Cabin Bag Proposal: MEPs Accused of Meddling

IATA

Geneva — The International Air Transport Association (IATA) accused the European Parliament of meddling in operational and commercial issues that it doesn't understand, following moves to make cabin luggage allowance obligatory, regardless of whether the passenger needs it or not.

"When regulators meddle in commercial or operational issues they don't understand, they usually get it wrong. Our consumer research tells us that the majority of travelers want to pay the lowest price possible for their ticket and buy the additional services they need. That's the complete opposite of an amendment that will force airlines to re-bundle their offering. Consumers will be disappointed with higher costs for all, and they will be frustrated with the operational chaos of determining which bags meet the requirements and which do not. If EU Parliamentarians insist on regulating where regulation is not needed, they should be prepared to take responsibility for its negative consequences," said Willie Walsh, IATA's Director General.

A proposed amendment to the enforcement of Passenger Rights (2023/0437) regulation by MEPs in the TRAN committee insists on passengers being given the right to bring an additional 100cm cabin bag for no charge – in effect, making everyone pay for a service not everyone needs.

IATA's poll of travelers in April found that the number two priority (behind only safety) for passengers was to make air travel more affordable. 72% of travelers agreed with the statement "I prefer to pay the lowest price possible for my air ticket, and pay extra for any additional services I need". The number of people paying to bring a bag on board, according to our survey, is around 30%, suggesting that a minority of travelers will be subsidized by the majority if this amendment were to be adopted.

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.