Downgraded from Business Class.

Status
Not open for further replies.
I include the URL for some AA commentary because it includes extracts of the AA "oversales" policies and is current information. Downgrading of the cabin is mentioned. And the USA market for flights is rather more competitive than Australia (domestic or international).

No boarding pass, No seat - FlyerTalk Forums

The issue of the air marshal mentioned earlier is non-trivial. Even so compensation should be provided. And all airlines are prohibited from mentioning the reason for the seat changes. So perhaps one of the points that should be mentioned for pro-active planning is " Don't pre-select seats that are favored by air marshals".

Happy wandering

Fred
 
..
This could have been avoided the day Qantas found out there was an issue. But nope they decided to stand their ground and play hardball. Poor decision making process. ...
It seems they had little choice - they needed to get back:
Actually the appointment had to be made by me while my parents were still in the States. My Father had a fairly serious health incident over there and I was able to get him an appointment with his specialist as soon as he arrived home (at the recommendation of said specialist).
...




One thing the strikes me about this is the check-in. From what has been posted I would assume that no OLCI was attempted - this appears to have been the major reason for their targeting. (Only thing is, does this mean just about all business class travellers use OLCI or were connecting from points East? (For me often being in row 5 is problematic as it's a designated exit row.)
...
Check in was at LAX, and they were amongst the first to check in for their flight (they are chronic early airport arrivers :))
...
...
However our team were unsuccessful in finding customers to reconsider their plans, and while not ideal, the last resort is to rely on no-shos and customer’s last to check in (including online check-in) to make the final decision.
...
 
Last edited:
The Frequent Flyer Concierge team takes the hard work out of finding reward seat availability. Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, they'll help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

The Qantas customer charter seems to indicate QF will only offer 'all assistance' provided you are prepared to fly on their services. Which could be 24 hours later.

Contrast with with BA - cancelled flight SYD-BKK and we were protected on Thai. Multiple times in the USA - cancelled or delayed services (even on awards) and the operating airline just finds you seats on any carrier to get you to where you need to go. UA paid for a seat on British Airways for me on a USDM ticket!

Friend of mine experienced delays ex HKG on QF (mechanical, nearly 24 hours) and were offered the next QF service. What about the four CX services leaving in the interim?

Are some airlines so reluctant to put passengers on the competition because they fear the... well.. competition?

This isn't necessarily Qantas bashing, there is a broader issue here. That of fair and transparent passenger rights. We understand things go wrong, but should we have to deal with the additional stress? If airlines are unwilling to be transparent (guidelines that aren't going to be shared - other than 'believe us, they're very generous'), perhaps there is going to eventually be a push for industry regulation from government.


Friends of mine were put on a UA flight DFW-LAX-SYD after their AA flight from BOS got delayed and they missed the DFW-SYD flight. It was the next day though. The next available flight on QF would have been several days later. I think one of them is a WP1.


by the way 32 people looking at this thread. The issue is very much still alive
 
I once experienced an op-up and then an op-down on an opposition airline (op up in lounge, op down at gate, to a bad seat in the middle down the back).

The crew complained that I should not have been given the opup in the first place, and when I politely asked for my original seat back they said "do you want us to walk on and tell the person in that seat they have to move?" I kind of didn't know what to say.

A very polite email to their CS saying 'your staff need to be better educated in customer service' resulted in a full fare refund and additional compensation.

Whilst slightly different to the OP's situation, after reading hundreds of posts, I get the feeling QF needs a better grasp on good will compensation versus mandated or policy compensation.

A little good will goes a *very* long way. My line of work sees customers with complaints all the time. It's amazing what throwing a few dollars at a situation can do (not just to placate the customer, but the word of mouth about how company xyz turned a bad situation into something good is worth its weight in gold).

I solve my customers issues quickly, professionally and realistically. The more time that occurs between the incident and final compensation, the more likely you are to lose the customer (and spread bad word of mouth).
 
I cannot understand why Qantas did not downgrade some points upgraders on this flight.

I would have thought a fare paying/revenue passenger trumps everybody.

Mind you can you imagine the banter on here if it had been one of us who was tapped on the shoulder on the aircraft and sent down the back. Perhaps too risky a scene to create.

The issue is that the agency/ contract staff in LAX have one goal in mind and that is to get planes away on time.

That means there isn't really time sometimes.

I was in a party of 6 in J from LAX to MEL a couple of years ago and groundstaff actually pulled away the upper air bridge before we had boarded.

When I asked the CSM about this, she told me that she was told by groundstaff that all business class passengers had boarded and she told me that often they do tell porkies to justify their behaviour.

I can only think that the ground services contract with QF has such severe penalties if plane doesn't get away on time that groundstaff do anything it takes.
 
Sponsored Post

Struggling to use your Frequent Flyer Points?

Frequent Flyer Concierge takes the hard work out of finding award availability and redeeming your frequent flyer or credit card points for flights.

Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, the Frequent Flyer Concierge team at Frequent Flyer Concierge will help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

I cannot understand why Qantas did not downgrade some points upgraders on this flight....

This is why my personal rule is now to pay for PE at a min and upgrade to J. If I was to be screwed/bumped, I can at least feel human in PE and get my points back afterwards.
 
Something has just occurred to me. I think that QF 16 is the last of the LAX flights to leave in an evening.

If you are one ticket with a connecting AA flight and QF sees that the AA flight is running late they will sometimes automatically reaccomodate you on a later flight - eg on 16 and then book a connecting domestic flight to SYD/MEL or wherever you were going.

As I said at the start, we won't be privy to any technical information as to what actually happened.

Red Roo is refusing to disclose the highest tier status of passenger in booking. I'm not sure that privacy laws do preclude giving out this info. Privacy laws preclude you from identifying and individual but to mention their QF tier status doesn't identify them,

Anyway, we'll never know the technical/altea/yield management reason but should accept:

(1) This will happen from time to time; and
(2) If it does there isn't anything any of us can do - trying to "negotiate" with contract staff on the ground in LAX is of no assistance once QF's customised Amadeus Altea software has downgraded or off loaded you!
 
I cannot understand why Qantas did not downgrade some points upgraders on this flight.

I would have thought a fare paying/revenue passenger trumps everybody.

Qantas have historically tried to provide the equivalent treatment regardless of fare type, not sure if I would like to see that change. The only exception to that is route/schedule changes for trips yet to be flown.
 
I know of a specific example (toilets in J becoming unservicable) led to all the J points upgraders being put down the back with only paid J passengers left in J - they needed to clear a substantial part of the cabin.
 
I agree there are some inconsistencies.

RR comment that check-in times used as last resort, versus OP comment that parents were at LAX very early
(albeit might be possible that everyone else was on connecting flights so already checked in, or had done so online, but I suspect unlikely)

I cannot understand why Qantas did not downgrade some points upgraders on this flight.
Tend to agree with that (assuming there was a points upgrader).
Surely a cash fare (even if I-class) trumps an upgrader.

Red Roo is refusing to disclose the highest tier status of passenger in booking.
I thought OP had mentioned both pax were Gold FF

---

The issues here seems to be a few fold..

1. No clarity as to why these two pax were picked. Seemingly high status passengers with paid cash fares, who had checked in early (maybe) - surely shouldn't be bottom of the list - and I think this is what is concerning most on this Board.

2. The compensation offered - Is probably generous if you are prepared to take the next flight (cash $s, hotel room etc) but the payment doesn't seem to reflect actual fare differences if you choose to fly Y (reality is at the time of booking you are making a concious decision to pay X$$ on top of a Y fare for greater comfort)
(Now reality is I would always build in at least 24hrs for any event/ return to work etc, as things can go wrong (eg. mechanical, weather etc) but it appears in this case the passengers did not have this buffer)

3. The behaviour of some QF agents at LAX - which RR appears to have addressed
 
The saddest part for me is that a lot of Qantas' woes are self inflicted and then amplified in world of intense competition and high passenger expectations..

No company can get it right all the time but this issue is so simple to fix, would not cost QF much but would have engendered much goodwill.

When goodwill is degraded, customers are less engaged.

Qantas: every single customer counts irrespective of Tier Status because every customer is connected to other customers and potential customers and so on. Your customers remain your biggest advocate. You may say that you value each and every customer, but in this case its just lip-service and would be insincere.

And it is now quite clear that the value is NEGATIVE.

Unfortunately though it is (or getting far more frequently WAS) loyal Australian customers that pay your wages. Companies that forget that linkage go into decline.

Come to think of it....
 
The Qantas customer charter seems to indicate QF will only offer 'all assistance' provided you are prepared to fly on their services. Which could be 24 hours later.

Contrast with with BA - cancelled flight SYD-BKK and we were protected on Thai. Multiple times in the USA - cancelled or delayed services (even on awards) and the operating airline just finds you seats on any carrier to get you to where you need to go. UA paid for a seat on British Airways for me on a USDM ticket!

Friend of mine experienced delays ex HKG on QF (mechanical, nearly 24 hours) and were offered the next QF service. What about the four CX services leaving in the interim?

Are some airlines so reluctant to put passengers on the competition because they fear the... well.. competition?

This isn't necessarily Qantas bashing, there is a broader issue here. That of fair and transparent passenger rights. We understand things go wrong, but should we have to deal with the additional stress? If airlines are unwilling to be transparent (guidelines that aren't going to be shared - other than 'believe us, they're very generous'), perhaps there is going to eventually be a push for industry regulation from government.

Well in Australia unfortunately, it coincidentally appears that donors to both or all major political parties win vs the community in stark comparison to in the US, UK or EU.

Case in point - losses on CCs - UK limited by Govt to first GBP 25, EU first 30 Euro and US it is USD 50 (the figures are from memory). No matter what.

Compare this to Australia with change in T&Cs in early 2000s NOT allowed anywhere else in the OECD but Australia. You have to prove that you took 'adequate' steps to secure your CC not the issuers have to prove you were at fault.

Example: UK 20ish yr old backpacker in 2010 was given an AUD prepaid debit card with $3,000 on it by her parents. A friend of hers had already lined up a job in a restaurant in Coogee. Mad girl landed, caught taxi to restaurant and started work 90 minutes later. She paid her taxi fare with the debit card (caught on restaurant cctv). That was the Friday, worked both Sat & Sun (oh to be 20...).

On Monday went to buy some items and debit card was zero. Must be mistake, went into issuing bank which had a branch in Coogee.
"What's happened?" -
"You've spent your money. It's not unlimited like a cc."
"But all I did was pay for taxi on Friday when arrived in Sydney."
"Oh. We'll look into it come back tomorrow.'

Summary - it was zeroed through taxi fares in Melbourne over 12 different Cabs over Friday, Saturday and Sunday. CCTV from restaurant shows her arriving, sitting, working etc on all three days in Coogee. Restaurant owner wrote a Stat Dec, made copy of ccTV etc.

Bank - You did not take adequate security - it's your loss, sorry. Went to Police, had look into it, questioned taxi driver no admissions, left unsolved. The ccTV showed her leaning away from driver in front seat but not shielding the keyboard with her hand as it was holding the terminal = not adequate security.

In UK, US & EU she'd have over $2,900 of the $3000 left.

Welcome to Australia, the lucky country (or you'd better be lucky as the Govts aren't here to help...).
 
It seems they had little choice - they needed to get back:
You may have misunderstood my point.

I wasn't referring to the passengers. I know they had to back as I would need to get back 97.2% of the time.

The minute Qantas found out there was issue, ie the client has lodged feedback on Facebook or when this thread was posted, Qantas should have resolved the issue in favour of the client without trying to screw them. That was not the case though.
 
+1 I very much appreciate that Red Roo has read through the thread and shared as much information as they are able to. I for one have every confidence that this incident is a very rare occurrence for Qantas premium passengers and will remain so.
If it is truly that rare then there would be no concerns for Qantas about paying a fair and reasonable compensation, which is certainly not the $700 difference between J and full Y. You are drawn to conclude it occurs often enough for 'fair' compensation to be a significant drain on QF profits.
 
We’ve immediately and personally apologised to the customers about the handling of this matter at Los Angeles, including the communication style regarding lounge access and compensation offered on the spot.
Thank-you for your reply and also your ongoing attention to problems that arise on this board. This was of particular concern to me and I am glad Qantas recognises that the handling was inappropriate - good staff can soothe a situation, bad staff inflame it. I hope as well as an apology to the customers, the staff in LAX have received feedback as to their communication style.

I for one have every confidence that this incident is a very rare occurrence for Qantas premium passengers and will remain so.

Intellectually I agree with you 100% - in 40 years of flying Qantas and 25 years in F and J I have never been off loaded or down graded. Emotionally? I have been shaken - I will always checkin online in future if I can and I will never feel totally confident again....

Very well put. We need our own version of EC 261/2004.
I think if it was up to the individual member states of the EU many would have exactly what we have here ie. Nothing

I have now written to the ACCC asking them to consider EC 261/2004 as further protection in an Australian context. While the two issues appear separate you have to feel that a better regime of refunds would feed back into the yield management algorithm.

https://www.accc.gov.au/contact-us/contact-the-accc#complaints-and-enquiries - gives you a very easy form to fill in (click on enquiry or complaint )- I did it as an enquiry as I don't have a formal complaint to make from my own experience. I would strongly urge people to think about doing this as well - it is always a numbers game....
 
I include the URL for some AA commentary because it includes extracts of the AA "oversales" policies and is current information. Downgrading of the cabin is mentioned. And the USA market for flights is rather more competitive than Australia (domestic or international).

No boarding pass, No seat - FlyerTalk Forums

The issue of the air marshal mentioned earlier is non-trivial. Even so compensation should be provided. And all airlines are prohibited from mentioning the reason for the seat changes. So perhaps one of the points that should be mentioned for pro-active planning is " Don't pre-select seats that are favored by air marshals".

Happy wandering

Fred

Very interesting reading especially all the links.I liked the order of bumping said to be AA's policy-
1. Passengers who do not meet the minimum check in time requirements
2. Passengers without assigned seats, based on check in times who did not qualify for one of these categories:
3. Passengers with assigned seats, based on check-in time who do not qualify for one of the following categories.
4 AAdvantage/AAdvantage Gold
5. Executive Platinum, Platinum, Emerald and full fare coach passengers
6. Businesss Class passengers
7. First Class Passengers
8. Those passengers who will experience a severe hardship as a result of being denied boarding. These customers might include those who are elderly, disabled, or children traveling alone.
The pax referred to by the OP would be in group 5,6 and probably 8 so should have been way down the list of pax downgraded.

Then from AA's conditions of carriage is this under no compensation if-
5. You are offered accommodations in a section of the aircraft other than specified in your ticket, at no extra charge (a passenger seated in a section for which a lower fare is charged must be given an appropriate refund)
So the question is the meaning of appropriate.Seeing the pax have no involvement in the overselling appropriate should mean appropriate to the customer not the airline.
 
If it is truly that rare then there would be no concerns for Qantas about paying a fair and reasonable compensation, which is certainly not the $700 difference between J and full Y. You are drawn to conclude it occurs often enough for 'fair' compensation to be a significant drain on QF profits.

+ 1

.........
 
Perhaps for clarification the OP or family can confirm the FF status. When I re-read it says Gold FF- was this definitely current & is it Qantas Gold?
 
I wonder if you are connecting the system is less likely to bump you. For example someone flying on the one booking SYD-LAX-YVR (on AS) may be less likely to be bumped especially if AS is booked solid on the following day. I also wonder if someone on a non QF ticket is actually less likely to be bumped, let's say for example MEL-HKG-AMM on an RJ issued ticket. Not sure that QF can re-issue the ticket of another carrier on the spot.
 
QF's customised Amadeus Altea software would have a whole lot of rules and algoriths that would decide who is bumped. In the mix would be:

(1) What airline issued the ticket - eg is it an 081 ticket number, or 001 (AA) or RJ or whatever;
(2) what was the fare class paid - eg within J was it J or C or D or I or U - in this case the pax were I class revenue pax so down the lower end;
(3) Status or as Altea calls is PCV (Perceived Customer Value);
- note that PCV can change as other passengers are reaccommodated on your flight;
(4) whether or not checked in - this seems to have been confirmed by QF

There will be many rules and we certainly won't be privy to them. AA is quite open and transparent about these things mind y ou they are far from perfect.

I remember being abused (verbally) by AA exec platinums walking through first class on an aircraft change - 767 to 757. I was in paid F (A class) and the AA exec platinums who had lost their seats in the aircraft change state "They are sitting in our seats" as they marched down the back! Clearly they were upgraders who were downgraded.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and enjoy a better viewing experience, as well as full participation on our community forums.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to enjoy lots of other benefits and discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top