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

[Flying mermaid]

He's here to play in the Big Bash which starts Thursday. So likely SYD domestic

This is one of the issues with the rules. They only apply to domestic lounges, so someone travelling internationally can wear thongs to the lounge at the departure point, wear them on the plane to Australia, but as soon as they connect to a domestic flight they have to either change or not go to the lounge.

The other issue is these rules only appear on the website under Qantas Club, so someone buying a business class airfare and not a frequent traveller could easily have no idea of the rules. It really needs to be put on the website under domestic business/business lounge so that this group of travellers is also aware of the restriction.

 

[amaroo]

One of many issues that could be done better... lounge access with kids is higher up my list.

 

[Simo]

It is a hole in the rules QF Dom lounges one rule and ain't lounge different rules. I understand liquor rules but rules by the airline should all be the same regardless of location of the lounge

 

[medhead]

I'd ban sandals in the workplace. Here I am forced to wear long trousers and long sleeve shirts, hot and covered in a film of sweat. Meanwhile the ladies in the office with open shoes, skirts and short sleeve tops are complaining about being cold. Not to mention turning the temp up to 25 and higher. They're lucky to have a wider range of acceptable attire. but it doesn't help make a comfortable climate for either of us.

 

[anabolism]

This is one of the issues with the rules. They only apply to domestic lounges, so someone travelling internationally can wear thongs to the lounge at the departure point, wear them on the plane to Australia, but as soon as they connect to a domestic flight they have to either change or not go to the lounge.

The other issue is these rules only appear on the website under Qantas Club, so someone buying a business class airfare and not a frequent traveller could easily have no idea of the rules. It really needs to be put on the website under domestic business/business lounge so that this group of travellers is also aware of the restriction.

Or just rescind the silly rules. These aren't the 1950s.

 

[CMA222]

Or just rescind the silly rules. These aren't the 1950s.

Do you mean when people had standards and took pride in their appearance, and therefore such rules were unnecessary?

 

[anabolism]

Do you mean when people had standards and took pride in their appearance, and therefore such rules were unnecessary?

Yes, when all men wore suit jackets and hats at all times, even bums. And no woman would appear outside her house without her arms and hands covered. Nor would she ever expose an ankle, lest she be considered a "loose woman."

 

[medhead]

Yes, when all men wore suit jackets and hats at all times, even bums. And no woman would appear outside her house without her arms and hands covered. Nor would she ever expose an ankle, lest she be considered a "loose woman."

They didn't wear hats at all times, they did have to tip their hat to the ladies. Plus headdress must be removed in the boozer! I also doubt the ladies were covered as you suggest.

But the point remains Thongs (flipflops to use the yankism) are for wearing to the beach or while mowing the lawn. At the very low end of the casual spectrum. Not smart. Not good in case of emergency either.*

* yes that is some sort of ironic witticism related to the mowing the lawn comment

 

[blackcat20]

But the point remains Thongs (flipflops to use the yankism) are for wearing to the beach or while mowing the lawn. At the very low end of the casual spectrum. Not smart. Not good in case of emergency either.*

* yes that is some sort of ironic witticism related to the mowing the lawn comment

Thongs, yes. Sandals, no.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

1369 posts about nothing IMHO - maybe I am too old school - maybe my learnings growing up that you adhere to the laws / conditions / policies set by the providers of the service you choose to enjoy - or don't enjoy it - simple choice.

Thongs / sandals - minor differences - I have ZERO sympathy for any male or female who is refused entry for wearing thongs / sandals whatever that lounge attendants deem unsatisfactory - a so so simple decision not to wear open toed / exposed skin footwear completely overcomes this problem.

You do not need to be a rocket scientist to choose suitable attire that will permit your entry - just another reflection of society today - way too many people any interested in ME ME ME and not prepared to adhere to service providers requirements.

QANTAS provide and control the lounge - adhere to their reqts or don't try to enter.

 

[medhead]

Thongs, yes. Sandals, no.

I'm keeping out of that one.

But I do note that sandals would provide far too much protection when mowing the lawn.

Then again I've grown up in queensland. Sandals and knee socks are an excellent look.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Then again I've grown up in queensland. Sandals and knee socks are an excellent look.

Interesting look YES - Excellent look QUESTIONABLE!

 

[ozbeachbabe]

Does Kevin Pietersen wear thongs into the Member's Stand at Lords?

If not, why not?

On Ch10's The Project last night the topic was mentioned when they interviewed him and they mentioned the time when Kate Ceberano got knocked back.

Carrie Bickmore then mentioned both she and co-host Pete Helliar both got knocked back last week.

Due to the aforementioned incident they were both clearly aware of the rules so why didn't they dress accordingly?

I thing there are people out there that despite being fully aware of the dress code deliberately ignore the rules as they want a confrontation just for the sake of having an argument.

If they did that, they might have to close down the Perth domestic lounges because of lack of clientele.... :shock:

Still wandering

Fred

When SO flew back from PER late Fri arvo in Nov he didn't see a single hi-viz wearing pax in the J Lounge. Not sure whether it was the wrong timd of day for it or SO only had a 'boys look.' :

 

[medhead]

Interesting look YES - Excellent look QUESTIONABLE!

There is always White shoes...

 

[penegal]

Here we go again...


My position which I have stated many times is that all pax should wear "closed-in" shoes (without heels) on the ground, and under 10,000ft.

This is a safety issue (not fashion). If an evac is required pax may need to use the slides and heels can tear the slides, so shouldn't be allowed.

In any emergency situation pax may be required to move quickly around the aircraft, and off the aircraft via slide, door, aerobridge, wing, tarmac or any other surface. The best way to move quickly and safely (e.g. brisk walk / power walk) is wearing "closed-in" shoes. Your feet are protected from any number of potential hazards (cold, heat, debris, broke xyz).

---

Imagine you were on the BA plane - would you want to walk across the tarmac barefoot in 40 degrees Celsius because you wore stupid footwear?

What about any number of recent incidents in the USA during winter months?

Common sense really IMHO.

 

[blackcat20]

I'm keeping out of that one.

But I do note that sandals would provide far too much protection when mowing the lawn.

Then again I've grown up in queensland. Sandals and knee socks are an excellent look.

I'm smart enough to wear closed shoes when I mow the lawn

Thongs / sandals - minor differences - I have ZERO sympathy for any male or female who is refused entry for wearing thongs / sandals whatever that lounge attendants deem unsatisfactory - a so so simple decision not to wear open toed / exposed skin footwear completely overcomes this problem.

That's the thing though. I wasnt knocked back at the door despite someone standing there checking out people. Multiple lounge visits in multiple cities. Only in MEL was I approached in the lounge andquestioned as though I had dared to change footwear in the lounge (I hadn't).

 

[Ansett]

Here we go again...


My position which I have stated many times is that all pax should wear "closed-in" shoes (without heels) on the ground, and under 10,000ft.

This is a safety issue (not fashion). If an evac is required pax may need to use the slides and heels can tear the slides, so shouldn't be allowed.

In any emergency situation pax may be required to move quickly around the aircraft, and off the aircraft via slide, door, aerobridge, wing, tarmac or any other surface. The best way to move quickly and safely (e.g. brisk walk / power walk) is wearing "closed-in" shoes. Your feet are protected from any number of potential hazards (cold, heat, debris, broke xyz).

---

Imagine you were on the BA plane - would you want to walk across the tarmac barefoot in 40 degrees Celsius because you wore stupid footwear?

What about any number of recent incidents in the USA during winter months?

Common sense really IMHO.

Couldnt agree more with you penegal. It is a potentially deadly safety hazard in my opinion and non enclosed or high heeled shoes should be banned on board ALL aircraft.

I also totally disagree with the habit of changing into PJs and slippers before take off, these items should be handed out once in cruise and not a minute before.

 

[medhead]

I'm smart enough to wear closed shoes when I mow the lawn

Unaustralian!

 

[Milefest]

Not only is it a safety issue in regard to heels but an inconvenience for other pax. Been stuck too many times behind a female in the aisle because they don't know how to walk properly when disembarking, holding everyone up for their connections, baggage claim, transportation etc. as well as being slowed down along the aerobridge.

 

[blackcat20]

Unaustralian!

Cant win!