Let me generalize this concept. Paying for only what consumers consume seems like the obvious right thing to do, but yet, it is not practiced in many businesses and governments. For example, should I pay more taxes if I called 911 more often than another person who did not call 911? I would indeed prefer that.
However, now playing the side of the consumer who does consume the overhead compartment. I would now be spending more since the total cost of my ticket is base fee + overhead compartment usage fee. This total cost would very likely be greater than the ticket fee in place without this policy since now instead of amortizing the cost across all passengers, the cost is imposed specifically on those who use the service.
What I am concluding is that there is a significant economic trade-off that businesses need to continually analyze in order to decide how to structure these "pay for what you use" policies. If the majority of consumers use the service, then this policy may be less attractive to the majority, however, if a minority of consumers use the service, the policy starts becoming attractive since the majority will see a cost reduction.