AFR's Joe Aston goes BAM!

[drron]

The loss of comped upgrades disappeared when Lindsay Tanner quite rightly negotiated with several airlines and got lower fares for the Government but no FF points for the pollies.

Frequent flyer perks discontinued - Government News

By Angela Dorizas Federal politicians and public servants will no longer benefit from frequent flyer points when travelling by air, Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner has announced. The Government has introduced new arrangements for the provision of domestic and international air services and...

www.governmentnews.com.au

As an unintended consequence comped upgrades were transferred from the general public to some politicians. That should now be abolished so at the very least ordinary flyers stand a better chance of points upgrades. It may regain QF some public good will.

 

[TheRealTMA]

Aren’t all politicians entitled to fly domestic business as part of their entitlements for parliamentary travel?

Or has that changed in recent times?

 

[kamchatsky]

Well Virgin claims that Qantas are claiming the lion share of politicians flights even though it is supposed to be BFOD:

I really hope that the outcome of this is that VA gets a greater share of flights, saving tax payers money.

 

[Captain Halliday]

Aren’t all politicians entitled to fly domestic business as part of their entitlements for parliamentary travel?

Or has that changed in recent times?

No change. This remains the case.

 

[p--and--t]

though it is supposed to be BFOD:

Are you sure that's the policy for pollies. Allegedly thats the case for the APS but pollies are not employees of the APS.

 

[CaptJCool]

Are you sure that's the policy for pollies. Allegedly thats the case for the APS but pollies are not employees of the APS.

SES travel was J
EL travel over 1,600 kM was J

THE following required the little “green wo/man” to be on the selected flight. If not, a drop-down menu had half a dozen reasons for why the fare chose was chosen

APS Staff travel Y BFOD
EL travel less than 1,600 km was Y BFOD

 

[SeaWolf]

Are you sure that's the policy for pollies. Allegedly thats the case for the APS but pollies are not employees of the APS.

The policy for APS isn't BFOD, it's LPF (lowest practical fare), which is a bit more flexible.

Domestic Travel Policy (RMG 404) | Department of Finance

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Guidance - Domestic Travel Policy (RMG 404)

www.finance.gov.au

When undertaking official domestic air travel, officials must select the Lowest Practical Fare (LPF), which is the lowest fare available at the time the travel is booked on a regular service (not a charter flight), that suits the practical business needs of the traveller.

Though even that guidance document page accidentally refers to it as "best fare of the day" at one point. I know it seems like splitting hairs, but there are distinct differences between LPF and what most people would consider BFOD to be.

 

[CaptJCool]

The policy for APS isn't BFOD, it's LPF (lowest practical fare), which is a bit more flexible.

Domestic Travel Policy (RMG 404) | Department of Finance

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Guidance - Domestic Travel Policy (RMG 404)

www.finance.gov.au

Though even that guidance document page accidentally refers to it as "best fare of the day" at one point. I know it seems like splitting hairs, but there are distinct differences between LPF and what most people would consider BFOD to be.

Yeah so if I didn’t like yesterdays fare I’d book another day or three later

 

[p--and--t]

The policy for APS isn't BFOD, it's LPF (lowest practical fare), which is a bit more flexible.

Domestic Travel Policy (RMG 404) | Department of Finance

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Guidance - Domestic Travel Policy (RMG 404)

www.finance.gov.au

Though even that guidance document page accidentally refers to it as "best fare of the day" at one point. I know it seems like splitting hairs, but there are distinct differences between LPF and what most people would consider BFOD to be.

Does any of that document apply to politicians?

I recall a certain MP rented a helicopter at >$5k to fly to a political fundraiser instead of a car journey of one hour. That is only one example out of many where pollies rent a private plane for journeys that could have been on commercial aircraft and saved a bundle.

For APS staff i can think of quite a few reasons not to use BFOD. The policy needs to take into account all related costs not just the fare.

 

[Sprucegoose]

It was interesting for VA to comment today that they only get 10% of the $250m pollie travel spend when the 'best fare of the day' if applied as it ought to be, would entitle VA to considerably more revenue.

VA's weakness is the limited J seating on their aircraft.

 

[justinbrett]

You’d think VA would ask itself “why do they prefer flying Qantas? What can we do to make flying our airline more attractive?”, not spit the dummy and demand employees be forced to fly with them.

In previous years lounge access was included for government employees. That was a good start.

Also, how does VA know they are offering BFOD? The QF WoAG rates are significantly discounted, usually QF and VA are within a few dollars of each other on major routes.

 

[SeaWolf]

Does any of that document apply to politicians?

No, it doesn't apply to the politicians and their staff. In general none of the rules that apply to the APS apply to them.

 

[p--and--t]

You’d think VA would ask itself “why do they prefer flying Qantas? What can we do to make flying our airline more attractive?”, not spit the dummy and demand employees be forced to fly with them.

In previous years lounge access was included for government employees. That was a good start.

Also, how does VA know they are offering BFOD? The QF WoAG rates are significantly discounted, usually QF and VA are within a few dollars of each other on major routes.

Ok so allegedly VA get 10% of overall pollie spend.

That doesn't mean the rest goes to QF

I would think the question is why not more spend with VA.

Is that total purely domestic or the overall flight spend? There is a lot of international travel on various airlines.

Remember a large amount of travel is to/from and within rural seats so what % goes to REX or other smaller airlines. And the fares on these routes are huge,

What percentage is spent on charters. What % of that travel spend is RAAF. Etc.

Id be interested in the comparative between QF and VA on domestic only minus rural before drawing a conclusion

Edit: Oh and as others have pointed out they are entitled to J where it is available on the route so there is an immediate difference between airlines J availability generating a difference in spend.

 

[levelnine]

Interview with Joe Aston on the Chanticleer podcast.

Interesting that even Aston is annoyed with the media coverage of the book, as he thinks the problems with Qantas are far more varied than the way they try to exert undue influence over politics — underinvestment in fleet/lounges, disrespect for customers, poor board governance, etc.

 

[SeaWolf]

Ok so allegedly VA get 10% of over pollie spend.
That doesn't mean the rest goes to QF

No, 90% of the domestic flights are on Qantas group and there's nothing alleged about it. Those numbers come from the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority.

MPs, staff favouring Qantas despite ‘best possible price’ rule

More than 90 per cent of air travel booked by parliamentarians and their offices were on the carrier and its low-cost subsidiary, the highest level in a decade.

www.afr.com

More than 90 per cent of domestic flights booked by federal parliamentarians and their staff are with Qantas and its budget subsidiary Jetstar, delivering the airline $25 million in airfares over the last year.

Over the past decade, that has grown from around 75 per cent, figures published by the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority show, despite the higher cost of Qantas flights compared to its rivals.

 

[p--and--t]

underinvestment in fleet/lounges, disrespect for customers, poor board governance, etc.

Is there any difference between carrier's in these respects. Across many posts on AFF, it would seem not. So why not a more balanced view.

Yes the board was dysfunctional. But any more dysfunctional than an airline that went into bankruptcy?

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 7:41 AM

No, 90% of the domestic flights are on Qantas group and there's nothing alleged about it. Those numbers come from the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority.

MPs, staff favouring Qantas despite ‘best possible price’ rule

More than 90 per cent of air travel booked by parliamentarians and their offices were on the carrier and its low-cost subsidiary, the highest level in a decade.

www.afr.com

So where is the REX spend?

I cant read the article but the first para says $25m to QF (out of $250m??)

And why do they constantly refer to the BFOD rule that doesn't apply to pollies & staff - false reporting.

 

[SeaWolf]

So where is the REX spend?

Included in the remaining 10%. That's all of the spend on airlines that aren't Qantas group.

 

[justinbrett]

No, 90% of the domestic flights are on Qantas group and there's nothing alleged about it. Those numbers come from the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority.

MPs, staff favouring Qantas despite ‘best possible price’ rule

More than 90 per cent of air travel booked by parliamentarians and their offices were on the carrier and its low-cost subsidiary, the highest level in a decade.

www.afr.com

Perhaps if they wanted MPs to fly with them, they could start by using their own metal on SYD-CBR? And reopen their Beyond lounge in CBR?

Seems like they’re not trying very hard to get government business.

 

[p--and--t]

Included in the remaining 10%. That's all of the spend on airlines that aren't Qantas group.

Thanks for your various posts with facts.

Are there figures for the relative % of domestic between VA and QF for the APS where the actual rules apply?

Unfortunately I don't have a lot of faith in the Murdoch press reporting.

 

[RooFlyer]

Interesting that even Aston is annoyed with the media coverage of the book, as he thinks the problems with Qantas are far more varied than the way they try to exert undue influence over politics — underinvestment in fleet/lounges, disrespect for customers, poor board governance, etc.

Per my posts above. The minister-requesting-upgrades is only a few paras about 2/3 the way into the book. The recounting of Qantas' and Joyces' shortcomings and behaviours pre and post pandemic, chapter after chapter is painful to read.