e.g. Transavia/Discover/Air Dolomiti may have different allowances to their mainline siblings), whether there's an intercontinental connection involved etc. It'll be entirely possible for the same economy cabin to include passengers who are subject to 6-7 different sets of carry-on rules, the complexity is bewildering and make the sales process misleading even if there hasn't been such an intention.
@1990 , it's no longer 1990. Luggage logistics and delivery are a lot more reliable than they used to be even 15 years ago.
@Throwawayname, hope so; either way, I prefer to keep my stuff with me (and travel light). Everyone should do what works best for them. Alert just wants to impose his will on everyone else. (That's why I felt the need to mock him). Stir the pot!
@1990 , I agree with you on that. I believe that any fear of missing baggage is exaggerated, if not irrational, but I certainly don't have a problem with those who can travel light.
The only problem is people who don't want to check anything in and still attempt to carry 20kg+ of crap with them.
Rain, yes, that is the paradox of the neoliberal era:
Some of the very people who climbed to security on a ladder built by the post-war consensus turned around, pulled the ladder up behind them, and then criticized the next generation for not knowing how to climb.
While the US doesn't have a "triple lock," its equivalent flashpoint for generational inequality is a combination of Social Security, Medicare, and housing (as investments, rather than shelter).
Anyway, time to 'lift myself up by my bootstraps,' as they say here. "Let them eat, Biscoff!"
"The idea was that passengers should have the right to carry one personal item..."
Perfectly illustrates the ignorance of government and the fools who control the levers of power. Oh, and one correction to the above statement. Replace "right" with "privilege". Governments can't create "rights"; they can only violate them.
The thing is, they all charge a different amount for a carry-on bag. The benefit of them having to advertise the price inclusive of a carry-on bag is that it makes it much easier to compare prices between airlines.
If you're not bothered about a carry-on bag, then sure, you can get a discount. However, I think it makes the price comparison much easier.
I've also noticed on some of the third-party booking sites, like Amex Travel or HSBC, they only seem able to access the fares without a carry-on bag. That is quite annoying because if you want to take a carry-on bag, you then can't use those portals. By doing this as default, it makes more sense, and then you can just discount it if you're not interested.
Reliable maybe, but fast-not so much. I don't want to waste 20+ min at my destination waiting for the baggage to finally arrive.
Mike, enough of the Ayn Rand fan-fiction. We get it.. who is John Galt.. blah blah. Enough of your anarcho-libertarian chaos fetish. Lack of sensible regulation leads to corporate feudalism. Claiming ‘sovereign citizen’ isn’t a defense either. K thanx byyyeee.
I don't honestly care about fees, it's a nit compared to the cost of a 2-3 week vacation. However some standardization would be great since currently it is very difficult to find bags that fit all the European airlines. Maybe if they do it, other countries (like the US) will follow. They all use the same planes so it makes no sense they all have different dimensions.
You're so ignorant, it stuns the senses. You are incapable of anything other than your usual strawman.
Have you tried claiming victory? “You proved my point” … “I accept your surrender” … or, my favorite, claiming everyone else is a “hypocrite” (*gasp* OH NO! He got me! /s) Go ahead, quote Twain again if it makes you feel better…
I think what you’re missing here is how people actually purchase their flights. At least in Europe, people are most likely to hit an aggregator like SkySkanner, Kayak etc in search for flights. And given that it picks up fares across multiple OTAs (for example the same Ryanair flight as sold by Ryanair, and 10 other OTA’s) the customer isn’t always clear what they are purchasing even if they go to the OTA’s website. And many people will but the Ryanair flight form OTA’s and not Ryanair directly. So consistency would absolutely make things more transparency. There’s an argument there whether the consistency is down to OTA’s being more transparent in how they display information but at least their excuse is they sell products from a myriad of sources! Not just a single airline inventory.
Ryanair is the most profitable airline in Europe, so there's no need to feel sympathy for them. I'm sure O'Leary will find a way to advertise 'personal items fares'. For example: post the 'discounted' personal item rate in huge, shiny numbers and even call it a discount fare, and put the non-discounted fare with the mandated amount of hand luggage in small, boring letters below, in brackets.
But this isn't about Ryanair. Europe has lots more airlines with sometimes really weird ideas about luggage. So it's good, in a way, that Brussels now wants to make the requirements a bit more uniform so that customers can compare in a better way. Remember that most people aren't engaged into flying and aviation like we are on this platform, and remember that half the people are more stupid than the average person.
‘So, you’re telling me… there’s a chance!’
(Not sure what actual point, if any, you were trying to make, because, for the most part, the EU is awesome, especially when it comes to passenger rights regulations, but, great film, regardless, so...)
Alan, I agree; time is money. Which is why EU261 is so great, too, because, like saving 20 minutes not waiting for bags, if any airline is at fault for excessive delays, they then have to pay you, too. Wish we had something like that in the US… (watch as miraculously leas flights are delayed… incentives!)
Skyscanner now finally has the option to compare prices with a carry on bag, hold luggage or both.
Yep Reagan (who I'm no fan of) and Thatcher decided that airlines should charge for baggage. Reddit dribble.
Count me in, then. I had a choice of a non-stop on Ryanair to DUB next month from a smallish (in terms of non-Schengen flights) airport in western Europe or connecting in AMS, CDG, or FRA. The former was 100 minutes; the latter would be about 7 or more hours from first departure to final arrival. And, I'd have to go through the EES as I tried to make a 2 hour connection, rather than prior to departure on the non-stop. Oh, and Ryannair was noticeable less expensive even with all my add ones. So, if they get me there safely, I can't imagine I'll have a complaint. Not that is ever is an option, but I'd take a 100 minute Greyhound in the US over a 7+ hours, 2-stop flight. Sometimes you find yourself choosing the lesser of evils. What should I have done? Fly private?
I'm with Ben. Aren't we at a point technologically that we can have it any way? Let me click on a button. I can choose to see airfares with no carry on or checked, with carry on, or with carry on and one checked.
Otherwise, let them do what they want with full disclosure. Yes, listing all prices without a carry on means those with a carry on may select an apparently lower fare but get a higher one once the carry on fee is added. But, listing all prices with a carry on means that those with no carry on may select an apparently lower fare but get a higher one once the discount is applied.
Lucky, unfortunately, the airlines are not transparent about the carry on fees. You have to go until the end of the booking to see the price. Some even require log in to see the price with carry-on, so I believe this compromise is actually appropriate even for your view. Often these fees are quite high, yet these airlines use human psychological/behavioural biases to trick customers. You need to see the actual discussion made to make this ruling to understand it better, instead of just judging on the surface.
Is 'outright lying' your new thing? Based on your typical conservative/libertarian commentary on here, you likely idolize both Reagan and Thatcher. (Oh, wait, did you forget the '/s'?)
NEVER every fly Ryan Air! On a recent trip to the EU, without my printer (duh!), I was unable to print boarding pasess when I did our online check-in. The online boarding pass system would not download to my phone with "technical difficulties." They charged 3 of us $25 EACH to print our boarding passes at the desk. And then they said that we could not take our carry-on bags and had to check them as cargo - another $25 EACH, even though they met the measurements stated. The flight was supposed to be from Barcelona to Paris. Actually the plane landed an hour and a half north of Paris and we had to pay another fee for the bus to take us into the city. They were supposed to take us to the Arc du Triumph (sp?) but no. Another costly bus ride to a Metro Station.
Ryan air just sucks!
I fully agree that it makes perfect sense to anyone with a brain that consumers should be given an easy way to compare the ripoff prices that Ryanair actually charges after leading you to believe you are getting a bargain with the prices from normal airlines. I personally can't travel with those crooks as they are just constantly trying to find reasons to charge you extra. I am prepared to pay extra and have done to fly with a decent airline. I don't understand why this journalist wouldn't want consumers to be able to assess how much their journey will cost easily. I just read another article where oleary is complaining about at least 1 flight a week being diverted because of drunk passengers but he won't be suggesting that he makes less profit by not selling alcohol to his passengers, personally I think his passengers have to be drunk in order to tolerate flying Ryanair
Wow. First, Ryanair specifically has a policy to give you a free boarding pass if you check in on line and your printer fails (phone dies, etc.). So, this should not happen. If you did not purchase a carry on beforehand, you have to pay a fee at the airport to have a carry on (not personal item). So, I'm guessing you arrived with a legit sized carry on, but hadn't paid to have one. They were sold out of their carry bag allotment, so you couldn't pay to carry on. You had to pay to check it in the hold. Finally, Ryanair is clear they use Paris Beauvais Airport. Why were you surprised they flew you there? My recommendation is to pay more attention in booking your travels.
If you lived with mountains of nonsensical EU rules instead of just observing and commenting upon those which you approve of, you might not bump your gums so readily. Typical of a yank who knows a little but pretends to be so knowledgeable, do stick to selling holidays 1990.
There are real newspapers published online for the discerning reader. Yanks and others can avoid being brainwashed by the likes of the Guardian you know 1990. Straw man, cough, cough.
AeroB13a (Guest) for once I am not in contention with you for misappropriating my login ID.
It is abundantly obvious that Walter Mitty Dunn, is creeping up to Ben and Ben is swallowing the slimy rhetoric. Rewarding him even …. 🙂
“The EU is awesome” posts 1990, the brain dead Guardian reader.
It must have been a traumatic flight experience with two ankle biters in tow and so many flight changes. ‘Bill & Ben’ the flowerpot men …. 🙂
Do try to relax on your holiday chaps, the tension can be felt worldwide.
This is not just about Ryanair. Airlines should just market the service they provide. Today their marketing sadly focuses on catching consumers’ attention with low fares that don’t contain anything useful and penalise passengers, in the hope that people add on other services without being able to compare full prices to other options that may be available in the market. This is a massive waste of time for the consumer, inefficient for the industry and also, morally wrong. I wish this legislation came sooner. Other countries should take note.
Calling bs on most of these...
Sounds more like you weren't paying attention to what you were booking.
Ryanair has an interesting problem. They well the seat and offer you to add a carryon for a fee (it includes priority boarding). But they only allocate 100 to sell each flight on planes with 189-197 seats. It is possible (though uncoming, I think) to sell out. Thus, late in the game, you might be able to buy a seat, but not add a carry on (all tickets get the underneath bag). How can they sell those under the new rules? The rules will require a carry on is included, which you may remove fir a reduction in price. They wouldn’t be able to do that unless they allowed unlimited carry on (at 1 per person).
Another huge problem is that this will cause significant delays because there is not enough space for everyone to bring carry-on bags.
I have flown Ryanair many times, completely sober. I live in Vienna, and when there is an option of Austrian airlines or Ryanair on same route, it is pure logic to go with the one what offers cheaper price. I have no problem to travel just with a backpack for a weekend away. I just checked same route (Vienna to Rome), and Austrian is at minimum double the price (120 vs 60 €). Yes, Austrian does include carry on, but I do not need it for single weekend, but even if I do add it with Ryan (inlcluding priority), they still end up bein 25 euros cheaper than Austrian. On such a short flight, Austrian does not offer anything that would justify price difference. And no, they are not trying to find reason to charge you extra. They are clear about their rules, and if one follows them, they will not charge anything extra. If, on the other hand, one is not able to understand what one is reading, that is a different story....
One reads today the obituary of Bruce (Old Snake) Crandall. A Helicopter Pilot of the highest calibre.
The likes of Col Crandall puts to shame the Walter Mitty type ‘aviation geeks’ of this unfortunate age.
R.I.P. Colonel Crandall.
This is consumer protection at its best. If Ryanair wouldn’t act like they act, this law wouldn’t have seen the light.
Freedom to choose a lower fare with more restrictions is obviously unacceptable for the European masses. They are confused by choice. We must force such airlines to be exactly the same as all the others, thus ensuring competition, because I'm a retard.
Pardon me, Aero, for leaving out how AWESOME the UK is, too, especially for their nearly identical air passenger rights regulations, UK261 (like EU261). Even “readers” of Telegraph might appreciate their compensation for significantly delayed flights under the airlines control. (Meanwhile, across the pond, we, in the US, have no such protections… *sigh*)
Mantis is based in Asia, yet he regularly propagates anti-worker and anti-consumer sentiments on matters affecting the US and Europe.
Perhaps 1990, Mantis has not scummed to the EU propaganda machine rhetoric and therefore is free to speak his own mind. Parroting woke, leftist ideology displays only ignorance of the facts 1990 …. yes?
“Outright lying” is no new thing on this website. The fact that some “Lie” about events before they were even born and go onto promote an unbalanced narrative out of sheer ignorance, is apparent for all to see.
1990, I repeat, parroting EU propaganda with accusations of complicity by the UK government, simply amplifies your lack of a rounded view of the EU.
Fair point, Aero. Luckily, consumer rights are floors, not ceilings. No one is forcing you to take the cash. If you prefer to preserve the airline's profit margins at your own expense, you are entirely free to leave your money on the table.
1990, to those who know it is you who needs to “Surrender” old crust. You are parroting EU propaganda because you know no better.
One suspects that you have not even realised that the EU echelons of power is stuffed full of failed domestic politicians. The EU has become a gravy-train for the rejected political figures of mainland Europe. The sooner people like you realise that fact the better.
Perhaps 1990, you might be better employed in trying to improve consumer rights in relation to the well documented as flawed, U.S. aviation industry. It is as clear as day, that your knowledge of the EU or other European nations aviation industries will only earn you the Walter Mitty ll accolade.
Aero, the EU, UK, and Canadian frameworks are exactly the blueprints the U.S. needs, which is why I constantly advocate for implementing them here. The fact that the EU is actively refining its rules to close carrier loopholes makes the model even more relevant.
As for the meta commentary: There is a major difference between exhaustingly shilling for a single carrier (like Tim does for Delta), and advocating for broad structural improvements for workers and consumers across the entire industry. If pushing for actual corporate accountability makes me a 'dreamer' in your eyes, I can live with that. Keep the comments coming.
1. Airlines will continue to be able to provide cheaper fares without bags included.
2. The problem would disappear if airlines didn't charge for (the first) checked baggage.
The regulation doesn't remove that freedom. Fares without carryon are still going to be permitted.
Under the new rules, a standard 7kg (~15 lbs) overhead bag and a personal item must be included in the base ticket price by law. What point are you even trying to make? Do you just hate carry-on bags? No one is forcing you to bring one... like, be 'free'... travel light, good sir. LOL.
Samo gets it. It's a consumer transparency law, not a ban on cheap tickets. Instead of airlines advertising an artificially cheap €15 fare and hiding the cabin bag fee until the final payment screen, they now have to show the all-in price with a standard carry-on first. Price-sensitive travelers can still opt out of the bag to save money, but airlines can no longer use hidden bait-and-switch fees to trick consumers.
I don’t care if Ryan air or any airlines sells seat without including cabin bags (carry on) . What bugs me most is lack of common dimensions for personal and carry on luggage.
1990 just creamed his pants. This might be the final straw that he lifts his glass from his Champagne Socialist armchair in the UWS and moves to Camden, Newham or Croydon in London?
You’re very unlikely to have BA (an airline with generous luggage allowances) and Ryanair (with the opposite approach) agree on the appropriate size of a wheelie bag.
*doing laundry* ...nah, I still prefer NYC (go Knicks!)
*raises glass to consumer rights that force multi-billion dollar corporations to pay up when they aren't transparent or don't operate reliably* Cheers!
Aero, nice Tory-splaining. George spends all day defending free-market deregulation, then blames Reagan and Thatcher for airline baggage policy... The hypocrisy went over your head.
The real problem is the inability to reasonably comparison shop because the product isn't standardized. I am a big fan of the car insurance model. Liability insurance means the exact same thing in every state and it is the exact same product. Different insurance companies can compete on price, service, bundling, whether you agree to electronic billing or whatever else, but the product is exactly the same.
Airlines aren't like that and this is a problem.
Being able to compare a standardized product is handy, especially using agencies and search engines. Presumably somebody who's all-in on Ryanair and uses their website directly from the start can be nudged to the cheaper fare the same way they currently nudge them to the higher fare...
Yeah, Ryanair is fantastically successful. Why? Lots of people fly them. But, the EU elite think they know better. People vote with their dollars. There is nothing wrong with Ryanair's model, but the low IQ folks who think they are smarter than the crowds think we need protection from them.
Never, cognitive dissonance is the pillarstone of the miserable socialist ideology. So our official TDS chief in charge will stay forever to live the benefits and lifestyle that we capitalists built
As a retired traveller aged 79 years and my wife who is 70 years old , we buy the cheapest flight, usually with a free small bag under the seat and then we buy one x 20kg or 23 kg check in bag , which we share .
At our age , we do not want to carry or roll cabin bags down airport corridors , up and down escalators and steps and then have to find a space in the overhead bins . The cost difference between one checked in bag and 2 cabin bags is usually immaterial . This enables us to travel and in 2026 already , we have visited Hong Kong ,China, Philippines , Bulgaria, Serbia, New Macedonia and Greece. No sitting at home watching TV for us !!!!!