AN ACR WDB FLC DEPARTED A FOREIGN ARPT WITHOUT COMPLETING A BAGGAGE MATCH PROC. THE RELIEF CAPT CLOSED THE DOOR BEFORE THE PROC COULD BE COMPLETED AND; APPARENTLY DUE TO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES; THE GND PERSONNEL DID NOT QUESTION THE FLC ABOUT COMPLETING THE PROC SINCE A CAPT HAD; IN EFFECT; TERMINATED THE PROC BY CLOSING THE DOOR RATHER THAN HAVE A GND AGENT CLOSE IT. B747-400.

Narrative

AFTER COMPLETION OF PREFLT CHKLIST AND CABIN DOOR CLOSURE; THE RELIEF CREW CAPT; WHO HAD BEEN AT THE BOARDING DOOR; GREETING PAX; RETURNED TO THE FLT DECK. HE INFORMED ME THAT A CLERICAL ERROR HAD BEEN MADE IN THE PAX TO BAG MATCH AND THAT HE HAD CHOSEN TO CLOSE THE MAIN CABIN BOARDING DOOR. I EXPECTED THAT WE WOULD GET A CALL ON THE RADIO OR VIA ACARS IF THERE WAS AN ACTUAL MISMATCH BTWN PAX AND THEIR BAGS. AS WE WAITED AT THE END OF THE RWY FOR OUR TKOF CLRNC (ABOUT 45 MINS) ONE OF THE RELIEF CREW MEMBERS COMMENTED THAT THE BAG MATCH MUST BE OK SINCE WE HADN'T BEEN ADVISED OF ANY PROB VIA RADIO. I CONCURRED; THINKING THAT THE ARRANGEMENT HAD BEEN FOR GND OPS TO CALL IF THERE WAS A TRUE MISMATCH. IT APPEARS THAT I WAS MISTAKEN AS THE PEK STATION MGR STATES THAT A POSITIVE BAG MATCH WAS NOT ACCOMPLISHED. I BELIEVE THE PROB WAS CAUSED BY A MODIFICATION OF THE NORMAL CHAIN OF EVENTS. WHILE THE BAG MATCH IS AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT CHK; IT IS NOT ON OUR PREFLT CHKLIST; BECAUSE THE BOARDING AGENT DOES NOT CLOSE THE LAST CABIN DOOR UNTIL THE BAG MATCH IS COMPLETE. SINCE WE CHK DOORS CLOSED ON OUR BEFORE START CHKLIST WE HAVE ASSURANCE THAT BAGS AND PAX MATCH BEFORE WE START ENGS. WHAT I FAILED TO REALIZE; HOWEVER; IS THAT IF ANYONE OTHER THAN THE BOARDING AGENT CLOSES THE DOOR; OUR NORMAL CHKPOINT FOR BAG MATCH IS LOST. WE ARE NOT LIKELY TO CONSIDER THE PAX TO BAG QUESTION DURING TAXI OR BEFORE TKOF. I SUSPECT THAT CULTURAL BEHAVIOR DIFFERENCES MAY ALSO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THIS PROB. IT MAY BE THAT IN CHINA THE BAG DISCREPANCY CEASED TO BE THE BOARDING AGENT'S PROB WHEN A PLT CHOSE TO MAKE THE DOOR CLOSING DECISION. PERHAPS RESPECT FOR AUTH WOULD LEAD A CHINESE BOARDING AGENT TO ACCEPT A PLT'S DECISION TO CLOSE THE ACFT DOOR AS AN INDICATION THAT THE PLT HAS ASSUMED RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE BAGGAGE MISMATCH. IT NOW SEEMS HIGHLY UNREALISTIC TO EXPECT A RESPECTFUL CHINESE EMPLOYEE TO RADIO A CAPT TO ARGUE ABOUT HIS BAG MATCH DECISION AND FOR THAT EMPLOYEE TO DIRECT A RETURN TO THE GATE. IN THE UNITED STATES; HOWEVER; WHERE THERE IS VERY LITTLE RESPECT FOR AUTH; I WOULD CONFIDENTLY EXPECT SUCH A CALL VIA RADIO OR ACARS. TO PREVENT A RECURRENCE OF SUCH AN EVENT; I AM CONVINCED THAT I MUST BECOME MORE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN ALL UNUSUAL EVENTS AND DISCUSSIONS PERTAINING TO ACFT GND OPS AND TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM ALL INVOLVED PERSONNEL. A PLT PROBABLY SHOULD NOT EXPECT A CHINESE CO-WORKER TO DIFFER WITH HIM OR ADVISE HIM THAT HE HAS ERRED. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 378670: BEFORE DEP OUT OF PEK; WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE PAX BODY COUNT AND THE PAX BOARDING PASSES MAY NOT HAVE BEEN IN AGREEMENT. WE CONSIDERED THIS TO BE A CLERICAL ERROR THAT COULD BE RESOLVED AT A LATER TIME. OUR SECURITY MESSAGE VIA ACARS READ 'NORMAL.' I CLOSED THE DOOR AT DEP TIME AND WE DEPARTED WITH ALL THE PROPER CHKLISTS HAVING BEEN COMPLETED.