Qantas Club Dress Standards...Stubbies, singlet and thongs....What the???

[Rebekkap]

So one casually dressed guy in the F Lounge sitting in quietly in the lounge, drinking a glass of coca cola, overlooking the runway, minding his own business, listening to his iPod will lower the whole tone of the lounge :?:

I would rather sit next to the person above (most likely to be me) than a group of business men talking loudly, talking nothing but big words trying to be bigger and better than everybody else. If you want to take it that low, then I guess those being loud and proud in a relaxing lounge .... well would lower the whole tone, more than one thong wearing guy discreetly in the corner.

Plus one here. I have seen far more men in suits being annoying and obnoxious in the QC than I have people in thongs.

I also think that some of the comments here (particularly the ones about Kath & Kim, which sound like nothing more than Prude and Trude from the same program) are pretty damn shallow.

I've been known to wear (leather) thongs into the QC.

As for the comment about banning fat people from the QC - words fail me. Would you think that comment was ok if you replaced "fat people" with "black people" or "Jews"?

If not, why do you think it's ok to be bigoted against fat people?

I completely understand the argument that if you can't fit in a seat, you have to buy two - but banning someone because of their body shape from being in the club? that's just bigotry and hate of a particularly nasty kind.

 

[bossreggie]

With regard to those High-Vis vests.....

I had a warehouse built last year and did many "inspections" during the build. I had to wear one every time I was on site. Now maybe I had some sort of "management style" vest (it sure looked the same as all the others).... I found it was so thin I could roll it up into a little ball no larger than a pair of socks.

If I were flying I could have easily had it in my hand luggage. I also do not recall it being heavy..... Nor particularly difficult to put on, or remove!:shock:

 

[extracta]

Society is built on judgment otherwise there cannot be progress.

40 years ago a lot of the opinions you are putting forward would have been relevant.

People were judged on the way they looked, their race, religion, sex, colour etc etc.

Society has moved on and what was not acceptable in the past has become the norm today.

You should take your own advice above and move with the times and not be stuck in the past.

 

[TonyHancock]

With regard to those High-Vis vests.....

I had a warehouse built last year and did many "inspections" during the build. I had to wear one every time I was on site. Now maybe I had some sort of "management style" vest (it sure looked the same as all the others).... I found it was so thin I could roll it up into a little ball no larger than a pair of socks.

If I were flying I could have easily had it in my hand luggage. I also do not recall it being heavy..... Nor particularly difficult to put on, or remove!:shock:

It is a little different when it comes to oil and gas and mining. In the oil and gas industry you are required to wear 100% cotton long sleeve shirts on site. (The thinner polyester vests melt when exposed to fire and can do considerable skin damage.) Consequently heavy duty cotton hi vis shirts tend to be the go.

I am, occasionally, guilty of wearing such shirts in Perth, Melbourne and Brisbane. (The coal mining industry requires long sleeve cotton shirts and cotton pants too as well as the hard hat and steel toe caps..)

My trips tend to be done in a day and I meet the client either at the airport or on site. There is no time to change for me. They are less frequent these days but I'll be on mine sites four or five times a year.

I guess if the plane I am flying on goes down in a raging fireball I will be appropriately dressed! )

 

[serfty]

Does this also apply to women QC members???? not that stubbies are the go but I often travel in a singlet top and leather thongs .... where do you draw the line?

Welcome to AFF wandalinda

 

[straitman]

Why judge and why have that false belief? that you are better than someone else purely because you think you are more prettier than someone? or that your style of dress is better than theirs? or that the cards in your wallet is shinier than someone's else? Its your choice what you do so whatever makes you happy, then that's how it is.

Basic psychology identifies that when we meet someone we initially judge them, deliberately or otherwise. If the only criteria we have is looks then that is how it happens. Individually we may or may not like it but that is how it happens in real life.

 

[JohnPhelan]

So one casually dressed guy in the F Lounge sitting in quietly in the lounge, drinking a glass of coca cola, overlooking the runway, minding his own business, listening to his iPod will lower the whole tone of the lounge :?:

Not sure if you're just trying to be deliberately provocative, but someone in singlet and thongs is NOT "casually dressed". There is a huge difference between "casual" and "beach wear".

 

[bossreggie]

So one casually dressed guy in the F Lounge sitting in quietly in the lounge, drinking a glass of coca cola, overlooking the runway, minding his own business, listening to his iPod will lower the whole tone of the lounge :?:

IMOHO Someone wearing thongs (feet) and smartly dressed (Polo Shirt, Casual Pants etc) is not really going to be much of an issue for 99% of fellow travellers. I think it is the whole Thongs, Boardies, Singlets combination, is what most find is lowering the dress standards.

 

[Alanslegal]

Basic psychology identifies that when we meet someone we initially judge them, deliberately or otherwise. If the only criteria we have is looks then that is how it happens. Individually we may or may not like it but that is how it happens in real life.

I agree that we do judge, form a view, based on someone's appearance and yes that first second or two can mean a lifetime worth of judgment. I know it happens everywhere and anywhere, rightly or wrongly but if one decides to close up just because of one's appearance, then so be it and I'm not going to suggest otherwise.

I know in my personal experience, my life has been much more fulfilling by limiting that judgment we all make that first instant.

IMOHO Someone wearing thongs (feet) and smartly dressed (Polo Shirt, Casual Pants etc) is not really going to be much of an issue for 99% of fellow travellers. I think it is the whole Thongs, Boardies, Singlets combination, is what most find is lowering the dress standards.

Total agree.

I have never advocated that boardies or singlets as acceptable for lounge wear. I have only mentioned that I find thongs can be appropriate (as long as the remainder of attire is casual,neat and smart). And again in my instance, you would have to be looking quite closely to notice.

 

[11sjw]

With regard to those High-Vis vests.....

Two different beasts vest vs long sleeve shirt. Most FIFO workers are required to wear long sleeve Hi Vis shirts (and pants with reflective tape in many instances) as the vests themselves pose a hazard around moving machinery.

As most of the people dressed like this depart the Perth QC by 0630 they're generally 1. gone before they're in the minority and 2. about to walk off a plane and spend a full day at work with no time to change in between.

Again the people dressed like that look much better than the people dressed as per the subject line.

 

[JohnK]

I had a warehouse built last year and did many "inspections" during the build. I had to wear one every time I was on site. Now maybe I had some sort of "management style" vest (it sure looked the same as all the others).... I found it was so thin I could roll it up into a little ball no larger than a pair of socks.

People are just too lazy and do not care how they look.

40 years ago a lot of the opinions you are putting forward would have been relevant.

I am sorry but my opinions are just as relevant today as they were 40 years ago. Or are you saying I should just shut up and accept everything that changes?

People were judged on the way they looked, their race, religion, sex, colour etc etc.

I don't condone judging people, and discrminating against, for most of the things you mention above.

When it comes to looks though that is a really different story. I will never accept the lower standards society has set for dress, tatoos, piercings etc.

Question for you. If society deemed that nudity was acceptable should we go done that path or would nudity violate the rights of a lot of religious and moral groups?

Society has moved on and what was not acceptable in the past has become the norm today.

You should take your own advice above and move with the times and not be stuck in the past.

Couldn't care less where society has moved. I am quite happy in my own little world.

When I said judgement was required for society to evolve I did not necessarily mean that every idea put forward is actually good for evolution. For argument sakes dress standards, facebook, twitter and most social networking sites are actually taking society backwards.

You can acall it progress if you like but I am not going to agree with you. Not in this lifetime anyway. I was born conservative and will die conservative....

 

[anat0l]

If I were responsible for enforcing the Qantas Club's policy on acceptable dress standards and basing it merely on the demographic in this thread, I think committing suicide would be the only thing to do right now.

 

[JohnK]

If I were responsible for enforcing the Qantas Club's policy on acceptable dress standards and basing it merely on the demographic in this thread, I think committing suicide would be the only thing to do right now.

I don't think I am quite suicidal yet on Qantas Club dress standards. Far from it.

What I do find funny is that around 4-5 months ago I noticed more and people wearing thongs in Brisbane and the more I look the more thongs I see. :shock: I am sure it is punishment for past sins.

 

[anat0l]

I don't think I am quite suicidal yet on Qantas Club dress standards. Far from it.

I'm not talking about the patrons being suicidal; I was talking about me, if I were the person responsible for enforcing the standards.


It's tragic in a way because if the T&Cs had a set standard right from the start then there would be no problem. Unfortunately, even if QF were to do this then the backlash would be swift and hard (viz. removal of anytime access).

Now it's stuck with the ambiguous phrase "smart casual" and even then the enforcement is only through their discretion. So firstly there is no established way to assess someone as smart casual and then you have all this "reasonableness test" people challenging such T&Cs. On top of that if you were asked to leave the QP due to your dress and you decided to contest this, unless the situation was starkly against your favour would you leave? And what could QF do to make you leave? Their T&Cs does not give them reasonable grounds to force anyone to leave unless they invoke the be-all-end-all discretion clause (i.e. "we have the right to remove anyone for any reason without explanation" - just like any other club).

But what is more pressing than QF's inability (or indeed any lounge or club with equally ambiguous rules) to enforce its standards consistently and accordingly is the actual impression of its members and the resulting negative (if sometimes, scathing) feedback. Which is what this thread is all about. There is no agreement from the collegiate here at all as to what constitutes acceptable dress. Perhaps the collegiate can agree that someone wearing a business suit will always be "correctly" dressed (their conduct is completely different from this argument), but that's almost about it. (Although what happens if you see someone in a suit with piercings and tattoos?)

The rest of the thread clearly shows there will be people who are disgusted at the dress standards of others whilst others will be wondering what the problem is with the others. The former will accuse QF of holding poor standards of accountability with respect to dress, whilst the latter will complain to QF for being victimised about their dress. In either case, QF cannot win and will almost certainly be viewed as a failure in this respect.

Now you try and tell me - if you were the person who was supposed to enforce the dress standards in the QP, what would you do that would not frustrate or infuriate a single patron so that if you were enforcing the standards you might actually be viewed as doing your job correctly?

 

[[email protected]]

Qantas need to maintain some decorum rules. There are enough grubbies in the lounges as it is, and they are in business suits.

 

[anat0l]

Qantas need to maintain some decorum rules. There are enough grubbies in the lounges as it is, and they are in business suits.

This is the other problem with this thread.

The thread was opened to discuss dress standards. How patrons behave in the QP is another matter not covered by the thread, although it is an important factor related to who should and shouldn't be accepted in a club.

Unless you mean you are talking about someone who is dressed very poorly in a business suit that their dress standard alone is acceptable grounds for rejection. (I find that hard to visualise unless there is really, really something wrong with the suit, e.g. it is made of clear plastic like the rest of their clothing).

 

[straitman]

Qantas need to maintain some decorum rules. There are enough grubbies in the lounges as it is, and they are in business suits.

Welcome to AFF and thanks for your comment.

Could I suggest that you send a PM to admin and get your user name changed away from your email address so that you do not get spammed.

 

[russ]

Couldn't care less where society has moved. I am quite happy in my own little world.

You don't seem happy to me! You seem upset that society has moved to lower dress standards.

Are you in the lounge this Sunday night? If so, I'll shout you a drink to cheer you up. If you RSVP, I might even wear some shoes!

 

[JohnK]

I'm not talking about the patrons being suicidal; I was talking about me, if I were the person responsible for enforcing the standards.

....

Now you try and tell me - if you were the person who was supposed to enforce the dress standards in the QP, what would you do that would not frustrate or infuriate a single patron so that if you were enforcing the standards you might actually be viewed as doing your job correctly?

Regardless of where our thread has been going there is no way I want to make the decision on who enters the lounge and who does not based purely on dress alone. I would go insane. And I guess this is another reason why dress standards are not being enforced even though stubbies, singlets and thongs are nowhere near smart casual.

You don't seem happy to me! You seem upset that society has moved to lower dress standards.

Yes society has moved to lower dress standards but I am not upset about that but rather being told that I have to accept any change. I don't have to accept anything and I will continue to judge people by the way they dress.

Are you in the lounge this Sunday night? If so, I'll shout you a drink to cheer you up. If you RSVP, I might even wear some shoes!

Your Tevas are perfectly fine. I would love to have a drink with you but I am not scheduled to leave until Monday.

 

[drron]

What an amazing can of worms the simple original post opened.Personally I really dont mind if people inappropriately dressed in the QP or elsewhere.But like JohnK I do take dress into account.If say I was thinking of changing accountants and a fellow turned up in his boardies I would think to myself -well he isn't concerned with my feelings with his dress,would he consider my feelings with his work.A tradie would not have to meet as high a standard-though those that drive like a lunatic on the roads with their names emblazoned on their vehicles woulkd not be considered with a similiar feeling on my part.
Just interesting for the Teva wearers-here in Coober Pedy they are worn by 2 groups-grey nomads and backpackers.Both groups certainly associated with the word casual,but smart?
To each his/her own.