Qantas doesn't care about priority boarding

[jakeseven7]

While I agree with most of your post if you’re going to start summarily dismissing staff over performance issues you’re going to need to throw a fortune at employment lawyers. Oh. Oh wait. Go right ahead. Please.

Gotta love the armchair managers who have probably never worked a day in large corporates

 

[justinbrett]

It didn’t work on QF840 this morning SYD-DRW. I was travelling with a work colleague who had no status and he didn’t even realise it was a priority line. Absolutely no policing of the line at all.

 

[Max Samuels]

I don't like to assume to know how other people should do their jobs, but from where I sit, PB doesn't look nor sound like rocket science, right? They literally just need to "bother" to do it. The fact that they don't speaks volumes......

 

[jase05]

Gotta love the armchair managers who have probably never worked a day in large corporates

I work for a very large Australian business and yes it is much harder these days to remove workers not doing their job but there are plenty of ways to get staff to comply. Seeing as though it’s allowed to continue I dare say QF isn’t bothering to get the message to staff

 

[trippin_the_rift]

We're thinking of the same company... right?

Might be a rich copying in the Qatar CEO when he doesn't even provide a OWE lounge in their home port. He might have the balls to call some stuff out, but doubt he'll listen to his failings.

There is a OWE lounge in Doha

Qatar Loyalty members have more earning capacity (ie: more fares earn miles than on other programs).
In that respect - Qatar is a legit fairer & simpler Oneworld member than some other airlines! And don't forget that QR has significant weight at Oneworld due to the majority voting power via their ASKs of investment airlines.

While I agree with most of your post if you’re going to start summarily dismissing staff over performance issues you’re going to need to throw a fortune at employment lawyers. Oh. Oh wait. Go right ahead. Please.

Qantas has failed consistently for so long that someone needs to ask if it's industrial espionage, rather than sloppy performance.
I wonder if Qantas measure and track these things. Would be interesting to dig into how sophisticated each customer touchpoint is measured by the airline.

Oneworld has penalties ($$) which can be imposed on airlines who consistently don't adhere to the detailed SOP for the handling of Oneworld pax.

 

[stm1sydney]

Seeing as though it’s allowed to continue I dare say QF isn’t bothering to get the message to staff

Qantas does have a system: promise lots of really nice things, obtain positive media coverage, and then never deliver on them.

 

[Danger]

Gotta love the armchair managers who have probably never worked a day in large corporates

I'll let trippin_the_rift share or not the extent of the member's involvement with "large corporates" but be assured your comment couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[doublecatered]

Precisely. Good luck with summarily dismissing staff over not enthusiastically enforcing priority boarding.

This forum is most likely filled with astute business minds that operate in a competitive environment and need to keep a close eye on costs. As does Qantas. Do you not think that Qantas would have addressed this issue A LONG TIME AGO if it was not going to cost them anything extra?
To truly achieve this elusive goal of priority boarding requires extra resources. Extra resources means more dollars spent on staff...something that this company is loath to do.
Why not you ask? Because planes generally get away on time and that’s the only thing we as business travellers want as a priority above all else.

 

[oz_mark]

I don't like to assume to know how other people should do their jobs, but from where I sit, PB doesn't look nor sound like rocket science, right? They literally just need to "bother" to do it. The fact that they don't speaks volumes......

AFAIK, they implement PB as they have been told to. The design of PB comes from further up the company.

 

[Sabot]

Slightly off topic, but banning all carry on luggage other than handbags and similar which will fit under the seat would be a great way of speeding things up during boarding and disembarking.

No more waiting for idiots who don't know how to use the overhead storage.
No more fighting for bin-space.
No more tears to the stewardess when your carry-on is slightly oversized/weight (If they ever enforced it LOL).

Not likely to happen given how many million dollar deals are done mid-air out of roller cases and suit bags though. ;^)

Can understand why the PB issue irks people, however, being a lowly economy riding scum most of the time I pretty much always board the plane dead last. The plane isn't going to take off without me if I'm sitting there at the boarding gate.

 

[Max Samuels]

AFAIK, they implement PB as they have been told to. The design of PB comes from further up the company.

"as they have been told to"? So in other words, not at all????

 

[Max Samuels]

To truly achieve this elusive goal of priority boarding requires extra resources...

Respectfully, I disagree. VA still has the same number of agents at the gate as QF - the difference being that they bother to look at the BP and use their quick intellect to determine whether a particular pax is "priority" or not.

 

[doublecatered]

Respectfully, I disagree. VA still has the same number of agents at the gate as QF - the difference being that they bother to look at the BP and use their quick intellect to determine whether a particular pax is "priority" or not.

Ive actually chatted to fa's about this ... As they are the ones that actually board the passengers, they are not too keen on sending somebody that has been waiting in one line (possibly through no fault of their own due to poor signage/inadequate terminal design etc) to the back of another loooong line and then having to deal with them in flight in one capacity or another. Crew have enough conflict points they need to deal with on a daily basis. They dont need more do they? At least if ground staff were actively involved, then they could enforce the procedure and then walk away once boarding is complete and not have to deal with the pax any further

If airport staff were more involved/plentiful at each departure, then that may result in something along the lines of what VIrgin does. But at the moment, I really dont see much changing

 

[RooFlyer]

Do you not think that Qantas would have addressed this issue A LONG TIME AGO if it was not going to cost them anything extra?

Qantas? No, I don't think so.

To truly achieve this elusive goal of priority boarding requires extra resources.

Sorry, I think that's not correct. I see your point above about having line-bounced pax on their flight. That's not a legitimate reason, if doing PB is part of their job description.

They can get more conflict onboard by enforcing safety regs, but you'd hope that they do that as required.

 

[mstgrv]

IMO the way certain US airlines handles this is a very good system - board passengers by group number.

It's way less antagonistic for your average passenger to be told "we aren't boarding your group yet" than to be told "you don't have priority".

 

[Danger]

Precisely. Good luck with summarily dismissing staff over not enthusiastically enforcing priority boarding.

This forum is most likely filled with astute business minds that operate in a competitive environment and need to keep a close eye on costs. As does Qantas. Do you not think that Qantas would have addressed this issue A LONG TIME AGO if it was not going to cost them anything extra?
To truly achieve this elusive goal of priority boarding requires extra resources. Extra resources means more dollars spent on staff...something that this company is loath to do.
Why not you ask? Because planes generally get away on time and that’s the only thing we as business travellers want as a priority above all else.

I disagree.

Respectfully, I disagree. VA still has the same number of agents at the gate as QF - the difference being that they bother to look at the BP and use their quick intellect to determine whether a particular pax is "priority" or not.

Sorry, I think that's not correct. I see your point above about having line-bounced pax on their flight. That's not a legitimate reason, if doing PB is part of their job description.

They can get more conflict onboard by enforcing safety regs, but you'd hope that they do that as required.

I agree with Max Samuels and RooFlyer. It absolutely does not require a significant cost investment.

IMO the way certain US airlines handles this is a very good system - board passengers by group number.

It's way less antagonistic for your average passenger to be told "we aren't boarding your group yet" than to be told "you don't have priority".

And that is one simple solution that would cost a minute fraction of one percent of the company's costs - certainly a hell of a lot less than the money Qantas spent on those large priority boarding signs.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

Precisely. Good luck with summarily dismissing staff over not enthusiastically enforcing priority boarding.

This forum is most likely filled with astute business minds that operate in a competitive environment and need to keep a close eye on costs. As does Qantas. Do you not think that Qantas would have addressed this issue A LONG TIME AGO if it was not going to cost them anything extra?
To truly achieve this elusive goal of priority boarding requires extra resources. Extra resources means more dollars spent on staff...something that this company is loath to do.
Why not you ask? Because planes generally get away on time and that’s the only thing we as business travellers want as a priority above all else.

My reasonably-educated guess is that Qantas isn't or can't track the full financial impact of not measuring successful priority boarding.

When your company is performing well in certain areas, it can mask the underperformance of another division.

I don't necessarily believe Qantas is doing a bad job overall - quite the contrary, but it's of my opinion that there are holes in the boat which nobody is plugging, and instead, all the manpower is focused on making the boat go faster, so nobody notices the holes that are slowly creating more drag.

 

[TheInsider]

And that is one simple solution that would cost a minute fraction of one percent of the company's costs - certainly a hell of a lot less than the money Qantas spent on those large priority boarding signs.

I agree that it doesn't work, but you can't compare US airlines. US airlines don't board a 737 in 14-20 minutes. This is what Qantas does.
Starts at -20, finishes at -6.

 

[justinbrett]

I agree that it doesn't work, but you can't compare US airlines. US airlines don't board a 737 in 14-20 minutes. This is what Qantas does.
Starts at -20, finishes at -6.

Pretty rarely in my experience

 

[tdimdad]

It's way less antagonistic for your average passenger to be told "we aren't boarding your group yet" than to be told "you don't have priority".

Been there with Finnair couple of times when I arrive at the gate while the boarding has already started and as group 2 assumed it might be good time to join the queue. They have a "queue dragon" who politely whisks people aside with 'Please wait here until we call your group' and that's it.

If QF did priority boarding routinely enough for people to learn to expect it, also non-priority passengers would gradually get it and the hard feelings would most likely be more of an interim stage at start or isolated events in the future, in general.