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

[reductionist]

This thread reminds me of one of my favourite scenes from 30 Rock.

YouTube - 30 Rock - Jack explains the tux

 

[JohnK]

Following the idea that has been mentioned many times on this forum that air travel is just another form of public transport .... then the QP or whatever lounge it may be, is just like another bus stop.

Technically it is not public transport but rather private transport.

So while you may well get away with many things at bus stops in theory there should be some standards to adhere to when in a lounge or on the aircraft. I know it is not always enforced but why would they specifically include minimum dress standards for entry to the lounges?

....- so really it opens a can of worms.

We love opening cans on AFF!

 

[parsonstrish]

Speaking of thongs reminds me of conversation I had with english lass returning home from visit to Oz. We started to chat while standing up and stretching during the flt. She mentioned reading a sign outside a pub 'no thongs allowed'. she and her friends wondered how one would know they were wearing a thong. Gave me a good laugh, so did she.

 

[arraitch]

This thread puts me in mind of the old joke about the definition of a gentleman being one who knows how to play the accordion, but chooses not to.

Would any AFFer out there care to explain the basis on which the wearing of a pair of rubber thongs into an airport business lounge somehow conforms to the phrase "smart casual"? Please?

 

[mannej]

This is an interesting debate.

Although I won't get into the nitty gritty of how acceptable thongs are etc, it reminds me of a mate of mine who is very well off.

He does dress trendy, but always very casual. He was looking for a car at a highly regarded car yard, but because they sales reps perceived him to be someone who wasn't there seriously, they never gave him the time of day.
Unbeknown to those reps, this guy's best mate was the dealer principle of the car yard, so those reps received a reprimand for their poor form.

This argument is very much a perception argument. There are probably many reasons behind the choice of travel apparel, and I guess that is their prerogative.

And I do not see how it is a form of private transport, unless you own your own private jet

 

[Alanslegal]

Technically it is not public transport but rather private transport.

And I would disagree there.

The flight operates on a schedule, you can hop on and off as many flights as you want as long as you have a valid ticket. Similarly with lounge access, its not a private room; you buy the right ticket and access is complimentary.

 

[Alanslegal]

And a $17,000 pair of thongs

h.stern flip flops

You do not judge a book by its cover, the same rule can apply for thongs apparently.

 

[extracta]

Would any AFFer out there care to explain the basis on which the wearing of a pair of rubber thongs into an airport business lounge somehow conforms to the phrase "smart casual"? Please?

1. It is up to QANTAS through their representatives to determine the meaning of SMART CASUAL on a case by case basis.

2. A lot of people wear thongs as normal dress. If you spend any time in Japan you would more than likely see people walking around wearing socks and thongs. Monks and people from hot places also wear open footware. Or are we going to try and stop the monks from wearing a sheet too.

3. I think it is more than reasonable for travellers to relax with open footware. Some people may be mid way through a long haul or plan on having a shower. As long as they are comfortable and minding their own business I am happy.

4. A lounge is not specifically a place for business meetings or business attire. There should be no reason why a traveller could not get off a flight in the pyjamas and socks they were given, go to the lounge and have a shower, and then go to their next flight in their pyjamas.

5. One of the good things about a lounge is that it provides an atmosphere for a person to relax without other people getting in their face. They should be able to wear whatever they like as long as it remains within the realm of common decency without other people trying to stick their nose in where it does not belong.

 

[DC3]

Technically it is not public transport but rather private transport.

Agree with that. As with entry to Qantas lounges, it's not open to access by 'the public'. It's by meeting the terms and conditions of entry that apply. Most travellers on any given day would be excluded from entry to Qantas lounges. 'The public' can't just walk in.

 

[russ]

JohnK, Qantas' Air Operators Certificate is for RPT, which means "Regular Public Transport."

I hope I don't offend you with my Tevas in the Sydney Business Lounge on Sunday night! I'll see if I can find a singlet!

 

[DC3]

JohnK, Qantas' Air Operators Certificate is for RPT, which means "Regular Public Transport."

But what about entry to (and dress standards in) the Qantas lounges. Isn't entry by private membership/invitation, where there are other terms and conditions that apply?

 

[el_rooto]

I will always wear pants and closed shoes when flying somewhere due to comfort/safety. I'll take my shoes of on the plane after we reach cruising altitude and change into PJ's.

However, I do think they should disallow people wearing ed hardy from entering the lounge....

 

[harvyk]

Talk about a can of worms...

IMO, there is nothing wrong with thongs and stubbies. I've worn similar things on many a flight, it's quite comfortable and when your stuck in Y for many hours IMO there is nothing worse than wearing a suit.

It's the singlet which I think pushes things over the edge. Whilst yes a QP is nothing more than a waiting room (albeit a nice one ), there are very few places which singlets are considered acceptible.

The gauge I use is the "local chinese resturant". If I would wear the clothes in the local chinese resturant at my local shops, then I would wear it in the QP. Whilst they have no problems with thongs and shorts. I doubt they would allow someone wearing a singlet without a shirt on.

 

[JohnK]

And I would disagree there.

The flight operates on a schedule, you can hop on and off as many flights as you want as long as you have a valid ticket. Similarly with lounge access, its not a private room; you buy the right ticket and access is complimentary.

It is transport provided by a private (OK listed on stock exchange) company. Can anyone walk in off the street and enter the lounge? So it is nothing like a bus stop.

And a $17,000 pair of thongs

I am not even going to look at the link but thongs are thongs no matter how much they cost. I have seen people spend thousands to buy rags. :shock: Does not make them acceptable in public though.

 

[Gold Member]

QC, Flounge.. they're all the same concept but with differing quality. If the lounge dragons allow 'yobbos' to get in with perceived sub-standard attire then good luck to them. If that's a problem for those that take offence, stiff cough.

 

[DC3]

QC, Flounge.. they're all the same concept but with differing quality. If the lounge dragons allow 'yobbos' to get in with perceived sub-standard attire then good luck to them. If that's a problem for those that take offence, stiff cough.

And so eloquently put.

 

[JohnPhelan]

I have and will continue to wear thongs inside the FLounge whether people or not think its appropriate.

Actually, it's up to the lounge reception people whether you will wear them or not - you won't wear them in the lounge if they won't let you in!

 

[Happy Trails]

Actually, it's up to the lounge reception people whether you will wear them or not - you won't wear them in the lounge if they won't let you in!

And, if enforced, perhaps it would reduce overcrowding such that any time access could be restored.

 

[pshepvic]

I still think we're debating the wrong thing here. I've said it once, and I'll say it again ....

BAN BLOODY CROCS!!!!!

 

[blueflamenco]

I am not even going to look at the link but thongs are thongs no matter how much they cost.

I agree with JohnK.

Why do people seem to assume that because something carries a hefty price tag or prestigious brand name that it automatically embodies good taste and fine quality?