My brother, Eric Joiner is a senior sales executive with a major 3PL and Logistics integrator. Eric is a regular contributing author to Logistics Recruiter.com. Eric may be reached at ejoiner2@gmail.com. The article below is written as an individual OpEd and reflects no official position by anybody other than Eric.
__________________________________________
During 2005, my company conducted a market research study looking at airline luggage and ways to reduce losses through both new technology and use of standard parcel express services to redeliver lost bags. In doing so we interviewed a number of very senior executives at three major airlines. All the executives we interviewed were keen to reduce the number of baggage misroutes not only to eliminate the customer service failures, but also to reduce the millions of dollars spent on rejoining the bag to the customer. Key however was the opinion that if lost bags could be substantially reduced, then passenger confidence in checking luggage might increase. Ultimately, that would lead to faster aircraft turns. The savings in fuel costs and aircraft efficiency was thought to be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Possibly enough to substantially push struggling carriers toward black ink.
The problem was nobody believed it could really happen.
Airline margins are slim-to-negative every day of the week. A number of factors play into that, including competition, aircraft type, weather, passenger load, seasonality, and especially fuel. Airlines make money when their airplanes are flying. For that reason, aircraft turn time; the measure of when a plane arrives, and then departs again with paying passengers, is a critical factor in profitability.
A number of American air carriers have been in bankruptcy for the past 18 months, so for the American airline industry in particular, this is a strategic issue.
The airlines have tried reducing the size and number of carry-ons passengers bring onto airplanes. They’ve even tightened weight restrictions on baggage. Nevertheless, the savvy business traveler with her trusty roll-aboard bag is still going to be throwing her luggage into an overhead bin instead of picking it up at baggage claim. No single carrier would ever risk forcing the elimination of carry-on bags. It would immediately alienate the business traveler to the point that they would change carriers. That was the fear of the airlines prior to the summer of 2006.
Then something happened…
During the summer of 2006, British and other western intelligence agencies uncovered a terrorist plot to blow up commercial airliners using liquid explosives carried aboard aircraft hidden in personal toiletries. Thankfully, the plot was foiled and no destruction took place.
As many will recall, the response from the US Transportation Security Administration, was swift and strong. Overkill would be a good way to describe it. Basically the TSA banned all liquids from being carried aboard commercial aircraft, either on your person or in passenger carry-on luggage. For those of us who are regular business travelers, this meant that we couldn’t take our shaving kits and make up cases in our roll-aboard bags onto commercial aircraft. Passengers were forced to either buy new toiletries at destination or check their luggage.
Toiletries, especially for the ladies, are expensive, so most of us grumbled (big time!) and checked our baggage. Having had bad experiences with lost luggage, many figured this would be the beginning of a horrible end.
But it turned out it wasn’t so horrible!
Shortly after the new rule was enacted, I recall sitting on a fully booked Delta 767 and watching with interest as passenger after passenger boarded…but the overhead bins remained open and empty. Total time to board the airplane was a full 10 minutes faster than normal. The flight actually departed early. We arrived early. Disembarking was also several minutes faster than usual.
As it turns out, my experience was not unique. Airline on time performance in July and August 2006 shot up and passenger satisfaction increased. Aircraft turn times improved for most major airlines as well. In airline economic terms, this was huge. By forcing the checking of unwieldy carry on bags, airline turn time improved, and thus service and aircraft usage were also improved.
What is ironic is that most people would agree that commercial air transport is a key ingredient in our global industrial infrastructure. However, in this instance, foreign terrorists might have unwittingly found a way to help save the US airline industry.
The terror plot in the summer of 2006 compelled the TSA to make a ruling that de facto eliminated all but a select number of carry ons from coming aboard US airliners. No single airline could have ever done this because of the negative marketing associated with it. Thanks to the TSA, I suspect there might have been at least some joy in the operations offices of more than one airline. Keep in mind however that the switch to checked baggage also put a burden on the baggage departments of these same airlines. Increases in checked bags also put a burden on airline conveyance systems and the TSA’s own screening processes.
The TSA is a governmental organization with a massive security mission. I believe it is less concerned with, and absolutely less educated in, any economic influence it has on industry. This is now clearly understood by folks like the makers of men’s business footwear whose styles require laces. Slip on, “airport friendly” footwear are now a fashion category. The TSA is a de facto 800 lb. gorilla whose weight has yet to be fully felt. Even Al Qaeda has no clue what impact its actions might have relative to the economic impact of a TSA ruling.
Back to our story… due to outcry from the traveling public, and a realization that most passengers really are carrying water in that bottle of Desani, the TSA modified its carry-on rules to the current one that limits travelers to the 3-1-1 measure. (3 oz containers only, stowed in a clear 1-quart bag, 1 bag per passenger.) While somewhat more convenient to the average passenger, the government and the airline industry missed a huge opportunity to improve airline operations, improve on time performance and potentially create more competitive industry pricing by failing to compel checked baggage. In the meantime, the 1-quart baggie is just one more thing to slow down the check line at the security checkpoint.
Yeah…OK. So what?
Ultimately, passengers and luggage are a supply chain problem. The airlines would love to fly only passengers. Bags are after all, ugly freight. For passenger luggage, there are no packaging standards, no size standardization, no quality control, no uniform labeling, poor (to non existent) stack ability, and no real uniform rating policy by the airlines. Lets also not forget that toiletries, often containing alcohol and compressed gasses, are hazardous materials. Passenger Airlines get a waiver from the FAA on these items so long as the baggage is accompanied by a passenger on board the same airplane.
What is ironic is that the critter that I think caused this whole problem… the ubiquitous black “roll aboard” bag…might be part of the cure. Anybody who has flown on a commercial jet in the last 15 years has seen the roll-aboard bag that every business traveler (including me) has. It fits into an overhead bin. Get on a US domestic flight and you will see that it takes people 20 minutes to board and longer to get off, as they compete for overhead bin space, then unfurl their belongings getting off. The unique thing is that because it has to fit into a specific size and space, such as an airline “size wise” measurement unit, the “roll-aboard” bag may help in determining stackable, configurable luggage… but only if its checked and some form of standard is in place for the bag itself.
I have been checking a bag every week for years. I have been “lucky” as I have only had my bags misrouted perhaps 4 times in 23 plus years. As a general rule though, I don’t like schlepping a bag through security, onto airport rail trams, and juggling luggage on the airplane itself. It’s just a hassle and a choice I make. I travel every week and am willing to take the risk that my bag might get misrouted in order to have the convenience of NOT hauling it through a gauntlet of folks whose last job included "would you like fries with that?".
One day, the major parcel carriers (FedEx, DHL and UPS) will get involved in passenger luggage in a big way. Right now, they only dabble in it because its ugly freight and non-conveyable in the sense that it bogs down automated high-velocity package sorting operations. There are boutique services which do handle luggage but lack the huge operational capacity of the big three integrators.
One day, I would like to be able to drop my families luggage at (any) local retail Express Mail Store anywhere in America and have the bags arrive at my destination without further effort on my part. I expect to pay for it, but also expect that the economies of scale held by parcel carriers and a subsidy from the airlines for removing the cost and service burden from them to help off set that cost.
To be sure, this kind of service would not work well for the business traveler who needs his bag today, nor would it work for the luxury traveler whose standard bag is made by Louis Vuitton. However for the resort vacation traveler, cruise ship passenger, or anyone with a multi-day itinerary, the service aspect would be worth considering. It would also require more standardized luggage. Someone's Louis Vuitton overnight bag would not be a good candidate to travel with a parcel carrier for the simple reason that there is no place to apply a sticky label when the item is made of fine leather. Standardized luggage for us business folks would be a GOD SEND. Anything that expedites handling, screening and release back to the original owners is a good thing.
To really standardize this kind of service in the US market the airlines will need help through improved standardization on luggage size, improved tracking technology and a change in the law to let a package carrier handle personal toiletries as non-hazardous goods just like the airlines. Left to its own devices, the airline and parcel industries will come up with this solution only after years of debate on whether such services are cost effective, profitable, and a service the public will pay for.
Then again… the TSA might make it happen overnight…by accident.
In the meantime, I’ll keep schlepping my stuff through the airport.
Comments