Downgraded from Business Class on Qantas due to "tech crew" [pilot] Travel Requirements

[Princess Fiona]

It wasn't mentioned, just speculated, which is why I asked.

@Pushka "Too early for the bar to be open " Doesn't mean they were not.

They are Tech Crew and they cannot drink.

 

[Pushka]

They are Tech Crew and they cannot drink.

They weren’t on duty though from what they were saying in the QP but we did not see them drinking alcohol.

Earlier, before we were asked to move out of the plane, being in row 1 we heard the crew saying to each other that we were being delayed because there were two pilots who may or may not be coming onboard. I actually posted that comment on AFF in the Chit Chat thread while we were sitting in Row 1 waiting waiting. The crew looked a bit bemused. When these two showed up we sure did not think they were pilots because of what they were describing to each other in the QP. So techies get to boot someone I guess is what it comes to but by then I didn’t believe anything we were told because nothing we were told was consistent nor correct. .

 

[prozac]

They are Tech Crew and they cannot drink.

Doesn't mean they did not.

 

[RichardMEL]

apologies I've only read about half the thread, but am wondering:

if they were tech crew:

- were they in uniform? (seems not)
- why would they be in the lounge? I almost never see tech crew (in uniform) in lounges unless it's, for example, a Captain coming to give an update on delay or something (this has happened rarely in my experience).

Now, if they were tech crew *NOT* in uniform, then I argue how they could be deadheading (a reason to require J).. potentially commuting? In which case, probably should be in Y.

it doesn't quite add up to me as I understand the situation (I may have missed parts in pages 3-6!).

Whatever the deal was this is really REALLY poor and of course gives status pax a really bad impression of the airline let alone how it was handled which would frustrate anyone.

Sure, I'm speculating a bit I know, but it all seems a bit odd imo.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Doesn't mean they did not.

Seriously ????
We have now descended to speculating that tech crew ie pilots were drinking in the QP before the bar opened and before a positioning flight

 

[Pushka]

apologies I've only read about half the thread, but am wondering:

if they were tech crew:

- were they in uniform? (seems not)
- why would they be in the lounge? I almost never see tech crew (in uniform) in lounges unless it's, for example, a Captain coming to give an update on delay or something (this has happened rarely in my experience).

Now, if they were tech crew *NOT* in uniform, then I argue how they could be deadheading (a reason to require J).. potentially commuting? In which case, probably should be in Y.

it doesn't quite add up to me as I understand the situation (I may have missed parts in pages 3-6!).

Whatever the deal was this is really REALLY poor and of course gives status pax a really bad impression of the airline let alone how it was handled which would frustrate anyone.

Sure, I'm speculating a bit I know, but it all seems a bit odd imo.

No uniform.

They were certainly in the Adl QP.

Crew originally thought they were pilots before they showed up. (And which we’d be happy to move for). But they weren’t. Like I said none of it makes sense.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

What is the difference between a techie and pilot? I’ve heard cabin crew refer to pilots as ‘techies’. But is that term given to maintenance crew of something?

 

[prozac]

Seriously ????
We have now descended to speculating that tech crew ie pilots were drinking in the QP before the bar opened and before a positioning flight

Really!!! You have never heard of people drinking before or during work hours? It happens. In this case if they were off-duty it is more possible.

 

[Princess Fiona]

No uniform.

They were certainly in the Adl QP.

Crew originally thought they were pilots before they showed up. (And which we’d be happy to move for). But they weren’t. Like I said none of it makes sense.

Tech crew are pilots. If the CSM told you they were tech that is what he/she means.

 

[Pushka]

What is the difference between a techie and pilot? I’ve heard cabin crew refer to pilots as ‘techies’. But is that term given to maintenance crew of something?

That’s what I was wondering too. They were calling them pilots until they actually arrived then used the word techs. But their conversations didn’t sound like they were pilots. No uniforms to distinguish but civvies. At least one lived in Adelaide our departure place.

 

[Austman]

They are Tech Crew and they cannot drink.

They weren’t on duty though from what they were saying in the QP but we did not see them drinking alcohol.

I've asked this question, several times, when I've discovered that the pax sitting next to me in J on QF or JQi were staff.

Their answer has been varied.

They have told me that, when on the way to immediately do some work, they of course, cannot drink.

But when on their way home or when their next work duty was the next day (or many, many hours away), they could.

I've not seen them do it, though.

 

[encryptededdy]

Whatever the deal was this is really REALLY poor and of course gives status pax a really bad impression of the airline let alone how it was handled which would frustrate anyone.

Sure, I'm speculating a bit I know, but it all seems a bit odd imo.

I agree it's a poor look, especially if the "exec" in the airbridge didn't share the full reason for bumping. I'm sure they have their own reasons for not sharing more, but in the end it's not good and evidently as demonstrated by this thread it leaves customers wanting answers.

I've been moved from a preselected Business seat to another Business seat on a QF A330 before with no explanation before, only to see a likely staff member sitting at my old seat (based on their long conversations with the CSM). The most logical explanation would be that the other seat was broken (as is unfortunately somewhat common with those QF J seats) and they put a person on staff travel there instead. However, it left me wondering and I'm sure some customers would not have been happy with the sudden seat move. It would've been very easy to just tell the passenger why they were moved, but for some reason they don't.

I suppose you could interpret this as they have something to hide (a reason for moving me for staff that I wouldn't like to hear), but I doubt that.

As for why OP was bumped, I feel like Occam's razor should apply here. If the CSM said it was "techs", then it was probably Qantas staff of some sort. I suspect we'll never know if they're tech crew (pilots) or aircraft technicians or whatever. Maybe someone misread or misheard something hence the switch from referring to them as pilots to not.

In theory, could it have been all a lie to cover up for something else (a staff member doing a favour for themselves or someone else etc.)? Yeah, sure. However, I just don't think that passes the pub test, especially in a large organization like Qantas.

As an aside: I do miss the days of the Red Roo account, as they could've usually looked up the flight and given a straight answer immediately, instead of generating 7 pages of speculation.

@Pushka I'm most curious if you've gotten a refund for your upgrade yet. Knowing Qantas, I know the answer is most likely not. For an involuntary downgrade I would hope you get your points back plus another nominal number of points for "Compliments of Customer Contact" or whatever.

 

[AustraliaPoochie]

Now, at the least, we know what QF is capable of, and whose decision it was to do this destardy deed.
They could have put those 2 in row 7, but they somehow talked their way, or had their way, to be put into J.
All the "goodwill"/feel good of QF, down the loo.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Too early for the bar to be open . The CSM looked embarrassed. She gave us a G&T and a bar of chocolate and said in all her 30 years of flying and with ME airlines and with Qantas she’d never seen this happen before. She said they were techies. Both said we would get points but I’m thinking that just means the upgrade points but we will see.

Post automatically merged: Aug 26, 2023

As I sat down I said ‘at least Virgin offers a middle seat lottery’.

Then again maybe it’s good they didn’t offer such a lottery. Who knows maybe you’d be put in the last row in the middle seat!

 

[NM]

Not being in uniform does not mean they were not tech crew heading to Melbourne to operate flight. They would very well have the required uniform apparel in their carry-on bags.

Perhaps they were on standby for this flight (as passengers) and QF was waiting until the flight "closed" to see if some J passengers were no-shows and the non-operating tech crew would be accommodated without needing to downgrade commercial passengers. But by the time they were required to board, all J passengers had boarder so now someone had to make the decision to downgrade 2 passengers so the tech crew could board. And that may have been cause of the delay as someone with the authority to re-accommodate two passengers form J to Y had to be found, determine who was going to impacted and make the adjustments.

What we do know is that it was poorly handled by the ground staff, but was handled as best as can be expected by the cabin crew.

It is quite likely that this was a legitimate requirement for two tech crew (aka pilots), who are both entitled and expected to travel in J if dead-heading to another port to operate a flight. The issue here is not that a particular AFF member was downgraded, but the process by which it was undertaken and communicated to them.

@Pushka , have you received a points refund yet? Any other communication from QF since the flight?

 

[DC3]

They could have put those 2 in row 7, but they somehow talked their way, or had their way, to be put into J.

You could be onto something there, Poochie.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Not being in uniform does not mean they were not tech crew heading to Melbourne to operate flight. They would very well have the required uniform apparel in their carry-on bags.

Perhaps they were on standby for this flight (as passengers) and QF was waiting until the flight "closed" to see if some J passengers were no-shows and the non-operating tech crew would be accommodated without needing to downgrade commercial passengers. But by they were required to board, all J passengers had boarder so now someone had to make the decision to downgrade 2 passengers so the tech crew could board. And that may have been cause of the delay as someone with the authority to re-accommodate two passengers form J to Y had to be found, determine who was going to impacted and make the adjustments.

What we do know if that it was poorly handled by the ground staff, but was handled as best as can be expected by the cabin crew.

It is quite likely that this was a legitimate requirement for two tech crew (aka pilots), who are both entitled and expected to travel in J if dead-heading to another port to operate a flight. The issue here is not that a particular AFF member was downgraded, but the process by which is was undertaken and communicated to them.

@Pushka , have you received a points refund yet? Any other communication from QF since the flight?

Thank you !!!
Great summary.

The downgrade was very poorly handled at the airport. Although there was nothing actually amiss about pilots traveling in J.
I think due to the clumsy way it was done QF should be giving some hefty extra points from “Customer Care”.

 

[encryptededdy]

Now, at the least, we know what QF is capable of, and whose decision it was to do this destardy deed.
They could have put those 2 in row 7, but they somehow talked their way, or had their way, to be put into J.
All the "goodwill"/feel good of QF, down the loo.

To be honest, assuming it was Qantas staff, if it was written into my employment contract that I would always fly J, then I would like to fly J. I can't really blame them for that, and I can't blame OP for being annoyed about being bumped without clear explanation. Dare I say it, assuming this happens very infrequently (which I have no reason to doubt), I don't even blame Qantas for bumping upgrades to allow these staff to travel if something truly unplanned came up and required these staff to be in Melbourne.

Of course, with most Qantas stories of something going not as planned, whether it be IRROPS or something like this, they always seem to mess up the communication and any follow up compensation. I suspect this thread would not be this long if OP was clearly told by the "exec" in the jetbridge why they were being bumped, and if OP received a follow up email shortly after their flight with an apology and a refund of points & offer of upgrade for a future flight / some other appropriate compensation.

I remember reading a blog (or was it a vlog) account of a passenger travelling on BA with a long connection in LHR onto a F flight. Unfortunately due to lengthy delays on their incoming BA flight, they had no time to spend in the Concorde room in LHR before continuing onto their F flight. After contacting BA after the flight, they were offered a voucher to visit the Concorde Room to make up for this. I'm sure this turned a disappointing experience for this passenger into a mostly positive one at a relatively low cost to BA. BA isn't even known for good customer service, but service recovery is somewhere Qantas really needs to step up.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Now, at the least, we know what QF is capable of, and whose decision it was to do this destardy deed.
They could have put those 2 in row 7, but they somehow talked their way, or had their way, to be put into J.
All the "goodwill"/feel good of QF, down the loo.

They don’t need to talk their way into anything at all.
Pilots travel J if the flight is work related.

 

[DC3]

They don’t need to talk their way into anything at all.
Pilots travel J if the flight is work related.

Poochie can be like a dog with a bone. Usually best left alone.