Strict check in times

[Chrisd26]

Maybe a basic question ...but why are some airlines so strict with check-in times?
For example not even a few minutes flexibility?

Thanks

Chris

 

[Evan]

A few minutes + a few minutes + people expecting the leeway of a few minutes.... = late departures for some airlines.... also the cynical part of my brain also says money
And if you have staff back later than expected you have to pay them more etc... all add up.
E

 

[drron]

Maybe a basic question ...but why are some airlines so strict with check-in times?
For example not even a few minutes flexibility?

Thanks

Chris

So you were watching Airways last night.Certainly a great ad for TT wasnt it

 

[straitman]

So you were watching Airways last night.Certainly a great ad for TT wasnt it

They actually handled themselves better than I expected they would :!:

 

[Travel Guru]

I don't have a problem with airlines having strict check in times, they have to draw the line somewhere, and if they don't enforce their checkin curfew it'll quickly get out of hand.

The other issue that airlines face is takeoff slots, and missing one can be an extremely expensive exercise, especially at larger airport such as SYD.

People know the rules, if they get there 26 mins before a flight, tough luck, they should have been more organised.

And as far as the TT show goes, would you really be flying TT if your business meeting in ADL was that vital?? :mrgreen::mrgreen:

TG

 

[Dave Noble]

I thought that other than the handling of the oversold flight, Tiger handled themselves reasonably well.

The person going to Adelaide who was late was a complete richard cranium and the 17 y/o stuck trying to get home was an interesting issue

I see no issue with strict cut off times; it is better imo to say 45 minutes and enforce it strictly rather than say 55 minutes and then allow people to arrive 10 minutes late. With atrict enforcement, everyone knows where they stand

Dave

 

[NYCguy]

I really must agree with the above. Where does one draw the line when it comes to late-arriving pax? One minute? Five minutes? Twenty minutes? The conditions you agree to when you buy the ticket with a carrier like TT or JQ are clearly stated and easily understood - if you're late, you miss your flight. Easy.

Unfortunately, just about every passenger thinks that they are entitled to have the rules bent for them, just as every passenger feels entitled to the best seat in the cabin, the most carry-on junk, and the best spot at the luggage-carousel on arrival.

 

[Flashback]

I thought that other than the handling of the oversold flight, Tiger handled themselves reaosnably well

The person going to Adelaide who was late was a complete richard cranium and the 17 y/o stuck trying to get home was an interesting issue

I see no issue with strict cut off times; it is better imo to say 45 minutes and enforce it strictly rather than say 55 minutes and then allow people to arrive 10 minutes late. With atrict enforcement, everyone knows where they stand

Dave

I haven't used that term since I was in primary school!

Agree with all of the above though, the line needs to be drawn with no exceptions made.

 

[Jeffrey O'Neill]

The question i would ask is if some of the LCCs are realistic in their turn around times.

Flew DJ back from Mel to Syd on Monday night and the diff between the arrival and dept time was only 25 mins.

At least they can board from the front and the back which helps, but ALL airlines really REALLY need to clamp down on what people try to bring on as cabin baggage.

I swear some of the bags are not much smaller than what I would chk in on an OS holiday.

As Kim would say, it really get's my goat when there's no friggin space in the over head compartments and the plane is only half seated :evil:

 

[dajop]

The other thing, particularly at the "outposts" (ie the non hubs), the same staff responsible for checkin are the ones that board the plane and get paperwork to crew. Even at hubs, such as MEL, on the LCC's the check in agents multi-task and perform a range of functions associated with getting the plane away on time. I remember I flew Jetstar a few days after they commenced operation, and one of the agents that checked us all in (at MEL) walked all the way down to the boarding gate with the printout of the passenger log. Of course JQ has become more sophisticated since then but still has the strict requirements - all to do with limited staff to get the plane away on time. And a line has to be drawn in the sand somewhere.

As for turning around planes, apart from what happens with Saab's and Dash 8's at regional airports, the best I've seen is an A320 - 20 mins from arriving at gate with a plane load of pax to door closing with a new (70% full) plane load, with push back straight after that. Air Asia at SIN. That was impressive.

 

[drron]

I thought that other than the handling of the oversold flight, Tiger handled themselves reaosnably well

The person going to Adelaide who was late was a complete richard cranium and the 17 y/o stuck trying to get home was an interesting issue

I see no issue with strict cut off times; it is better imo to say 45 minutes and enforce it strictly rather than say 55 minutes and then allow people to arrive 10 minutes late. With atrict enforcement, everyone knows where they stand

Dave

I agree completely,however the vast majority of pax on LCCs are not even lurkers on AFF,would have very little knowledge of airline proceedures and hence would look at the show and think TT failed to do a proper job of helping the pax.And the idiot going to Adelaide was a definite richard cranium.

 

[UP4014]

LCC want both sides their way, the passengers to accept their rules and accept when they (LCC) stuff it up as well.

I have no issue with a LCC setting rules, but they need to be more gracious when they themselves don't deliver.

And yes, if you need to be somewhere on time why choose the lowest of the low, Tiger?

 

[tuapekastar]

Strict checkin times are reasonable and necessary IMHO especially for LCCs (though the cynic in me does think they see it as a revenue stream).

Until the day I miss one...then it'll be totally unfair! :shock:

OTOH I could well understand the frustration a pax may feel if they missed checkin cut-off by, say, 1 minute, then the flight was delayed an hour and sitting temptingly on the tarmac just out of reach for that long. i.e. it doesn't cut both ways (and I'm not suggesting it should, just pointing out what a frustrating time that would be).

 

[k_sheep]

I think strict check in times are an absolute necessity for LCCs and full service carriers. Like others have said, where do you draw the line? The difference is, if you miss the cutoff on a full service airline, you'll probably get rebooked for free. If you miss for a LCC, tough luck. It's the main reason I turn up rediculously early for LCC flights, just in case.

Mind you, I checked in late with QF once out of Mackay, but that's because there was no one there to check in with for 20 mins before closing time!

ps also agree - haven't heard richard cranium since I was a little tacker! That takes me back.

 

[Nigelinoz]

I guess strict check in rules are to be expected at places like LHR where if an airline does not pushback on time they risk losing there slot but I also think that some airlines like Ryanair do take it to extremes sometimes,I have seen a passenger at Stansted in tears because she was a couple of minutes late checking in and was denied boarding which meant she would be late for a friends wedding.
I think that sometimes there needs to be some commonsense shown.

 

[oz_mark]

I guess strict check in rules are to be expected at places like LHR where if an airline does not pushback on time they risk losing there slot but I also think that some airlines like Ryanair do take it to extremes sometimes,I have seen a passenger at Stansted in tears because she was a couple of minutes late checking in and was denied boarding which meant she would be late for a friends wedding.
I think that sometimes there needs to be some commonsense shown.

If they say 45 minutes prior to departure, they mean 45 minutes prior to departure. Not 41 minutes. Not 42 minutes. If you something important to get to, make sure you are there on time.

 

[Nigelinoz]

If you something important to get to, make sure you are there on time

That's all very well in practice but it's not a perfect world and people do get caught in traffic etc so whilst airlines must have "rules" about check in etc if a passenger has ample time to make it to the gate what would be the harm of letting them check in if they are only a few minutes late?.
I have been a few minutes late checking in for many Qantas flights over the last few years and have still been allowed to check in and made it to the gate in plenty of time.
There has to be a cut off point of course and if I was 10 minutes late I would not expect to be allowed to check in but 2 or 3 minutes is a different matter IMHO.

 

[oz_mark]

I have been a few minutes late checking in for many Qantas flights over the last few years and have still been allowed to check in and made it to the gate in plenty of time.
There has to be a cut off point of course and if I was 10 minutes late I would not expect to be allowed to check in but 2 or 3 minutes is a different matter IMHO.

That;s Qantas. Not an LCC. DIfferent operational practices allow Qantas to be more lenient, but there is a cost associated with that. The LCC's drive that cost out giving less wiggle room.

 

[medhead]

I agree with the idea of strict check-in times and following the carriers rules. But I note that the example of TT on the Airways show was a complete scam really. the CIP had her excuses and they just didn't stand up. It was widely acknowledged that the lady was 4 minutes late. The excuse given for the strict cut off, a) I've already done the paperwork, and b) the cut off time is set so early because of all the paperwork i have to do. Clearly the paperwork is not that much of a burden if it is all done and finish in under 4 minutes. Not only that, the CIP spent the same time required to check in the pax on explaining why they couldn't check her in.

Finally, according to SWMBO (i missed this bit), there was a flashed up note to say that TT now give a few minutes grace on check in.

Having said all that, let me restate that I totally understand and agree that limits have to be set.

 

[simongr]

some airlines like Ryanair do take it to extremes sometimes,I have seen a passenger at Stansted in tears because she was a couple of minutes late checking in and was denied boarding which meant she would be late for a friends wedding.
I think that sometimes there needs to be some commonsense shown.

Yes there should be some common sense - making sure you get to the airport on time is a good starting point for common sense. If the friend's wedding was that important then some proper planning could have been useful.

For a start how do we decide what are good or bad reasons for being late? And how do the airlines verify that the reasons are true?