Charging for carriage of skis

[814man]

This question is prompted out of curiosity rather than by me trying to avoid paying, what is in the overall scheme of things, a relatively small sum.

In previous years when going on ski holidays I have been asked by the Travel Agent, and paid, the addition fee they request for carriage of skis and ski boots – about £15 if I recall.

Last year my TA didn’t ask about it and it wasn’t until I was packing a few days before travel that I remembered. On speaking to the TA they said I would need to pay the fee at the airport and that it would also be a higher sum - £20.

I was prepared to do this but on arrival at airport I wasn’t actually asked and so didn’t feel the need to offer the payment.

This year I declined the payment request by the TA and again wasn’t asked to pay at the airport.

So my questions are:

What is this payment for?
Who gets it?
Why is it less if paid in advance?
Is it universally adopted?
Who has now lost out by my non payment?

[redfred]

I think the travel agents conning you, I used to work for SR and they didnt charge and BA dont either

[814man]

Thanks for the quick reply redfred. It made me question if I had imagined it but on checking the Tomas Cook web site it states:

If you wish to travel with your own equipment on a charter flight there is a charge of £13 made for each pair of skis or snowboard. This carriage can be pre-booked up to 14 days before departure, after this you will have to book ski carriage at the Thomas Cook Airline desk at your departure airport on your day of departure at a cost of £25 per item.

It is clearly only an issue if you travel on charter flights.

I'd still like to know what its for and where it goes though!

[redfred]

Just in their pockets but im sure they will tell you its for insirance purposes, charters charge you for anything it seems

[surely not]

814man, the charge is levied by the Tour Operator.
Not one penny of it goes to the airline that has the hassle of arranging for the handling and carrying of the darned things. The airline gets the money if you are charged excess baggage because the weight of the skis and boots takes you over the personal baggage allowance on your ticket.

I was told some time ago that the charge for carriage of skis was brought in by the tour operators when passengers started to take their own skis with them rather than hiring from outlets in resort with whom the tour operators had commission arrangements. This way they made up for potential loss of revenues.

Scheduled airlines are a totally different kettle of fish.

[Ckin Gal]

bmibaby charges £10 per sports item including skis. when you said scheduled airlines did you include locos?

[bealine]

It's an emotive subject - always has been!

"Any item exceeding 62 inches, length and girth combined will be deemed as oversized and may be subject to additional charges".

As a normal, "full-frills", scheduled carrier, BA allow skis and boots as part of your baggage allowance. At Gatwick, we tend to be fair for skiing destinations and are unlikely to charge if your overall weight is under 30 kg. (unless you or the friends you're travelling with are rude or ill-mannered so, PLEASE, do not carry on with your private conversations whilst checking in or carry on a moble phone conversation !!! Your manners do have a bearing on how the airline staff treat you!)

BA at Heathrow, on the other hand, are more likely to charge every penny they're entitled to. (LHR staff receive incentives for hitting Excess baggage targets. If BA decides to do the same at LGW, then we would become less lenient!)

In a similar way, we treat pedal bikes as part of the overall allowance. Surf Boards / Windurfers / Canoes etc, however, should attract additional charges as a significant part of the available hold space is rendered unusable because of one item!

It is usual for sports equipment (golf bags included) to be charged at half the normal excess baggage rates providing sports bags / golf bags etc aren't obviously stuffed with extra clothes etc.

As scheduled air fares continue to fall, the charter boys and tour operators are having to seek ever more creative ways of generating cash. You can't really blame them!

[barry lloyd]

814 man

Since no-one speaks up for the ramp agents (=loaders) on this forum, I will
Suggest you try loading a few 737s/A320's with skis, bikes, snowboards and all the other paraphernalia, to say nothing of the heavy suitcases stuffed with food - how do we know? - because they are so stuffed they frequently break open. There is often more food than clothes, believe me. As for cases over 30 kilos, try lifting several dozen of them from a baggage dolly into a 737 on a 12 hour shift, and see how you feel!
The sheer acrobatics that have to be used on the EZY GVA flights (for example) to get all this stuff on (and off) in 25 minutes would put the members of Saltimbanco to shame! And, no, the loaders don't get paid any more for it. In the case of charters, it's just the same, except you might have marginally more time.
Thank God divers aren't allowed to carry their tanks...

[814man]

Many thanks to those who have taken the trouble to respond to my original question.

I’m still not sure however if I have an answer to my main question which was who gets the money?

“redfred” seems to think it’s the Travel Agents, while “surely not” believes the Tour Operator imposes (and presumably pockets) it as a way to put you off taking your own kit under some sort of shady deal with local ski hire companies. “Ckin Gal” and “bealine” say that it’s the airline.

Any more offers?

“barry lloyd”, is your case that the money should go to the ramp agents as they do the hard work?
Can I just say that as a member of the Royal Air Force who has in the past been employed on the RAFs Air Transport fleet I am well aware of how difficult it can be to load freight!! My experience spans from PAX and their luggage, to Nuclear Weapons. And we never got paid extra whatever the load, or the time spent on the task!!

[surely not]

814man........ the charge goes to the Tour Operator

[bealine]

.........and, in the case of a scheduled airline, the airline's excess baggage account!

[barry lloyd]

814 man:

Apologies for preaching to the converted!

I'm not a baggage handler/ramp agent/whatever, but I've done a fair bit of baggage/newspapers/mail/mushroom shifting in my time, so I feel qualified to comment!

In all seriousness, I believe the loaders should get some kind of enhancement for dealing with that kind of stuff. The problem is that it's seen by the beancounters as another way to 'enhance revenue', so (to the best of my knowledge), it just goes on the bottom line, as bealine pointed out.