avoids

The traveller shared her top hand luggage hacks to avoid having to check in a bag, and it’s inspired other holidaymakers to reveal their favourite airport tips and tricks

A savvy traveller has been praised for her ‘genius’ hack to effectively double her hand luggage allowance without forking out for additional fees when flying.

The holidaymaker, known as @lifeofjazz_ on social media, has revealed her top trick for getting away with hand luggage only, dodging the need to check a bag in at the airport. First and foremost, she makes sure her suitcase meets the required dimensions and weight restrictions to avoid any headaches at check-in. She went on to explain: “I have a few tricks that I do when travelling with only hand luggage.

“Number one, I put a bag inside a bag. You see this bag [referencing her video], there’s another bag inside of it. I usually go to Boots or Duty Free, and get a bag because they are not allowed to touch anything inside something you’ve bought already within the airport.

“I have a crossbody bag, obviously that’s fine, it’s tiny. Then I have my small suitcase, make sure you roll everything within your suitcase so it can fit.”

She also advises getting on the plane early to secure overhead locker space rather than having to cram your bag beneath the seat in front.

Responding to her post, one follower commented: “I do the duty thing too. Get a cheeky meal deal from Boots and ask for the biggest bag.”

Another added: “People also don’t realise you don’t need to use those plastic bags for toiletries, you can use your own see through makeup bag, doesn’t matter how big.”

A third user said: “But nowadays you can even bring a cabin wheeled bag, just a rucksack. I do the duty free bag but Ryanair told me they have limitations on duty.”

One more user added: “I always bring a pillow case put some clothes in.”

This follows other passengers revealing their tricks to enhance the airport experience overall, with one user saying: “You can’t bring a full water bottle through airport security, but you can bring an empty one.

“Most airports have water bottle fillers installed at drinking fountains after security. Beats paying six dollars for bottled water.”

Adding to the discussion, another traveller recommended speeding up security screenings by taking off bottle lids, thereby demonstrating to officials the bottles are completely empty.

Meanwhile, someone else chimed in with: “You can bring ice in a bottle though as long as it’s not melted. I like to do that and then fill it up inside the airport. I love ice water.”

Another comment advised against using the first water refill station immediately after security – typically congested due to high traffic – suggesting instead to look for the next available one for a swifter top-up.

A different user contributed yet another travel tip, advising travellers to pack compression socks for longer journeys, explaining: “For personal comfort, I find compression socks to really help during longer flights/trips. I also carry an empty water bottle through security, then refill it before boarding in order to have plenty of water for the flight.

“I carry a light sweater or thin-down vest in my bag (too many cold flights). Noise-cancelling headphones. I also carry a small external battery pack. Always plan for the worst (long lines, delays) allow plenty of time and arrive early.”

WASHINGTON — President Clinton consulted congressional leaders Wednesday on his policy toward Bosnia but continued to avoid a firm commitment to seek congressional approval before deciding to send American forces there.

The 1973 War Powers Act requires the President to notify Congress in most cases before sending troops into areas of potential hostilities and requires that the troops be withdrawn within 60 days if Congress does not authorize their presence.

The law was enacted over President Richard Nixon’s veto. Each successive Administration has argued that it represents an unconstitutional infringement on the President’s powers as commander in chief.

During the last 12 years of Republican administrations, Democrats in Congress have made a major issue of support for the War Powers Act. That puts Clinton and his aides in a potentially difficult situation, which they have tried to avoid by evading questions about precisely where they stand.

Clinton continued that approach Wednesday. “Ask my lawyer, I don’t play lawyer,” he said when asked at a White House photo session whether he believes the law is constitutional. “I think it’s worked reasonably well.”

Later, White House Communications Director George Stephanopoulos said: “The President is reviewing the War Powers Act at this time. That is under review by the National Security Council and the counsel’s office.”

White House aides have fallen back on carefully worded pledges to consult with Congress in a manner that is “consistent with” the war powers law but not necessarily “pursuant to” it. Once Clinton decides on a course of action, he “will go to the Congress if it is required,” Stephanopoulos said.

President George Bush followed a somewhat similar path before the Persian Gulf War. Bush argued that he did not need congressional authorization before sending troops to the Gulf but urged Congress to pass a resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq before the actual war began. Bush insisted, however, that he had the power to go ahead with the attack if Congress voted against him.

Clinton’s less clear-cut position appears to be acceptable to congressional leaders.

Although members of Congress have often touted the War Powers Act as an important safeguard against unbridled executive power, few over the last 20 years have relished the prospect of using it.

One indication of the weakness of the law came in the House on Wednesday when it finally got around to approving a resolution authorizing the sending of U.S. troops to Somalia. The authorization came five months after the troops were dispatched and the day after U.S. forces turned over control of the relief effort to the United Nations.

At a ceremony at the White House to honor troops returning from the African nation, Clinton linked their experiences with the events that may soon unfold in the former Yugoslav republics.

“Your successful return reminds us that other missions lie ahead for our nation,” he said. “You have proved again that our involvement in multilateral operations need not be open-ended or ill-defined, that we can go abroad and accomplish some distinct objectives and then come home again when the mission is accomplished.”

At a later White House ceremony, where he talked about the importance of rapid action on health care reform, Clinton defended his Administration against the charge that monitoring developments in Bosnia-Herzegovina has interfered with his other activities and that it has tried to do too many things at once.

“One of the most challenging things we have to do in this city at this time is to break a mind-set that we have one problem at a time and we’ll get on it and we’ll only think about that,” Clinton said.