Jetstar criticised after boys' soccer team stranded

[Yada Yada]

Then that is completely unfair situation. Any family travelling get freebies from JQ if there's a problem whilst other groups are left to sort themselves out.

Have people not heard of travel insurance ?

I have not suggested freebies for anyone. I'm simply suggesting it would be in JQ's interest to offer some help when problems such as these arise, e.g. making a few phone calls to arrange transport and/or accommodation for those who want it. I can't see how this would be considered unfair.

 

[oz_mark]

I have not suggested freebies for anyone. I'm simply suggesting it would be in JQ's interest to offer some help when problems such as these arise, e.g. making a few phone calls to arrange transport and/or accommodation for those who want it. I can't see how this would be considered unfair.

I would guess that their fear would be that after arranging it, the people would assume that Jetstar would also be paying for it. The parents should have been on the blower to the inurance company.

 

[NM]

I would guess that their fear would be that after arranging it, the people would assume that Jetstar would also be paying for it. The parents should have been on the blower to the inurance company.

I liked someone's suggestion that having available a list of hotel and transport company phone numbers to pass to the passengers for them to make their own arrangements. And perhaps have some recommended hotels that may be willing to offer a discount for disrupted passengers for the privilege of being listed on the form. Little cost to the airline and probably a relief to many travellers. It could easily include an opening paragraph with an apology for the disruption, a statement about the airline not being responsible for costs, and details of how to contact the airline to confirm onward travel details.

As a parent of a 12yo soccer player, if I was not one of the accompanying parents I would be more concerned with who would be sharing a room with my child rather than the cost.

 

[Dave Noble]

I have not suggested freebies for anyone. I'm simply suggesting it would be in JQ's interest to offer some help when problems such as these arise, e.g. making a few phone calls to arrange transport and/or accommodation for those who want it. I can't see how this would be considered unfair.

Since if they offer it to 1 passenger , or group of passengers, they should offer it to all. Discrimination , positive or otherwise, is unfair

You are suggesting freebies , in phone calls and in a hotel reservation service. As Oz_mark says, the parents should have been onto the case, not JQ. If they had a sheet of useful phone numbers for services like local hotels to give out, that might be worthwhile

Dave

 

[Dave Noble]

As a parent of a 12yo soccer player, if I was not one of the accompanying parents I would be more concerned with who would be sharing a room with my child rather than the cost.

With suitable insurance cover , I would expect there to be no sharing

Dave

 

[serfty]

IIRC there was a comment from a JQ rep. regarding some issue with information not being communicated adequately.

I'll try to dig it up...

 

[Yada Yada]

Since if they offer it to 1 passenger , or group of passengers, they should offer it to all. Discrimination , positive or otherwise, is unfair

You are suggesting freebies , in phone calls and in a hotel reservation service. As Oz_mark says, the parents should have been onto the case, not JQ. If they had a sheet of useful phone numbers for services like local hotels to give out, that might be worthwhile

I wouldn't call making some phone calls and referrals "freebies". I'd call it good customer service. Whether they do it via handing out a page of useful information or simply be helpful and make a few phone calls, I'd call that good customer service and a way to build loyalty and repeat custom.

To go out of their way to help those with children who request some help is not discrimination. It is basic human decency.

 

[Dave Noble]

To go out of their way to help those with children who request some help is not discrimination. It is basic human decency.

Of course it is discrimination. It is positive discrimination in favour of those with kids.

Dave

 

[Yada Yada]

Of course it is discrimination. It is positive discrimination in favour of those with kids.

If you are looking to debate the meaning of the word 'discrimination' then I'll concede the point. However if you think such 'discrimination' is a bad thing, I'll never agree.

 

[Yada Yada]

Jetstar accused of under-12 cold shoulder
LUKE SAYER
18jul06

DISCOUNT airline Jetstar tried to force a group of under-12 soccer players out into wet and freezing conditions in Melbourne late on Sunday night, says a parent.

<...snip...>

"The majority of passengers were very calm, but one group was upset and our staff felt threatened, or the potential to be in a threatening situation," Ms Pregellio said.

Australian Federal Police were called in by Jetstar, and Mr James said the AFP officers were much more help than the airline.

"They were fantastic, and organised us some food and drinks and found somewhere for us to stay," he said.

Mr James said the 38 people in the group were in an impossible situation when Jetstar cancelled the flight.

<...snip...>

A Hobart volleyball team flying from Sydney to Hobart with Virgin Blue had a more successful return. Their flight was diverted to Launceston and the airline organised a bus to take the group home.

http://www.themercury.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,19826332%5E3462,00.html

The Federal Police managed to be helpful, and Virgin Blue did the right thing in a similar situation too.

 

[JohnK]

The Federal Police managed to be helpful, and Virgin Blue did the right thing in a similar situation too.

Are you suggesting that Jetsar did not do the right thing?

 

[Yada Yada]

Are you suggesting that Jetsar did not do the right thing?

Moi? Perish the thought! :mrgreen:

 

[Dave Noble]

If you are looking to debate the meaning of the word 'discrimination' then I'll concede the point. However if you think such 'discrimination' is a bad thing, I'll never agree.

I don't think that discrimination is a good thing, on that we differ, though at least we do agree that it is discrimination by definition

If Jetstar charged extra for passengers with kids in order to cover extra costs in assistance in these situations, methinks that the press would be "outraged" and would get "today tonight" et al into a tizzy.

Of course, if the kids were unaccompanied minors which had been handed over into JQs charge ( assuming JQ accepts ums ), then obviously I would expect that they would provide appropriate service since they had accepted responsibility for the kids

Also, if as suggested in the snippet, that the passengers were acting in a threatening way , then it is unsurprising that they called the police . I also do not see that the 38 people were in an impossible situation; if the organisers were not competant to handle unexpected situations , then they shouldnt have been in charge of the group. It may well be v inconveniant, but hardly that challenging a task to phone a few hotels

Dave

 

[serfty]

The issue of "Unaccompanied minors" is not relevant here as DeathStar has NO provision for them.

The airline regrets that it is unable to accept carriage for unaccompanied minors.

See here under "Independent Traveller Requirement - Children": At the airport.

 

[Yada Yada]

I also do not see that the 38 people were in an impossible situation; if the organisers were not competant to handle unexpected situations , then they shouldnt have been in charge of the group. It may well be v inconveniant, but hardly that challenging a task to phone a few hotels

This is my point with regards to JQ - it would hardly have been challenging for them to make a few phone calls for anyone who wanted a bit of help. I know they didn't have to, but that approach has devalued the company's standing.

 

[Dave Noble]

This is my point with regards to JQ - it would hardly have been challenging for them to make a few phone calls for anyone who wanted a bit of help. I know they didn't have to, but that approach has devalued the company's standing.

Here we disagree. There is a cost to JQ to doing so in both time and money. I could understand them offering leaflets with useful phone numbers ( such as suggested earlier ) since this would be a trivial cost ( and maybe they do do this ) , but to have a member of staff spending time phoning around hotels etc for the passengers that are inconvenianced does have costs in staff time.

If people want the extras that go with full service carriers they should avoid carriers which clearly publicise their LCCness

Hopefully, this will ensure that others arranging trips for groups will think about their risk assessments and contingency planning which it seems to me that these organisers didnt.

Dave

 

[acampbel]

....If people want the extras that go with full service carriers they should avoid carriers which clearly publicise their LCCness...

Enough Dave .... you are like a broken record!

It is perfectly apparent that you equate helpfullness with money. User pays in all respects, and the rest can go to buggary - especially those cretins with kids!

You vote for John Howard, don't you?


Cheers,


Andrew

P.S. Sorry ... couldn't help myself.

 

[oz_mark]

This is my point with regards to JQ - it would hardly have been challenging for them to make a few phone calls for anyone who wanted a bit of help. I know they didn't have to, but that approach has devalued the company's standing.

I have already come to accept that JQ customer service is an oxymoron. But that is the way they have chosen to run their business.

Nevertheless, it is still my belief that ultimate responsibility should be bourne by the organisers for failing to ensure adequate insurance coverage. Domestic insurance is cheap.

 

[NM]

Nevertheless, it is still my belief that ultimate responsibility should be bourne by the organisers for failing to ensure adequate insurance coverage. Domestic insurance is cheap.

Personally, I would not have bothered with travel insurance for such a trip. But I would have expected to pay for any additional costs such as accommodation, meals and ground transportation if my flight was cancelled due to bad weather. So I don't see a lack of travel insurance as a failing of the organisers of this trip. But this does highlight that we all need to understand our responsibilities and the airline's responsibilities when we choose to travel.

I just hope the media coverage of these types of situations helps people who don't travel regularly to understand these responsibilities.

 

[Dave Noble]

Enough Dave .... you are like a broken record!

It is perfectly apparent that you equate helpfullness with money. User pays in all respects, and the rest can go to buggary - especially those cretins with kids!

These comments are crass and hardly even worthy of the playground or even Omni. JQ markets and operates in a well known manner. Having a member of staff hand hold passengers affected by a weather delay *does* cost money. 1 hour of a staff member's time is not free is it, or do you suggest that JQ staff should work for free to do so?

If wanting extra frills from travel, then book with a carrier that offers them. If this had occurred with a carrier such as BA , then my views would be different. If you pay for a big mac, you don't expect a gourmet meal surely?

You vote for John Howard, don't you?

Who I vote for is irrelevent and completely unrelated to this

Dave