micheal_can
Senior Member
There would be a maximum limit on weight for OSHA.
The cost is to get Via profitable.
|
|
|
VIA Rail
- Thread starter ehlow
- Start date
There would be a maximum limit on weight for OSHA.
The cost is to get Via profitable.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I agree that the design of the baggage fees doesn’t exactly seem to be primarily motivated by operational health and safety concerns, but they nevertheless should help reduce such concern, even if that is arguably only a small side effect…
reaperexpress
Senior Member
How significant is that occupational health and safety concern in the first place, given that staff has no obligation to interact with passengers' carryon baggage?
Urban Sky
Senior Member
The more individual pieces of lugagge passengers travel with (and the heavier and bulkier they are), the more likely they are to depend on someone’s help to handle it (especially at low-platform stations). And the more passengers need help, the more staff will feel compelled to offer their help, even if they are not obliged to so so. In the end, people tend to work in service jobs because they want to serve (assist) their customers, not just observe (supervise) them…
micheal_can
Senior Member
Picture your pensioned grandma with only a carry on.She is likely riding on the cheapest fare and will likely need help.
Rainforest
Senior Member
$25 per bag is not a big deal. But if VIA wants to compete with airlines on convenience, then making the passengers worry about the luggage size and weight at the time they book isn't the best way to win.
If they have to charge those $25, then I would at least bundle them into the standard ticket price, and let the passengers opt-out and save $25 if they don't need much luggage. Rather than forgetting to opt in, then bringing something bulky, getting hit by a higher fee, and deciding to book a flight next time.
I never had to pay extra for luggage on the rail trips in Europe.
If they have to charge those $25, then I would at least bundle them into the standard ticket price, and let the passengers opt-out and save $25 if they don't need much luggage. Rather than forgetting to opt in, then bringing something bulky, getting hit by a higher fee, and deciding to book a flight next time.
I never had to pay extra for luggage on the rail trips in Europe.
T3G
Senior Member
They don't do a lot of things on rail trips in Europe that they do here...
T3G
Senior Member
Not that high, no, but they certainly do have platforms that are barely above track level that one has to climb up stairs to get into.
Urban Sky
Senior Member
Agreed, but their platform heights are mostly 55 or 76 cm, which leads to a preference for low-floor rolling stock:
As a general rule, the higher the gap between boarding height and platform height, the more time-consuming (and dangerous) the passenger exchanges and VIA’s 43 inches (48” boarding height minus 5” inch low-level platform height) might be the largest gap you may encounter (as a standard at least!) anywhere on this planet…
lenaitch
Senior Member
Clearly, I think workplace safety was last thing on management's mind when they implemented this policy. The policy seems to be constructed oddly, but if end-rack space is at a premium, this is probably seen as a way to limit use. Airlines have all sorts of rules about luggage as well so it's not like they are alone.
As a post-retirement gig, I drove for an out-of-town airport van service. You wouldn't believe what some folks travel with.
As a post-retirement gig, I drove for an out-of-town airport van service. You wouldn't believe what some folks travel with.
Rainforest
Senior Member
That's true. My concern is not that they restrict the luggage amount, but that they surprise the passengers with a relatively small but probably unexpected fee.
Many Canadians have more experience travelling by rail while in Europe and/or East Asia than travelling by VIA. Moreso for tourists from overseas.
That $25 fee is not enough to convince the passengers not to take a suitcase, but enough to create confusion if they don't read the conditions carefully when booking, or decide to bring a larger bag after they have booked.
T3G
Senior Member
Fair enough, I just think that screwing over their user base because there are some people who have no self control and bring all their worldly possessions on a train is the wrong approach, and implicitly classist, as "high value" business class passengers are not hit by the same fees.
IMO you should be allowed to bring bags that are as large as you want, but with the understanding that it's your stuff, and no one but you or the people in your party should be in any way concerned with it. But then, as someone who has spent far too long working in customer service, I'm very much over people who try to make their problem your problem.
smallspy
Senior Member
It doesn't.
But with more Economy class passengers per car versus business class passengers, there is also a reduced number of bag capacity per passenger available, considering the baggage capacity is fixed by the volume available in each car.
Plus, business class passengers are (generally) paying more for the privilege. Just like on the airlines, with that privilege comes perks.
Dan
Urban Sky
Senior Member
I would also assume that unlike in Economy Class, Business Class passengers travelling with 2 large pieces of luggage are dwarfed by those travelling with zero such items, meaning that they take less luggage space even on a per-passenger basis…