A new "high" on QF First [Denied sparkling water before departure from LAX]

[stm1sydney]

Vote with your feet! If other airlines are so good, go with them !

That's funny because that is exactly Qantas' attitude. I voted with my feet about 20 years ago. However I do think this whole issue is over-conflated. Not a PR disaster obviously.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I personally think that a lot of people who fly First Class need to take a step back and be a little less entitled. Yes, it's a lot of money, but rules are in place for a reason...

But there are no ‘rules’ here. The airline has chosen to save money by not opening the bar cart. That is not a rule, but a commercial decision. There is no restriction serving alcohol prior to departure in the USA. Just the airline needs to pay for it.

 

[TomVexille]

But there are no ‘rules’ here. The airline has chosen to save money by not opening the bar cart. That is not a rule, but a commercial decision. There is no restriction serving alcohol prior to departure in the USA. Just the airline needs to pay for it.

Don't some states & or counties have such restrictions? Like PHX IIRC

Just not anywhere QF fly to.

 

[2infinity]

Although I completely agree that sparkling water should be available for pre-takeoff drinks in First, IMO, this whole matter seems an over-reaction. I agree with RichardMEL, if it was life saving (**coughs a bullsh1t**), you'd be managing it better than waiting till you're on board for that lifesaving drink. You'd have doctors letters etc.

My suggestion to try and prevent this occurrence again, is take a bottle of sparkling water from the First Lounge before heading to your flight, just as insurance. You shouldn't have to do it, but sometimes cough happens. That's what insurance is for.

Time to BYO?

how would you explain it at security screening? While eying the great big garbage bin where all liquids go to die.

Where there's a will there's a way. All reasonably decent international airports have duty-free post security screening. There is your supply. I have been forced to use my duty free in flight due to incompetent in-flight service to Fiji in the past. Yes its supposedly against the airline's rules, but done smartly, no issues.

 

[UP4014]

Absolutely disgusting. Since having major surgery some years ago it is very difficult for me to swallow still water, it feels like swallowing concrete. So I must have sparkling water. Being denied sparkling water like that is a very poor decision by Qantas and a PR disaster.

Annoying perhaps, but hardly disgusting.

Not if your the one with major surgery! Being denied life saving sparkling water.

If it was life saving you would carry some with with you would you not? Just in case life was in danger.

how would you explain it at security screening? While eying the great big garbage bin where all liquids go to die.

If you're in first wouldn't you be helping yourself from the first lounge?

 

[JRR]

I was not upset about it, more bewildered.

However ... I see the Stockholm Syndrome brigade is alive and well with comments about “entitled” First Class passengers. Yes, flying international F, I do feel entitled to certain things.

 

[serfty]

If you're in first wouldn't you be helping yourself from the first lounge?

Not QF First lounge in TBIT, unless a 26oz glass bottle is your thing ...

 

[UP4014]

I was not upset about it, more bewildered.

However ... I see the Stockholm Syndrome brigade is alive and well with comments about “entitled” First Class passengers. Yes, flying international F, I do feel entitled to certain things.

Isn't Stockholm Syndrome about affection to ones captors?

 

[UP4014]

Not QF First lounge in TBIT, unless a 26oz glass bottle is your thing ...

That's a good point, I'm unfamiliar with the water service of either type when I'm in the lounge preferring other beveridges on the late night flights from TBIT.

 

[JRR]

Isn't Stockholm Syndrome about affection to ones captors?

Indeed. In this case passengers leaping to the defence of the poor mistreated Airline in the face of those horrible entitled First Class passengers!

 

[BD1959]

If you're in first wouldn't you be helping yourself from the first lounge?

I requested a small bottle of sparkling water to take with me from the MEL FLounge back in November - was informed they no longer stock small bottles and I'd have to purchase from the shops - so not just an LAX thing!

Regards,

BD

 

[UP4014]

Indeed. In this case passengers leaping to the defence of the poor mistreated Airline in the face of those horrible entitled First Class passengers!

I don't know anyone is leaping to QFs defence. People are just saying wait until after take off it's not such a big deal.

 

[RichardMEL]

Personally I think it's ridiculous that sparkling water is somehow stocked in the bar carts and not with the soft drinks, but that's a minor catering issue. Yes I said minor because IMHO it is. This only happens ex- some ports, and (as usual) it is not consistently applied from many departures on QF from LAX. (Also note it's not only QF that do apply this.. well not rule, but policy - I've had it on UA previously and a euro carrier like LH years back).

I stil say that if a "reasonable" explanation/reason (of course one's definition of what is reasonable will vary widely) of why they can't provide sparkling water, or a bloody mary, or whatever. and a promise and follow through to provide ASAP after TO should be accepted.

I would consider it far less reasonable or good customer service to just say "No" with no explanation or empathy.

We weren't there. We don't know exactly what the interaction was. That's not me defending QF.. I'm just trying to say there are ways of handling this kind of thing, and there are also ways of reacting to it.


I find in my professional life where I have to give a degree of customer service when things go bad (in IT) that most poeple are far more reasonable andunderstanding when given an explanation. Even if they may not understand it, being given a reason and a measure of understanding is usually better received than just "No".. but that's just me.

I remember one time on EK leaving some place they only offered Moet as a PDB in F rather than the Dom. I enquired about it and they expressed it was a similar situation to this. I just said OK no worries I'll wait till take off. It seemed a bit silly and penny pinching for a carrier like EK, but that was what they were doing. I'm not going to jump up and down and call it disgusting or a PR disaster.

I think most of us are reacting to the extreme language being used to describe an annoying and disappointing situation but hardly a "disaster" of any sort. Remember any landing you walk away from is a good one

 

[JRR]

As I stated - I personally was not upset, just bemused as I thought a glass of sparkling water would be a given given it is international F we are talking about not cbr-Syd (where interestingly a ore departure sparkling is available).

However ... more generally, what is a big deal is relevant to the class of service? If Qantas wish to advertise the “luxury” of First Class ... part of which is the cabin service upon boarding and before takeoff.

First World problems? Yes ... but it is First Class.

 

[RichardMEL]

but if the same policy, right or wrong, applies to everyone on the plane then class is irrelevant isn't it?

 

[JRR]

but if the same policy, right or wrong, applies to everyone on the plane then class is irrelevant isn't it?

I am confused now ... if Economy conomy are denied a pre departure sparkling water then First should be as well?

Should First be denied any sort of PDB because it is not policy to provide it to a economy?

 

[RichardMEL]

I am confused now ... if Economy conomy are denied a pre departure sparkling water then First should be as well?

Should First be denied any sort of PDB because it is not policy to provide it to a economy?

no no no that's NOT what I was suggesting at all.

I am talking about the policy of not opening bar carts while on the ground ONLY.

As I understand it this policy, when they choose to follow it, is common for the whole aircraft Y, J and F.

In that case, it doesn't matter what class you're in, and thus the expectation of service in F, if the policy applies to the whole aircraft.

At least that's what I am trying to get at there.

I'm not debating the merits of the policy here, just the notion that if it's being applied then it applies to everyone.

And by the way we're discussing the available of only certain items as a PDB.. as we all know one can get water, champagne or usually a soft drink (though I've never actually seen this lol) as a PDB on QF in these situations.

Of course I agree it's bemusing to use the "bar cart" excuse if they'll have PDB bubbles. However that wasn't what I am trying to get at with my comment

sorry if I've confused it even more.

aside: Jr8? that a reference to Jack at all?

 

[JRR]

No Jack here!

I see your point ... however ... putting aside a legal prohibition relating to a specific issue that applies to the whole plane ...

I would absolutely expect that policies and procedures (including availability of food and drink items) would vary based on Class. Indeed they should be tailored to the class. After all that is why F passengers pay the big bucks.

 

[JRR]

In international F the Airline should (unless law or safety prohibit) out the cabin crew in a position where any reasonable request can be met with a “yes”.

 

[RichardMEL]

Well you know I agree on that point (hooray! ) given this whole bar cart issue is one of cost more than anything, that if you're in F (or J perhaps) they should crack it open and wear the cost. I do understand that.

I do think it's penny pinching and/or perhaps an excuse for the crew to do less work pre-departure ("let's have a bottle of (still) water and a bottle of bubbly and offer that. The rest can wait").. but honestly *I* don't really know the truth except that I've definitely had the cost/duty issue of alcohol opened on the ground ex-US on multiple carriers as being an "issue" or "policy"

but I am on board with the notion that if you're paying for a F seat ($$$, points) well heck that should cover it.

That's assuming this whole thing is ONLY about cost to the airline and not a safety/security thing(which it isn't).

and no worries re Jack just thought I'd ask!