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

[medhead]

Yes Governments do set a list of prohibited and dangerous goods, however an airline also has the power to set its on policies based on what it considers dangerous, for instance DJ does not consider a Cello to be dangrous while Qantas does and requires it to be checked in as oversize baggage?

Let me keep it simple for you, the government makes rules, airlines add to them, and the security screening point is the place the makes sure they are followed. If you dont think they are empowered to stop you then by all means confront them and report back (when you get access to AFF again, not sure internet access is provided in lock ups) .

Dangers goods are specific categories of materials. For example class 7 dangerous goods are radioactive materials. Airlines can not randomly add things to those categories of dangerous goods. So No a cello is not a dangerous good. But, of course qantas can have a policy on how they will carry a cello but that is related to safety not dangerous goods.

Let's keep it simple for you. Governments make rules and airlines cannot change them, they can only decide how they implement them. Along those lines most airlines will refuse to carry class 7 dangerous goods.
You've given an example that relates to how qantas implement ohs rules, casa rules (no doubt), and common law duty of care (there maybe others) but that example has nothing to do with dangerous goods rules.

Google Australian Dangerous Goods Code.

Ohh and I didn't write anything to suggest I though security wasn't empowered to stop me. I have no idea where you got that from.

 

[medhead]

Ok so here are the categories of dangerous goods
Class 1 Explosives
Class 2 Gases
Class 3 Flammable liquids
Class 4 Flammable solids
Class 5 Oxidizing agents and organic peroxides
Class 6 Toxic and infectious substances
Class 7 Radioactive substances
Class 8 Corrosive substances
Class 9 Miscellaneous

Ok so now where do we put a cello. Class 9 with asbestos, airbag inflators, dry ice and other miscellaneous hazardous materials?

 

[straitman]

Sorry but dangerous goods regulations are set nationally and internationally but government and multi government agencies not airlines. The only say an airline (or pilot) has is to decide whether or not they will carry dangerous goods.

The Dangerous Goods regulations are set at many levels as you so rightly point out. ICAO is where it all starts and I actually challenge anyone to understand their published manual. This is then presented in user friendly terms (?) in the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations. Nobody is actually expected to know these regulations due to their complexity. The IATA DG manual is publised annually and is a reference manual. Within the IATA DG Regs there are country specific exemptions and also airline specific exemptions.
In addition each country has their own regulations which in the case of Oz is CASR 92. In addition, and whilst trying to comply with all of these individual operators can further limit what and how they carry goods.

You say that carry on luggage is classed as dangerous goods under some act. Which act? Because there is no provision under the ADG code to arbitrarily classify something as dangerous goods that isn't dangerous goods. In fact it is prohibited to falsely classify something as dangerous goods.

Ok so now where do we put a cello. Class 9 with asbestos, airbag inflators, dry ice and other miscellaneous hazardous materials?

Operators can limit the carriage of specific goods within the regulations. I know this as I many discussions with and was involved in making submissions to CASA when CASR 92 was being drafted.

 

[Dave Noble]

Dave you have made this comment before. Whilst I understand your wish for the size and number to be enforced I am not sure why the weight is such a concern to you. Have you ever been injured by an overweight carry on?

I am as concerned about the loose duty free spirits as I am about a heavy rollaboard above me - except the rollaboard is less likely to roll out of overhead onto my head...

I have seen someone injured from a heavy carry on falling onto someone whilst being taken out of the overhead. I didn't get hit, but definitely would not want to be hit by overweight cabin baggage falling on my head

 

[markis10]

Google Australian Dangerous Goods Code.

That explains your lack of knowledge in terms of the way things are in aviation land, Google is not the best resource compared to those licenced to deal in this area and have had professional experience as alluded to by Straitman. If you have had any insight into how google works you would be well aware of its limitations when it comes to finding the right material!

Ohh and I didn't write anything to suggest I though security wasn't empowered to stop me. I have no idea where you got that from.

I never said you did, I was just keeping it simple for you and saying if you did not like what was happening then dont let me stop you from questioning it with the security guard in person, in short take take the words posted in an internet forum or on google for that matter as the final word

 

[medhead]

The Dangerous Goods regulations are set at many levels as you so rightly point out. ICAO is where it all starts and I actually challenge anyone to understand their published manual. This is then presented in user friendly terms (?) in the IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations. Nobody is actually expected to know these regulations due to their complexity. The IATA DG manual is publised annually and is a reference manual. Within the IATA DG Regs there are country specific exemptions and also airline specific exemptions.
In addition each country has their own regulations which in the case of Oz is CASR 92. In addition, and whilst trying to comply with all of these individual operators can further limit what and how they carry goods.

Operators can limit the carriage of specific goods within the regulations. I know this as I many discussions with and was involved in making submissions to CASA when CASR 92 was being drafted.

Exactly. As I said the airline can refuse to carry DGs. But they can't decide that something like a cello or carry on bags are DGs.

The formation of the regulations are even more complex that the outline you provide as class 7 regulations are developed by the IAEA. I suspect that the CASR you mention are probably an adoption of the ADG Code which is the primary regulatory source domestically. But I'm not sure of that point as I'm not familiar with the casr. However it doesn't change the point above.

As for knowing the DG regs. I have certainly been expected to have a working knowledge of them in a past life. And I'm still expected to know class 7 DG regs in detail.

 

[markis10]

Exactly. As I said the airline can refuse to carry DGs. But they can't decide that something like a cello or carry on bags are DGs.

If an airline labels an item as dangerous and refuses to carry it then what rights do you have, sure dangerous goods are defined by governments, but you are missing the point, there is nothing to stop the carrier from adding to it!

Let me give you an example not related to airlines, Australia Post as a regulated air freight carrier will not let you send any laptop battery by air regardless of the fact that these are not dangerous goods designated by IATA, ICAO or CASA, as they have deemed it a dangerous good for air shipment.

Perhaps you have not noticed the terms and conditions of your carriage:

"Prohibited articles include but are not limited to"

 

[medhead]

That explains your lack of knowledge in terms of the way things are in aviation land, Google is not the best resource compared to those licenced to deal in this area and have had professional experience as alluded to by Straitman. If you have had any insight into how google works you would be well aware of its limitations when it comes to finding the right material!

google is actually an amazing thing called a search engine that allows you to find the resources used by professionals. I can only suppose that you lack of knowledge of DGs is due to being limited to aviation. Whereas my experience dealing with DG has been over a range of transport modes and industries.

I never said you did, I was just keeping it simple for you and saying if you did not like what was happening then dont let me stop you from questioning it with the security guard in person, in short take take the words posted in an internet forum or on google for that matter as the final word

In fact you did say that and you've just said it again. I never said I had a problem with security screening I never said anything about questioning it. What I've done is correct the incorrect information you've given about DG. No need to distract from your mistake with furphies. It is also great that you mention not taking words from an Internet forum. That applies to your suggestion that 12kg of socks and jocks are classified as dangerous goods by airlines.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

I don't give a hoot about the dangerous goods rules above, my main issue is with a security contractor telling me what is or isn't allowed by the airline (besides the SECURITY RESTRICTED items like sharp objects, dangerous goods etc), when they have KNOWN to be wrong, example, two pieces for J pax, or when the airline themselves is quite happy to take a certain amount of carry-on for example ex-SIN but the guy at the sliding doors ex-MEL says no!

 

[medhead]

If an airline labels an item as dangerous and refuses to carry it then what rights do you have, sure dangerous goods are defined by governments, but you are missing the point, there is nothing to stop the carrier from adding to it!

Let me give you an example not related to airlines, Australia Post as a regulated air freight carrier will not let you send any laptop battery by air regardless of the fact that these are not dangerous goods designated by IATA, ICAO or CASA, as they have deemed it a dangerous good for air shipment.

Perhaps you have not noticed the terms and conditions of your carriage:

"Prohibited articles include but are not limited to"

You are talking about two totally different things! How many times do I have to say it? Any carrier is entitled to set their policy, i have consistently stated that. But that policy does not turn the items into dangerous goods, which are legally defined. The policy is not based on dangerous goods legislation. It may be deemed a safety issue but that is a entirely different matter.

Dangerous goods are hazardous substances there are actually laws that DO stop people from adding to that list of dangerous goods. So they can have a policy but they cannot create dangerous goods.

I have worked for 8 years regulating dangerous goods, providing training and approving transport of dangerous goods. I known little bit about the legal requirements in this area. So just put your condescending attitude away. Especially as you are getting confused between the law and company policy.

 

[medhead]

I don't give a hoot about the dangerous goods rules above, my main issue is with a security contractor telling me what is or isn't allowed by the airline (besides the SECURITY RESTRICTED items like sharp objects, dangerous goods etc), when they have KNOWN to be wrong, example, two pieces for J pax, or when the airline themselves is quite happy to take a certain amount of carry-on for example ex-SIN but the guy at the sliding doors ex-MEL says no!

Exactly. I'm still trying to work out why I'm being put down in such condescending terms over something that has nothing to do with the issue at hand when I've simply tried to draw a clear distinction between airline policy and certain legal requirements.

We can add to the list that someone in starclass is allowed 2 items of 10kg each.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

Exactly. I'm still trying to work out why I'm being put down in such condescending terms over something that has nothing to do with the issue at hand when I've simply tried to draw a clear distinction between airline policy and certain legal requirements.

Agree 100% with what you have said so far medhead.

 

[Dave Noble]

I don't give a hoot about the dangerous goods rules above, my main issue is with a security contractor telling me what is or isn't allowed by the airline (besides the SECURITY RESTRICTED items like sharp objects, dangerous goods etc), when they have KNOWN to be wrong, example, two pieces for J pax, or when the airline themselves is quite happy to take a certain amount of carry-on for example ex-SIN but the guy at the sliding doors ex-MEL says no!

Overweight luggage *is* dangerous. Maybe the security people have been asked by the airline to help enforce the restrictions. Regardless, if the allowance is 7Kg and the person had 12Kg, then it shouldn't be being taken on ; the airline provides for a service for taking luggage on flights an on Qantas , doesn't even charge for it.

 

[medhead]

Overweight luggage *is* dangerous. Maybe the security people have been asked by the airline to help enforce the restrictions. Regardless, if the allowance is 7Kg and the person had 12Kg, then it shouldn't be being taken on ; the airline provides for a service for taking luggage on flights an on Qantas , doesn't even charge for it.

Agreed and I'm already on record somewhere here to support the importance of this safety issue to do with heavy luggage.
I also take a lot of effort to stick within the limits. With current travel patterns this is rather inconvenient.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

I wasnt saying overweight bags should be allowed either.But it is not up to the security guys discretion, it is the decision of the airline as to how many items, or what kind of items (except the security controlled type items), or how heavy the items are.

 

[Dave Noble]

I wasnt saying overweight bags should be allowed either.But it is not up to the security guys discretion, it is the decision of the airline as to how many items, or what kind of items (except the security controlled type items), or how heavy the items are.

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

 

[Aussie_flyer]

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 they often are NOT applying the rules because they dont KNOW THEM!

 

[UP4014]

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

 

[mannej]

But they often are NOT applying the rules because they dont KNOW THEM!

A lack of knowledge of the rules is not limited to the security at the gate...

FWIW, in regards to the comment about the socks and jocks, what weighs more? A ton of bricks or a ton of feathers?

 

[Reggie]

If an airline labels an item as dangerous and refuses to carry it

More likely to be when an airline labels an item as dangerous, it then charges 4 times higher for the freight cost, and adds additional paperwork fees.