Qantas’ Hidden Standby

[jpp42]

There’s plenty of reports of pax on a late inbound who have raced to their gate only to find they were offloaded a long time before

I had this happen on Korean Airlines once at Seoul, when my inbound was late. I was near the front of the plane, I breezed through transfer security and the new gate was close by. They were incredibly apologetic about it but couldn't fix it as they had already boarded my replacement. I was rebooked on an Asiana flight leaving an hour later so I still got to my destination the same day.

 

[RooFlyer]

There’s plenty of reports of pax on a late inbound who have raced to their gate only to find they were offloaded a long time before. EK does this in Dubai. AY did this to a friend connecting to QF in SIN.

A work colleague (actually the company MD) and I (both QFF Plat) were late on a domestic getting into SFO and rushed to international to catch our Qantas flight in J. (separate tickets). We made it with a clear 5 mins to spare, much to the obvious surprise of the check-in agent. I can still see his look of horror.

After a bunch of umming and arring, and a couple of calls, he told us that they had closed early and our seats were gone. We politely called BS and pointed to the sign above him; still open. We had them on the ropes.

They folded immediately and we got a US$500 voucher each (redeemable for cash in those days), rooms at a really good hotel and US$150 expenses each to tide us over until the next day's flight. Neither of us minded an extra day at leisure in San Francisco and we lunched and dined on Qantas like royalty.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

A work colleague (actually the company MD) and I (both QFF Plat) were late on a domestic getting into SFO and rushed to international to catch our Qantas flight in J. (separate tickets). We made it with a clear 5 mins to spare, much to the obvious surprise of the check-in agent. I can still see his look of horror.

After a bunch of umming and arring, and a couple of calls, he told us that they had closed early and our seats were gone. We politely called BS and pointed to the sign above him; still open. We had them on the ropes.

It’s always a tough call when to unload a passenger that you think will miss the connecting flight. Some folks believe if the connection time goes below MCT then it is no longer a legal connection which is incorrect. It’s an illegal connection to sell at the time of booking but not at the time of travel as MCTs generally factor in small delays one would encounter and represent a sort of worse case scenario for connections.

They folded immediately and we got a US$500 voucher each (redeemable for cash in those days), rooms at a really good hotel and US$150 expenses each to tide us over until the next day's flight. Neither of us minded an extra day at leisure in San Francisco and we lunched and dined on Qantas like royalty.

Not a bad outcome.

I’d be curious to learn how they rebooked you in that instance. For instance did they simply rebook you on the QF service from SF the following day (supposing they operated daily services between SF and AU) or was a rerouting involved, or did they rebook you on a partner? Importantly, were you able to keep your J seats?

-RooFlyer88

 

[MEL_Traveller]

It’s always a tough call when to unload a passenger that you think will miss the connecting flight. Some folks believe if the connection time goes below MCT then it is no longer a legal connection which is incorrect. It’s an illegal connection to sell at the time of booking but not at the time of travel as MCTs generally factor in small delays one would encounter and represent a sort of worse case scenario for connections.



-RooFlyer88

Not necessarily a tough call. MCT is a possibly a reasonable measure. There’s no guarantees of the exact time the plane will dock, or how long it will take for all the passengers to exit the plane and get to their connection. They don’t want people running and getting injured. As you know, an injury racing from one flight to the next would be covered under MC99, which is a potentially hefty price tag.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

Not necessarily a tough call. MCT is a possibly a reasonable measure. There’s no guarantees of the exact time the plane will dock, or how long it will take for all the passengers to exit the plane and get to their connection.

Certainly justifiable and not an arbitrary measure since those MCT times are actually well thought out and normally based on empirical data gathered on the time it takes passengers to get to various gates around an airport. But I think too part of it would depend on the context. For instance, I once had a tight connection well below the MCT for ORD and was certain I'd miss the connection. However, to my delight, my UA plane from YYZ arrived 2 gates away from the connecting HNL flight. So in some cases the airlines can coordinate to minimize the risk of misconnection (e.g., United's ConnectionSaver technology).

I suppose part of it depends on things like whether they could safely hold the plane for you. Having flown long haul quite a bit, a 30 minute or even hour delay won't necessarily impact flights since they can often make up the time in the air, particularly on longer routes like SFO > SYD.

They don’t want people running and getting injured. As you know, an injury racing from one flight to the next would be covered under MC99, which is a potentially hefty price tag.

Well I'm not sure whether you could claim MC99 for something like that since the injury was caused by the passenger's negligence. Certainly if you misconnect and your trip began in Canada or Europe, compensation could very well be due, as it is based on when you arrive at your final destination, and so even if your flight into the connecting hub was 45 minutes late, and that caused you to misconnect into Sydney, where you had to wait 14 hours for the next flight, then considerable compensation could be owed (to say nothing of meals, hotels and damages pursuant to MC99).

-RooFlyer88

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Certainly justifiable and not an arbitrary measure since those MCT times are actually well thought out and normally based on empirical data gathered on the time it takes passengers to get to various gates around an airport. But I think too part of it would depend on the context. For instance, I once had a tight connection well below the MCT for ORD and was certain I'd miss the connection. However, to my delight, my UA plane from YYZ arrived 2 gates away from the connecting HNL flight. So in some cases the airlines can coordinate to minimize the risk of misconnection (e.g., United's ConnectionSaver technology).

I suppose part of it depends on things like whether they could safely hold the plane for you. Having flown long haul quite a bit, a 30 minute or even hour delay won't necessarily impact flights since they can often make up the time in the air, particularly on longer routes like SFO > SYD.

Well I'm not sure whether you could claim MC99 for something like that since the injury was caused by the passenger's negligence. Certainly if you misconnect and your trip began in Canada or Europe, compensation could very well be due, as it is based on when you arrive at your final destination, and so even if your flight into the connecting hub was 45 minutes late, and that caused you to misconnect into Sydney, where you had to wait 14 hours for the next flight, then considerable compensation could be owed (to say nothing of meals, hotels and damages pursuant to MC99).

-RooFlyer88

The US is well versed in tight connections. If made a 10 minute connection at CLT. My bags didn’t, but I did. The gate was close. But staff will know the inbound gate before making decisions to offload.

International outside the US is more complex as you usually have to go through transit security and may have document checks as well. And considerable distances to travel between airline gates at places like HKG. For example, all CX flights don’t leave next door to each other, as you might find in the US.

The law is nuanced, but it was established through case law under the Warsaw Convention that ‘boarding’ is considered a series of steps, some under the control of the airline, some not. Going through passport control and security are. Going to the bar for a drink is not. In the case where a passenger arrives and is directed to proceed immediately to the next gate as the flight has commenced boarding, or is about to close, would likely be considered the ‘process’ of boarding. The passenger is following the directions and is under the control of the airline.

Whether a passenger is negligent is another issue which could reduce damages. But being ‘in a hurry’ and paying less attention to any dangers given the instruction to proceed with haste, may mean little or no contributory negligence on behalf of the passenger. You’d look to something like Wuchner v British Airways as a starting point.

 

[RooFlyer]

It’s always a tough call when to unload a passenger that you think will miss the connecting flight. Some folks believe if the connection time goes below MCT then it is no longer a legal connection which is incorrect. It’s an illegal connection to sell at the time of booking but not at the time of travel as MCTs generally factor in small delays one would encounter and represent a sort of worse case scenario for connections.

No matter of MCT. Check-in was open. They assumed we weren't going to show, and gave our seats away. They got it wrong.

I’d be curious to learn how they rebooked you in that instance. For instance did they simply rebook you on the QF service from SF the following day (supposing they operated daily services between SF and AU) or was a rerouting involved, or did they rebook you on a partner? Importantly, were you able to keep your J seats?

Just rebooked us in J the next day. Can't remember the details, but no further dramas. It was a very nice day in San Francisco.

 

[wrldtrvllr]

I think the difference is that SQ wanted to do their own checks on visa requirements for vietnam. VA might have been able to do them, but the responsibility ultimately lies with SQ.

VA does not have the same standby ability as QF. Once boarding starts, VA cannot accept any other lax for the flight. So even if it goes out with two spare seats, and you were impacted by a delayed of cancelled flight… nothing the gate agents will do.

You standby scenario only works if you have a no show confirmed, which is when doors close. Too late for VA.

Standby works quite differently in the USA, where you normally have a ticket for the flight, and are added to a standby list. I don’t believe either QF or VA will do that. You’d have to be ticketed once they discover a no show. CF the US where they just have to board you.

Not really - had a VA gate agent prepared to give me the last seat on the plane, until that person turned up just before gate closing.

And yes standby is different in the US where you actually get listed and can see as such at the boards by the gate. Something Australia could learn from I guess...

 

[wrldtrvllr]

What ended up happening here? Did your original flight eventually take off and you dealt with the mess in Brisbane? Also from your description it's unclear whether Virgin does have the same unofficial standby arrangement as Qantas. For instance, did you inquire before boarding started for the other flights (and thus before the computer processed boardings, potentially giving them the ability to move passengers around) or did they have the capability of assigning you to the flight once everyone has boarded (provided there is space available)? In my case with Qantas, they had me wait at the gate until everyone was boarded. I nearly had a seat on the next flight out to Melbourne had it not been for the two passengers who miraculously made their connection onto Melbourne (unsure where they were coming from).

-RooFlyer88

Original flight left a bit late, but I had contacted SQ prior to departing, and they made contact with me when I landed in BNE (I gave them my flight details) - they were all waiting at the check-in desks and everything that needed to be checked was done efficiently enough. (Yes I did gamble on the russian roulette table expecting to make a separate connection easily that almost spectacularly blew up in my face).

Regarding the standby waitlisting I did enquire with VA lounge initially but they said everything was full and looked completely stressed so I took it as a sign they were swamped and didn't have the knowhow to do anything useful, and gate agents would be my best friend. I checked at the next departing gate to be surprised there was only 1 agent manning the gate (talk about being short staffed...) - but he seemed friendly enough to want to help, but as it was full, we had to play the waiting game - almost worked - last passenger turned up last minute. Went to the next gate (which due to delays, was concurrently boarding, but opposite so I could actually monitor progress too) - that agent said full flight and everyone had boarded (gate was yet to close though) - she then checked a few things and said cascading delays were due to network inbounds but my actual flight had no issues and was en-route to that very gate (turns out crew servicing that flight also arrived so any delays would not be inbound related); had one other play at another nearby adjacent gate - the agents there was equally flustered, but less willing to entertain any last minute printing of BPs so I crossed my fingers, went back to the lounge to mull over plan C - lucky it wasn't required.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

No matter of MCT. Check-in was open. They assumed we weren't going to show, and gave our seats away. They got it wrong.

You mention check-in was open. Does that mean that the check-in desk land side was still open and they denied you boarding because they could not accept your luggage? This by the way is a trick some airlines try to deny boarding (claiming a security regulation) without having to pay out compensation, as there is no law on the books that obligates passengers to be travelling with their checked luggage. If that was the case, airlines would never lose your luggage and there would be no need for X-ray scanning of baggage at check-in.

Just rebooked us in J the next day. Can't remember the details, but no further dramas. It was a very nice day in San Francisco.

Good to hear they were able to accommodate you, although I must say it is interesting that Qantas ran daily service to SFO. Then again, it must've been a different time.

Not really - had a VA gate agent prepared to give me the last seat on the plane, until that person turned up just before gate closing.

It seems to me like we have some conflicting advice as to whether VA gate agents have the capability to move passengers onto the flight they are boarding in a manner similar to Qantas.This could very well be a case of something that in theory the agent could do, but it's a pain in the cough for them to do and thus they choose not to do it. Alternatively, this capability could only be available when the s*it really hits the fans (e.g. wide scale outage at an airport due to a Qantas bird eating fan blades for lunch)

-RooFlyer88

 

[RooFlyer]

You mention check-in was open. Does that mean that the check-in desk land side was still open and they denied you boarding because they could not accept your luggage?

No. Simple. We rocked up to the QF check in desk, within check in time and the sign said open and there were still people there.

They had simply assumed that, with 5 mins to go, we wouldn’t front up and gave our seats away.

Yes, it was about 10 years so, from hazy memory.