Masks on QF International Flights

Saw this article in SMH about QF lifting mask mandate on certain international flights where the destination doesn't require masks to be worn. Will be interesting to see how this plays out and how many people keep wearing them, and how many people stop wearing them even on flights when they are meant to be required.

Qantas to lift mask requirement on some international flights

Qantas says it will soon allow passengers to travel without masks on some international flights, even though face coverings remain compulsory on all domestic services.

www.smh.com.au

 

[RichardMEL]

Nope that is simply not true, no one has posted that people shouldn't be able to choose to wear a mask if they want to, just that they shouldn't be able to impose it on others when the regulations do not require it.

Personally even in settings where it is required, I still don't feel it is up to joe public to "impose" that, or try to enforce, on others. It should be for those making the rule, or their representatives - for example (unfortunately for them) airline employees or other appropriate authorities.

Of course that's not what you're writing or implying of course so my point is more prompted by the quote - not a reaction to you specifically. Some of the angst in various places has been caused by people having a go at others to mask up (where it's required) but can often backfire or be those making assumptions (for example, perhaps someone has an exemption). I've been in situations such as a doctors office where some have not worn a mask, or not worn properly, and it's frustrated me but it's not for me to self police that in my view.

just imo.

 

[offshore171]

Nope that is simply not true, no one has posted that people shouldn't be able to choose to wear a mask if they want to, just that they shouldn't be able to impose it on others when the regulations do not require it.

Spot on. Thanks for calling this out.

There is not one example in this thread of someone opposing the rights of the pro-mask people from being able to continue their choice to mask up. In fact many posters have been very explicit in saying that they support their ability to mask up if they wish.

It's always the other way - the mask enthusiasts wishing to impose their position on others.

 

[RichardMEL]

Spot on. Thanks for calling this out.

There is not one example in this thread of someone opposing the rights of the pro-mask people from being able to continue their choice to mask up. In fact many posters have been very explicit in saying that they support their ability to mask up if they wish.

It's always the other way - the mask enthusiasts wishing to impose their position on others.

And this is where the core conflict can arise.

Remember the "pro-mask people" as you put it are probably better described as either people with an interest in their own health(though masks don't help nearly as much as a protective device for the wearer) or to be considerate of the community around them to potentially prevent any infection spread-if they have something (be it flu, covid or whatever).

the conflict arises where perhaps some feel while their right to mask up if they like is not the issue, but their risk is increased by those that choose not to. Now, in settings where it is optional.. well that's an issue of choice of all sides, and I personally do not feel it would be appropriate to suggest to others to mask up for others' protection (as noted above because someone with no symptoms may indeed be healthy, and even those with symptoms may just have a common cold and not covid). The flip side is those who feel that perhaps if someone is around them, in a place like a crowded PT setting or aircraft, and are showing symptoms that they should mask up for others (and this is essentially the reason for such rules where and when they exist). Wearing masks have never really been about protecting the wearer, but as a way to limit (to some degree) the spread to others.

And that's essentially where the problems begin based on one's point of view I guess.

The counter to suggest "well just don't be in that setting if it worries you" is mostly fair, but I do feel that sometimes folks don't really have a choice - such as catching PT to their work and while I agree air travel (the focus of this thread) is in the majority a voluntary choice for most of us - what of people sent on work trips? what of a need to travel for a sudden family emergency or death? so on and so forth.

While I really do not personally like the term "mask enthusiast" or "pro mask" because they are, to me, quite judgemental in nature, I do not agree in an optional setting that those who have reasons to wear a mask (which is none of my business) should put that on others, but try and control the things they can control when in a high risk(to them) setting.

I definitely see both "sides" of this debate.

imo

 

[offshore171]

the conflict arises where perhaps some feel while their right to mask up if they like is not the issue, but their risk is increased by those that choose not to. Now, in settings where it is optional.. well that's an issue of choice of all sides, and I personally do not feel it would be appropriate to suggest to others to mask up

Ultimately, this is why we have elected officials, guided by their teams of public health professionals, to set laws, rules, and regulations around mask wearing in various situations.

So that it is not the role of self-appointed members of the public to berate those who choose not to wear a mask where it is not a requirement.

If they don't like the regulations, they can lobby their MP to get them changed, but they are not entitled to hector other members of the community who are within the rules.

 

[JohnK]

The new normal was ruining the world's economy. It increased the numbers with mental illness,it has increased the numbers of people dying with heart disease and cancer as they were not getting follow up or because diagnosis was delayed. I'm sorry but another 2 years of the new normal would be far too expensive on the toll of human disease.

@drron I think we know who is behind this mess. It's not a conspiracy. The whole thing has been poorly scripted with lot of lies thrown in and backtracking. Follow the money.

By the way I've been suffering with severe chronic depression for most of my adult life and quite a lot of my youth too but I never understood what was going on. I'm not sure there is a solution. If there is then it's not simple. I made the stupid decision nearly 25 years ago to try mind altering drugs. What a mess that caused.

Where I'm going with this is hardly any one cared about mental health before covid. Now it has become a convenient tool to be used against restrictions.

What I didn't know before was the number of people who died from the flu. Now that's been highlighted by the number of dying from covid. For dying with covid or dying from is exactly the same thing. You would not be dead if not for covid.

The number of people dying from flu around the world is between 250K and 650K. It varies each year with the severity of flu season but also the numbers are never going to be completely accurate.

The number of people dying from covid is apparently 0.1% which if applied to the world's population is 7.9 million. That's not an insignificant number of deaths. The number could actually be higher but it's not lower.

We're now saying these deaths are acceptable collateral damage as long as we carry on with our useless lives without any restrictions. Acceptable? Weve learnt absolutely nothing. The past 2 years have been wasted. All we care about is our own greed. The world is evil. Of that there is no doubt.

 

[Lynda2475]

The flip side is those who feel that perhaps if someone is around them, in a place like a crowded PT setting or aircraft, and are showing symptoms that they should mask up for others

To be fair when there were restrictions on flights, you were not permitted to travel if you had symptoms mask or no mask - its one of the questions asked at check-in.

If you have cold/flu/covid symptoms then the advice is to stay at home until they resolve.

Unfortunately there is a whole spiel on this thread wanting people who are feeling well and have no symptoms to mask up on flights because there is chance they may have been exposed to covid.

As an aside WRT work travel, if you have health concerns you can negotiate not to fly.

For dying with covid or dying from is exactly the same thing. You would not be dead if not for covid.

Dr Ron has already explained why this is not true.

The number of people dying from covid is apparently 0.1% which if applied to the world's population is 7.9 million.

Also incorrect, it is 0.1% of positive cases, not of the entire world's population; and the death rate has been falling post introduction of vaccines, as they whilst they may not prevent spread they are still mostly preventing serious illness.

 

[RichardMEL]

To be fair when there were restrictions on flights, you were not permitted to travel if you had symptoms mask or no mask - its one of the questions asked at check-in.

Sure, but I note there are still restrictions for Aus domestic flights (I know this thread title is about international, but it seems to have become a more general discussion at this point). And the "not permitted" part was (is?) pretty much an honour system. If I say I have no covid like symptoms, then sniffle and claim it is alergies or hayfever or something - which could well be the case - who is going to say no (without some kind of requirement for a test, which thank goodness is long gone for domestic and an increasing number of international destinations).

So you probably still had people out there who were flying with symptoms to one degree or another... but we digress.

Unfortunately there is a whole spiel on this thread wanting people who are feeling well and have no symptoms to mask up on flights because there is chance they may have been exposed to covid.

As an aside WRT work travel, if you have health concerns you can negotiate not to fly.

maybe.. maybe not. Some employees may feel pressured to either do the travel or lose their jobs if they want to avoid travel for health concerns - much like WFH. Most employers I think are pretty good in this general area, but I don't think it's a given that it could be easily negotiated.

(for example I know of a workplace where there is a strong push and pressure to return to the work office for various reasonsm, and those with medical concerns are finding more resistance to wanting to stay WFH. It's an ongoing grey area in my view).

but again, a digression - I was just trying to provide another example of a public setting where one can be in close contact with a fair number of people where they may not have a choice in the matter specially if there's a lot of pressure to go into the office and not WFH - and I do know people who are very reluctant to go to the office - and the numbers returning to offices in the major cities are still relatively low from what I can tell)

 

[Scarlett]

The world is evil. Of that there is no doubt.

I hit a 5-iron to two feet this morning @JohnK. Tomorrow it might go in the hole for birdie.

The world is a thing of never ending beauty.


But I didn’t fly QFi to get to my destination, so I can’t comment on whether anyone was wearing masks… sorry mods.

 

[Princess Fiona]

<Mod Hat
This thread has gone way off topic which to remind everyone is masks on QFi
I have tried politely to bring it back on topic with a relevant data point of my own, to no avail.
Any further off topic discussion will be deleted
Mod Hat >

 

[milehighclub]

Masks no longer required on flights ex NSW, QLD, WA to USA/UK/EUROPE.

Masks required on ALL inbound flights, all flights EX VIC, all Domestic flights, and all outbound flights not to the above destinations.

Because QF1 goes via SIN, masks required on SYD-SIN but not SIN-LHR.

 

[mviy]

Masks no longer required on flights ex NSW, QLD, WA to USA/UK/EUROPE.

Great.

Masks required on ALL inbound flights, all flights EX VIC, all Domestic flights, and all outbound flights not to the above destinations.

Because QF1 goes via SIN, masks required on SYD-SIN but not SIN-LHR.

Hope these remaining issues get resolved soon. Maybe not in time for my outbound trip, but hopefully before my return.

I think having to spend 24 hours in Economy on my outbound trip to the UK mostly wearing a mask would have been very difficult.

At least for SYD-SIN I'll probably be awake most/all of the time and can try to have food/drink to get some breaks.

 

[milehighclub]

Hope these remaining issues get resolved soon.

Seems that they are jurisdictional, so will be removed when Governments decide.

 

[JohnK]

Are masks likely to remain compulsory on QFi flight on SYD-BKK route? Have another flight coming up soon and the added protection would be nice.

 

[mviy]

Are masks likely to remain compulsory on QFi flight on SYD-BKK route? Have another flight coming up soon and the added protection would be nice.

There's two parts to that. For the outbound it depends on the rules in Thailand. For the flight back to Australia that would depend on the rules in Australia. I guess it depends on whether you think either/both is going to change restrictions and when as to when it will change.

 

[downtheback]

Are masks likely to remain compulsory on QFi flight on SYD-BKK route? Have another flight coming up soon and the added protection would be nice.

You can always choose to wear a mask, even if others aren't.

 

[henrus]

Masks required on ALL inbound flights,

This makes zero sense given the US based carriers haven't been requiring masks on flights to/from Australia for a while.

 

[JohnK]

There's two parts to that. For the outbound it depends on the rules in Thailand. For the flight back to Australia that would depend on the rules in Australia. I guess it depends on whether you think either/both is going to change restrictions and when as to when it will change.

Outbound on QF SYD-BKK and I'm not sure Thailand removing the mask mandate antigen soon. Inbound on SQ via SIN and I think mask mandate still there too.

You can always choose to wear a mask, even if others aren't.

I think I've made that clear already. I see no reason for me to stop wearing masks anytime soon especially in Thailand where people from all over the world come to gather in crowded spaces.

Last thing I'd want is to ruin a holiday.

 

[Franky]

Not the case at LAX.
Masks are mandatory that’s what they said on the announcement prior to disembarking.
There was a sign at the Global Entry kiosks to remove there while processing. But masks are certainly worn in LAX regardless of what the other US requirements are elsewhere
View attachment 282153

How long ago was that? We left the US on 12JUN thru DCA to JFK and I was totally prepared to mask up at T2 at DCA, when the announcements were made that they were no longer within the airport or any flights..

 

[Princess Fiona]

How long ago was that? We left the US on 12JUN thru DCA to JFK and I was totally prepared to mask up at T2 at DCA, when the announcements were made that they were no longer within the airport or any flights..

Two days

 

[SCM]

If you are flying J, I haven't seen a single airline enforce their use (regardless of legality). Not so sure about economy (plus more like to get karens complaining).

In any case, just always be drinking alcohol - that's my strategy. Can't wear a mask if you're drinking.

If the cabin has been darkened due to imposed sleep time, just keep in mind flight attendants are not going to be walking around with torches - checking everyone, and waking up passengers who are not wearing a mask.