Is it the job of airport security to weigh passenger's cabin baggage?

[markis10]

I thought the private security at airports was provided by a contractor to the airport company or authority.

I doubt the airlines could ask a private security company not contracted to them to police bag weight limits. (unless they are and I'm sure the airlines would tell their customers SNP/Chubb etc was going to check the bag weight).

I'm having a meeting in the airline lounge :mrgreen:, please get your supervisor to come see me there and bring my bag when you have finished. Making sure to tip him.

Matt

I have never seen carry on checked by the screening point at DOM airports for airline policies, only the INTL terminals where the screening point can be considered the same as an aerobridge, but I expect that will change moving forward, to quote last years review into screening policies by our government:

Now that there is an increase in off-airport and automated check-in for passengers, the screening officer is often the first persona passenger will interact with at the airport.
Both these trends result in a range of issues including:
 screeners potentially managing bag sizes and weights (and the related OH&S issues);
 increased volumes of baggage to be screened; and
 increased bag complexity and superimposition which impacts detection performance.

 

[medhead]

If the security staff are applying the airline's rules, then it isn't their discretion

Seems that a number of regular travellers think that rules that are inconveniant to them need not be followed

But based on the OP the security staff are not applying the rules, they are using their discretion and they appear to be only applying one airlines' rules to all passengers.

This is the point that many people are raising here and that has nothing at all to do with travellers thinking that the rules are inconvenient and don't apply. It is about the fact that the security screeners do not appear to be applying the range of rules that can apply to carry on luggage.

As it was 12 kilos he was told by security than he could only have 7 kilos & he had to go back and check it in. Anyone who travels regularly ex BNE would appreciate that news like that would go down like a lead balloon.

I have never seen carry on checked by the screening point at DOM airports for airline policies, only the INTL terminals where the screening point can be considered the same as an aerobridge,

But the OP is about Domestic screening.

This morning SO was going through the security screening point at BNE Domestic terminal (QF end) when one of the security people picked up his carry on then passed it to a colleague and asked them to weigh it.

Overweight luggage *is* dangerous.

I know I replied to this already but let me reiterate, heavy luggage may be dangerous but it is not a dangerous good. The limit is in place due to *safety*. I would also think that I would feel just as unhappy if I was killed by a 7 kg bag flying around a cabin as if the bag was 12kg.

 

[anat0l]

Gee, the disadvantages of coming to the conversation late.

Firstly, I have a basic knowledge of DGs (Dangerous Goods, yes I will spell it out using capitals here) from learning a half-course at uni in Occupational Toxicology. A heavy bag is dangerous but that does not make it a Dangerous Good. Otherwise, heavy bags would need to be transported with forms and the like (rather than merely just repacked/reorganised). I see about 20+ posts have been wasted trying to iron out the semantics of two words.

I wish some of you can argue with my dad. He gets very furious when he is told that his cabin baggage or checked baggage is too heavy and he is told to shift some weight around, when his argument is that it doesn't matter where the weight is on the ****ing plane, the plane will weigh exactly the same. Anyway, I digress....

I didn't actually know that the security companies are subcontracted by the airlines (as opposed to by the airport authority itself). To that extent, if airlines want to push the responsibility of checking bags on them, fine, except fundamentally it slows the security screening process, and unlike explosives checks would it be really fair to make bag checks random?

On another note, it is almost too easy to get away with more cabin baggage and/or the wrong limits being enforced. For one, domestic passengers flying QF are entitled to:

• 2 x 105cm bags
• 1 x 105cm bag + 1 x garment bag
• 1 x 115cm bag

Each piece must not exceed 7kg. The security people have to make sure they remember all three sets of rules.

Now I did make a slight boo-boo there. These allowances only apply if you are flying QF metal on a jet. If you're on a turboprop, the allowance is only one piece at 4kg. Now how do you suppose the security staff check for that one?

Then, as some people said, what if you are not flying and just visiting the lounge / seeing friends or relatives off? Then again, how are the security people going to know otherwise unless they follow you all the way to the gate and then possibly charge you for lying?

A whole bunch of these issues would be solved if they moved baggage checking to the gate. Of course, unless everyone was pre-checked before boarding*, the boarding process would be very much slowed.

What they should also do is provide a test frame which is raised higher above the floor. Except for those people who are justifiably incapacitated, if someone cannot lift their carry-on baggage there's a good chance it'll be in breach of carry-on regulations.

So, to round off, in answer to the OP question - is it the job of security to weigh pax baggage? Prima facie, no. But since they appear to be "in the right position to do the job"........


* One model that I can see is that at the service desk, gate desk and lounges, test frames are given and pax prove to a staff member that their carry-on is within limits. A note is then made on the manifest that the carry-on passes. Later, when the pax are boarded, those pax whose carry-ons have not been tested are held back and not boarded until their carry-ons have been tested and permitted. This is where a couple of boarding lines would be very useful.

 

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

I don't really care who enforces the bag size & weight limit, I just want it enforced.

I am rather surprised that the airlines don't see the enforcement as a great revenue raiser since QF is the only 1 to give free checked in luggage domestically.

 

[Dave Noble]

.

I wish some of you can argue with my dad. He gets very furious when he is told that his cabin baggage or checked baggage is too heavy and he is told to shift some weight around, when his argument is that it doesn't matter where the weight is on the ****ing plane, the plane will weigh exactly the same. Anyway, I digress....

The difference is that the plane itself is unlikely to fall out of a locker and land on someone. If an article of size X falls, the pressure exerted will depend on the mass of the object. By limiting the weight, the pressure will be lower should it land on someone.

On another note, it is almost too easy to get away with more cabin baggage and/or the wrong limits being enforced. For one, domestic passengers flying QF are entitled to:

• 2 x 105cm bags
• 1 x 105cm bag + 1 x garment bag
• 1 x 115cm bag

Each piece must not exceed 7kg. The security people have to make sure they remember all three sets of rules.

If they start with the 7Kg limit it is a good start

.

Then, as some people said, what if you are not flying and just visiting the lounge / seeing friends or relatives off? Then again, how are the security people going to know otherwise unless they follow you all the way to the gate and then possibly charge you for lying?

Unlikely to need to be carrying around stuff if just seeing someone off and can just leave it in a car or if they have nowhere else to put it, not go through.

.

A whole bunch of these issues would be solved if they moved baggage checking to the gate. Of course, unless everyone was pre-checked before boarding*, the boarding process would be very much slowed.

Rather than have one set of people do the checking at a central point where all pass, then would require a lot more staff to handle each gate

.

So, to round off, in answer to the OP question - is it the job of security to weigh pax baggage? Prima facie, no. But since they appear to be "in the right position to do the job"........

Indeed, the security point does also seem to me to be the best spot for the enforcement to occur and would be good if this was also where the sizing checks were performed which could be done reasonably easily if the sizing allowance and quantities were standardised before it gets too much like the USA with ridiculous sized carry on

 

[markis10]

But the OP is about Domestic screening.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious, as I said Ï have never see it happen at DOM, of course that does not mean it does not happen

I didn't actually know that the security companies are subcontracted by the airlines (as opposed to by the airport authority itself). To that extent, if airlines want to push the responsibility of checking bags on them, fine, except fundamentally it slows the security screening process, and unlike explosives checks would it be really fair to make bag checks random?

The security companies are contracted by the airport, the airport is required to look after security as per CASR 92 & Aviation Transport Security Act 2004, as part of the nominated plans in the security document they are required to enforce airline policy in terms of items not permitted onboard an aircraft.

 

[equus]

If they start with the 7Kg limit it is a good start

As all carry on items go through the X-Ray scanner on a moving conveyor, how hard could it be to have a scale built in? Over (lets say 10kg to allow for a bit of leeway, and potentially higher limits for some airlines), then the scanner won't let it through.

If you wan't to go the whole way, then have the boarding pass scanned, and have the X-Ray also measure the item (not too difficult to do from the digital X-Ray image) - the combination of the boarding pass info as well as weighing and measuring could then account for all the rules (pax status, airline, type of aircraft etc). This would even allow for (non-metallic) items not having weight if carried - as you simply need to walk them through in your pocket.

 

[docjames]

* One model that I can see is that at the service desk, gate desk and lounges, test frames are given and pax prove to a staff member that their carry-on is within limits. A note is then made on the manifest that the carry-on passes. Later, when the pax are boarded, those pax whose carry-ons have not been tested are held back and not boarded until their carry-ons have been tested and permitted. This is where a couple of boarding lines would be very useful.

This was done to us by BA at CDG. At checking, I was asked to place the carryon bags into the measuring cradle (each one (both identical) of mine and mrsdocs bags) at checkin and a luggage tag ("Approved Carryon" or similar wording) was put on the handle. This would be better than expecting security to process, and leave only a few (those withnon-checked luggage) to be enforced at the gate.

 

[Will]

So the screening point has the authority to deal with:

- Dangerous Goods, as defined under the Technical Instructions issued in combination with CASR 92.015 - being an all-inclusive list: Quote " the things specified in the Dangerous Goods List contained in the Technical Instructions are declared to be dangerous goods". Articles over a certain weight are not Dangerous Goods. Something doesn't become a Dangerous Good because it is declared to be so by an airline; it must be defined in the technical instructions. In other words, a dangerous good is not necessarily a Dangerous Good.

- Weapons, and Prohibited Items as defined under the ATSR (the regulations authorised under the ATSA).

Nothing referenced here, nor any legislation or regulation I have been able to source through other means, authorises or empowers screening point staff to expand their role.

The only caveat may be under common law notions of trespass, however for several reasons I don't believe Macquarie Bank's employees have the power to unilaterally restrict access to the port.

 

[dajop]

I can understand screening for international at security points, but for domestic, what if you are not flying out that day (eg WP's wanting lounge access after collecting checked luggage on arrival)? I guess you could prove you had just flown in.

 

[markis10]

So the screening point has the authority to deal with:

Nothing referenced here, nor any legislation or regulation I have been able to source through other means, authorises or empowers screening point staff to expand their role.

The only caveat may be under common law notions of trespass, however for several reasons I don't believe Macquarie Bank's employees have the power to unilaterally restrict access to the port.

Screening is part of a whole of airport approach to aviation security, from where I stand I believe the authorities see screening as not only being there for certain laws already touched on but also as part of the enforcement of other legislation that draws on international agreements such as the Chicago convention and I quote the previously mentioned screening review doc:

Consistent with International Civil Aviation Organization obligations, the general purpose of Australian aviation security legislation is to establish a regulatory framework to safeguard against ‘unlawful interference with aviation’. Section 10 of the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 sets out the definition of unlawful interference with aviation as follows:........
 placing, or causing to be placed, on board an aircraft that is in service, anything that puts the safety of the aircraft, or any person on board or outside the aircraft, at risk;

(I have only included one of the many things covered)

A screening point becomes part of an airports security policies by its very nature, and airports are not government entities, if they choose to enforce Section 10 of the Aviation Transport Security Act and support airline policies in respect to ensuring nothing is taken on board the aircraft that puts its safety at risk through the use of security guards at screening points that would seem to be consistent with the safety regs in general IMHO, the discussion paper already mentions the poor legislative framework in place for screening points which is obviously a result of events and the need for haste, LAGS is a good example there.


Maybe I am being too nice to the airports, I am not a big fan of guards and have seen them overstep their mark in the past, however I think in this case it might be a good thing.

I wont be challenging the authority for such locations to check my carry on for weight limits etc, but I will watch with interest what happens to anyone that does challenge it (hopefully in a respectful way)!

 

[Will]

Screening is part of a whole of airport approach to aviation security, from where I stand I believe the authorities see screening as not only being there for certain laws already touched on but also as part of the enforcement of other legislation that draws on international agreements such as the Chicago convention ...

I think we probably largely agree on the content of the rules, but differ slightly in philosophy and interpretation, vis acceptance of legislative influence outside of the strict content of the acts and regulations.

I have never had occasion to make an issue of it, as I have only been challenged when travelling internationally and I always make sure my bags are within weight limits.

HOWEVER, if I was trying to get airside at a domestic terminal and the contracted private security guard tried to restrict access based on weight of my bags (and sometimes I have entered with my checked bags of 20+kg), I would very likely cause a polite stink.

 

[markis10]

HOWEVER, if I was trying to get airside at a domestic terminal and the contracted private security guard tried to restrict access based on weight of my bags (and sometimes I have entered with my checked bags of 20+kg), I would very likely cause a polite stink.

One might need to take the golf clubs with you owing to poor airport carpark security provided by the airport when next visiting a QP for an AGM after a round of golf, I can certainly see your point of view in that context, and wonder what the reaction would be?

 

[ozbeachbabe]

Maybe I am being too nice to the airports, I am not a big fan of guards and have seen them overstep their mark in the past, however I think in this case it might be a good thing.

I wont be challenging the authority for such locations to check my carry on for weight limits etc, but I will watch with interest what happens to anyone that does challenge it (hopefully in a respectful way)!

A DRW based Qantas Link Captain caused a song and dance when subjected to an EDT test by ISS Security prior to operating a flight. Of course the whole episode was captured on the CCTV cameras which are everywhere.

The same thing happened again at ASP when the Captain said if she was screened she would refuse to operate the flight. The result one cancelled flight, a planeload of uphappy passengers and one Captain stood down from flying duties from employer - a contractor not QF, a detail that is neither here nor there for the pax.

 

[Dave Noble]

One might need to take the golf clubs with you owing to poor airport carpark security provided by the airport when next visiting a QP for an AGM after a round of golf, I can certainly see your point of view in that context, and wonder what the reaction would be?

If you tried to do that now, I doubt that security would allow someone to take a suitcase and golf clubs through the x-ray even if the person claimed that they were not travelling

 

[anat0l]

A DRW based Qantas Link Captain caused a song and dance when subjected to an EDT test by ISS Security prior to operating a flight. Of course the whole episode was captured on the CCTV cameras which are everywhere.

The same thing happened again at ASP when the Captain said if she was screened she would refuse to operate the flight. The result one cancelled flight, a planeload of uphappy passengers and one Captain stood down from flying duties from employer - a contractor not QF, a detail that is neither here nor there for the pax.

Is EDT the explosions detection test?

Regardless, what a dumb move to protest it. I wouldn't care if you were the Queen..... Glad that she was stood down; what a ridiculous reaction.

For the record and coincidence, when I flew to ASP last year, I was tested for explosives. As usual, no big deal.

 

[dajop]

The same thing happened again at ASP when the Captain said if she was screened she would refuse to operate the flight.

Don't know what the big deal is for captains/flight crew, it takes a few seconds, much easier than kicking up a fuss. But the logic of the situation suggests that the captain of the aircraft does not need explosives to kill everyone onboard an aircraft and/or cause significant damage to the urban environment, so security would be better off screening other random passengers. I guess there could always be imposters.

 

[Will]

Is EDT the explosions detection test?

Regardless, what a dumb move to protest it. I wouldn't care if you were the Queen..... Glad that she was stood down; what a ridiculous reaction.

Just out of interest, the ATSR specifically deal with the Queen... and she is exempt from all screening

 

[Will]

If you tried to do that now, I doubt that security would allow someone to take a suitcase and golf clubs through the x-ray even if the person claimed that they were not travelling

As long as the suitcase contained no prohibited items, weapons or Dangerous Goods, what basis could they have for refusing?

 

[ozbeachbabe]

If you tried to do that now, I doubt that security would allow someone to take a suitcase and golf clubs through the x-ray even if the person claimed that they were not travelling

I think the issue here is that security assume that everybody passing through the screening point is about to board an aircraft and at present it would seem there is no provsion eg for a WP who has come off an international flight to have some chill out time at the QP at BNE Domestic prior to going to their hotel.

So security tell you "sorry but you'll have to check that in" & you say "I can't check it in because I'm not flying anywhere". Then what you have to do is go & hire a locker to put your checked luggage in whilst you visit the QP?