Downgraded from Business Class.

[opusman]

It's called following due process. Unless you ask everyone there is potential to miss someone who would said yes and thereby avoiding someone being unnecessarily denied access.

I think I'd rather simply be involuntarily bumped than to be asked about it, to refuse it, and then be involuntarily bumped anyway...

 

[Princess Fiona]

I know - by reading your previous posts/opinions on the matter...

But, you also said "I understand as well as anyone else here how it works" ... I suggest - no you don't! Once it happens to you - you will know!

Ok. So unless and/or until my mother in law is telephoned to advise her of a F-J downgrade on a BA flight I don't understand as well as anyone else how this works :?:

Thanks for clearing that up for me from your point of view but with respect I disagree.

 

[amaroo]

I'm also happy to accept EmilyP's word on this as well ie. her parents were not asked to volunteer to downgrade. If you read my response to her post that you have quoted you will see that.

I have never at any point said or even suggested that QF asked everyone else to volunteer except EmilyP's parents.

We don't know if QF asked anyone to volunteer, neither does EmilyP.
The answer to this question lies with QF.

And, again! This is a tactic used by QF ... they don't have to ask for volunteers if they bully customers into accepting a cough alternative (I.E. supervisor walks away from a disagreement/discussion/contract) they've achieved their goal of erasing their contractual obligation.

What a cough way of doing business ... reminds me of the filthy tactics used by the medical industry in the LOTFAP :idea:

 

[Princess Fiona]

And, again! This is a tactic used by QF ... they don't have to ask for volunteers if they bully customers into accepting a cough alternative (I.E. supervisor walks away from a disagreement/discussion/contract) they've achieved their goal of erasing their contractual obligation.

What a cough way of doing business ... reminds me of the filthy tactics used by the medical industry in the LOTFAP :idea:

Neither you nor I know whether QF asked for volunteers.

 

[amaroo]

I am going to start by saying that I am somewhat dismayed at your use of the word 'bullying'. While I agree it has been handled less than well, the need for involuntary downgrades and the options available to passengers is available in the Conditions of Carriage - although we could argue over what 'appropriate' means.

If you're presented with a coughpy outcome and start to engage to resolve the issue ... and, the person (the senior person representing the business) you're talking with turns away and walks off - what would you call it? Tactics/bullying - it's all the same in my books.

 

[amaroo]

Neither you nor I know whether QF asked for volunteers.

Can't have it two ways ... They didn't need to ask ... They might have asked ...

How would you describe the tactics used by the senior QF rep ?

 

[OATEK]

I know - by reading your previous posts/opinions on the matter...

But, you also said "I understand as well as anyone else here how it works" ... I suggest - no you don't! Once it happens to you - you will know!

Practical experience is a great teacher, and probably nobody knows how they will react in a given situation taking in to account heightened tensions, cultural differences, and local laws and agreements.

I think we can all agree that we don't want to find out either, but this thread has certainly made us better informed. And one learning is that QF can be as tough as any airline, and once they make a decision it can be hard to deflect. And another is that contract QF staff seem to have little regard for loyal QF pax. The list goes on...

 

[amaroo]

Ok. So unless and/or until my mother in law is telephoned to advise her of a F-J downgrade on a BA flight I don't understand as well as anyone else how this works :?:

Thanks for clearing that up for me from your point of view but with respect I disagree.

Reciting T&C is one thing .... experiencing the BS is completing different.

Compared to another recent incident - water pumps .. the compensation dealt out to some passengers was similar (probably greater, differently easier to achieve than this unfortunate couple) for enduring a flight with faulty water pumps! IIRC compensation was received with minimal after "event" frustration. I.E. bugger off and go talk with Flight Centre....

My, Q - was QF required to cough-up according to their righteous T&C ?

 

[serfty]

[MODERATOR HAT]

Just a reminder to please keep it civil to/from/between all members and that includes authenticated company representatives.

While many have an opinion and, indeed, a right to express that opinion, that is not to be done in a denigrating or aggressive manner on this site.

Some posts have veered close to erring on the wrong side of the T&C's. I ask that all endeavor to to post in a calm and non aggressive manner.

​

[/MODERATOR HAT]

 

[ketsuzei]

Can't have it two ways ...

Now that's what I call bullying. Or bull-something, anyway.

 

[amaroo]

Now that's what I call bullying. Or bull-something, anyway.

You missed answering the second part! Don't focus on the small ... hit the big issues!

 

[Princess Fiona]

Can't have it two ways ... They didn't need to ask ... They might have asked ...

How would you describe the tactics used by the senior QF rep ?

If you are referring to the Lounge supervisor at LAX and the behaviour detailed here by EmilyP I have already stated my opinion.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Reciting T&C is one thing .... experiencing the BS is completing different.
?

And resorting to ad hominem attacks is another level entirely.

 

[drron]

Well FJ called for volunteers.The 2 Fiji rugby players who checked in beside us at the business counters were not on the plane.We only got bumped from Row 1 to row 2.

 

[amaroo]

If you are referring to the Lounge supervisor at LAX and the behaviour detailed here by EmilyP I have already stated my opinion.

The difference between you and me .... I see the connection between QF T&C and the behaviour of the the LAX manager as one/linked.

You appear to see the agent as working as a rogue within a small staffed operation in an offshore posting with complete detachment to the ramifications of his/her actions.

And resorting to ad hominem attacks is another level entirely.

I'm sorry you feel that way. You appeared to be passionately defending your point of view - as am I.

Sorry, I don't accept I've gone on the attack or criticsed you or anyone else. We're all allowed to have an opinion and when someone actively challenges my opinions - I'm going to reply.

 

[Princess Fiona]

I'm sorry you feel that way. You appeared to be passionately defending your point of view - as am I.

Sorry, I don't accept I've gone on the attack or criticsed you or anyone else. We're all allowed to have an opinion and when someone actively challenges my opinions - I'm going to reply.

As is your right. However in two of your most recent posts you have mentioned the medical profession with a "wink" emoticon and referred to a thread where I received compensation from a faulty water pump on a flight.
Forgive me for feeling that the man rather than the argument was under attack.

 

[timster]

Well FJ called for volunteers.The 2 Fiji rugby players who checked in beside us at the business counters were not on the plane.We only got bumped from Row 1 to row 2.

Aaah ... now I understand. When you originally referred to the "Flying Fijians" I thought you must be traveling with a circus aerial troupe.

 

[amaroo]

As is your right. However in two of your most recent posts you have mentioned the medical profession with a "wink" emoticon and referred to a thread where I received compensation from a faulty water pump on a flight.
Forgive me for feeling that the man rather than the argument was under attack.

It's not a wink .... It's a light bulb (at least on my iPad) which I view as an "idea". The medical "industry" (didn't use the word profession) in LOTFAP is well known for dastardly deeds and poor customer outcomes ... I'm suggesting this incident appears to have similar undertones to the LOTFAP way of doing things.

I feel the water pump incident is valid. Why, because the repetitive ricital of the T&C has drown out all other discussion on the manner and ethics of the actual event including the terrible attitude of the LAX staff.

If the T&C argument is going to hold water - it needs to be plain vanilla for everyone ... not chocolate for some of us. BTW, I didn't mention names on purpose .... I'm sure 90% of posters in this thread wouldn't have had a clue what I was posting about!

 

[scheps]

There's extensive discussion on seat movements due to FAMs on UA on other fora. FAMs are always easy to spot (no sleep, no alcohol, on board first etc etc). They also have preferred seating (for optimum security), so avoiding known 'hot seats' is good advice.

Interesting, going by those features, it could be me. Now i just have to find myself a badget to back that up

 

[MEL_Traveller]

If the T&C argument is going to hold water - it needs to be plain vanilla for everyone ... not chocolate for some of us. BTW, I didn't mention names on purpose .... I'm sure 90% of posters in this thread wouldn't have had a clue what I was posting about!

the terms and conditions are clear, and they apply, per DOT regulations, equally to everyone. No one can be involuntarily denied boarding unless volunteers have first been solicited.

the rules however do not apply to downgrades, and the airline appears free, under regulation, to choose who it wants to downgrade and how. They are required to refund the fare difference, but without some effort, that is generally going to work in the airline's favour.

consumer regulation is good because it generally cuts through legal process. The EU compensation scheme is an excellent example.

unfortunately we are not protected by something similar in australia. however, while overbooking is not illegal (and it's possible an australian court would find along similar lines as the US), overbooking is most probably a breach of contract.

consumers can pursue their claims through the small claims court, and consumer affairs is there to offer free advice on how to achieve that.

was the customer service as good as it might have been at LAX? maybe not by the sounds of it. But were they obligated to do anything other than they already had? under DOT regulations it seems not.

Has qantas responded as well as it might have now the passenger is home? it doesn't appear so, although we have to wait for the final refund calculation to come through. although you'd have thought QF would have been keen to calculate that amount sooner rather than later, so this case could be closed.

If the refund is per the agents' table, I would suggest going to consumer affairs. If the passengers have the time, and the will, it would be an excellent test case which could start the ball rolling, one way or another, to passengers getting a better deal in the future.