Qantas Domestic Business Lounge - oneworld Emerald access Discussion

[ajw373]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

If they claimed it not to be a business class lounge then that would be different

By calling it a business lounge they are deliberately ignoring one world rules of lounge access which state that OWS should get access to it

That didn't answer my question. If they changed the name would you be happy? How about Qantas Club Plus?

 

[anat0l]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

If they claimed it not to be a business class lounge then that would be different

By calling it a business lounge they are deliberately ignoring one world rules of lounge access which state that OWS should get access to it

What is the difference between lounge access, apart from the fact that Qantas calls their domestic lounge a business class lounge but treats it as a pseudo first class lounge? If they changed the name would you be happy?

My my my, Dave, do you need a little help pulling your head out of the sand?

The short answer to your final question ajw373 is YES, they should change the name of the lounge, and give it a name which does not contain the words Business or First.

Of course, even if the name of the lounges are changed then I still see a lot of complaints from other oneworld elites coming through in the form of, "Well, your lounge access policy says that Business class passengers can access this lounge. So if a Business class passenger can access this lounge why can't oneworld Sapphires get access? This is very inconsistent!"

So the easier thing to do would be to regard the lounges as non-oneworld lounges (like the BA CCR) and then say that we have special rules for access which are as follows.... (and oneworld Emeralds just happen to have access under these rules...)

 

[ajw373]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

So the easier thing to do would be to regard the lounges as non-oneworld lounges (like the BA CCR) and then say that we have special rules for access which are as follows.... (and oneworld Emeralds just happen to have access under these rules...)

This is more or less what they have done.

 

[pauly7]

platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Less being the key bit. They *have* called it a business lounge
It is , imo, no different to BA deciding that they will not allow OWS into their business lounges or a OWE into their 1st lounges, the latter being viewed ( it would seem ) as wrong from this thread. Surely should expect all the carriers to abide by the OW policy rather than being able to make up new rules on the fly

Are you not Qantas WP anymore Dave?

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Are you not Qantas WP anymore Dave?

I do currently have QF Platinum status ( together with AA Platinum status and EK Gold status ) but I do know people who have been refused access to the Business lounge whilst having status which OW policy indicates permits access

I doubt that I will keep QF Platinum status for more than another 18 months given that I am generally unlikely to choose Oneworld for non domestic travels ( other than perhaps for SYD-SIN and LHR-ORD )

 

[drron]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

I do currently have QF Platinum status ( together with AA Platinum status and EK Gold status ) but I do know people who have been refused access to the Business lounge whilst having status which OW policy indicates permits access

I doubt that I will keep QF Platinum status for more than another 18 months given that I am generally unlikely to choose Oneworld for non domestic travels ( other than perhaps for SYD-SIN and LHR-ORD )

Dave I have often disagreed with you but firmly behind you on this one.I have been denied access to the QF business lounges in BNE and MEL as an AA plat.
To say Flagship lounges are the same as QF domestic lounges is a load of absolute bulls excreta.Flagship lounges are in terminals that are major hubs for AA international departures.It just so happens that domestic services also depart from those terminals.AA do not have a separate F lounge as QF does for their international departures.The domestic QF lounges are therefore totally different to a F lounge or a Flagship lounge.They are indeed described as Business lounges so QF is not adhering to OW policy.

 

[pauly7]

platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Dave I have often disagreed with you but firmly behind you on this one.I have been denied access to the QF business lounges in BNE and MEL as an AA plat.

I guess unless QF reverses it's access policy this should be noted as another drawback for all those undertaking the AA challenge for status!

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

I guess unless QF reverses it's access policy this should be noted as another drawback for all those undertaking the AA challenge for status!

I don't see why; QF refuses admission to their own Gold members, so no difference in that respect.

 

[dk4]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

I would totally agree with the argument that nonQF 1W Sapphire card holders* should have access to the (domestic) business lounges, per 1W rules. The solution for QF is quite simple- a rewrite of the 1W terms where "AND" is turned into "OR"... thus; sapphire members* have access to a frequent flier lounge OR business class lounge prior to their 1W departure. In this scenario, the "OR" is at the discretion of the operating airline (at terminals where they provide both facilities).

In QF's case, this would mean QANTAS CLUB "or" DOMESTIC BUSINESS LOUNGE, so the latter would only be accessible to Sapphires in locations where the former didn't exist (i.e. nowhere).

* AAdvantage Sapphire "domestic" access restriction argument may be valid IMO.

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

I would totally agree with the argument that nonQF 1W Sapphire card holders* should have access to the (domestic) business lounges, per 1W rules. The solution for QF is quite simple- a rewrite of the 1W terms where "AND" is turned into "OR"... thus; sapphire members* have access to a frequent flier lounge OR business class lounge prior to their 1W departure. In this scenario, the "OR" is at the discretion of the operating airline (at terminals where they provide both facilities).

In QF's case, this would mean QANTAS CLUB "or" DOMESTIC BUSINESS LOUNGE, so the latter would only be accessible to Sapphires in locations where the former didn't exist (i.e. nowhere).

* AAdvantage Sapphire "domestic" access restriction argument may be valid IMO.

Absolutely, One World changes the rules or QF changes their lounge designation.. either would do it

The AA "domestic" issue is a red herring and is based on AA's definition of domestic on the AA site and more clearly specified on the OneWorld site. Also, QF does permit AA Platinum members (and BA Silver members) to the Qantas Club lounge so is not a question of whether there is lounge access entitlement, just that they will only allow Emerald members in the business lounge ( AA EXP members have no issue gaining access )

Dave

 

[moa999]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

QF should just rename domestic Business to First (or Premium) then call it the Domestic First / Domestic Premium lounge.
Then absolutely no complaints.

Current QF policy may be against the letter of the rules, but definitely right with the spirit - a dedicated lounge for the top tier of travellers by class of service and ff status.

 

[samh004]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

QF should just rename domestic Business to First (or Premium) then call it the Domestic First / Domestic Premium lounge.
Then absolutely no complaints.

Current QF policy may be against the letter of the rules, but definitely right with the spirit - a dedicated lounge for the top tier of travellers by class of service and ff status.

The flaw with that plan is that flights would then earn more SC’s as they’d be F not J.

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

The flaw with that plan is that flights would then earn more SC’s as they’d be F not J.

Not necessarily. An earlier incarnation of the SC earning table had flights of 2700 miles or fewer having the same status credit earnings as for business class. It was only at 2701 miles and higher where First earned higher than business class. They could rejig the tables again in the same way which would also neatly deal with the anomoly of most AA 1st domestic flights earning .

 

[Siegfried]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

The flaw with that plan is that flights would then earn more SC’s as they’d be F not J.

I think the OP was talking about renaming the lounge rather than the fare class.

However, from what I can see, the debate seems to be about what the lounge is called vs what it is. So, I have a suggestion for QF (with tongue firmly planted in cheek).

1. Rename the Business Lounge the "J W P" lounge - those in the know will understand what it means.
2. Organise a supply / sponsorship deal with a certain purveyor of marginally palatable scotch to introduce a new "colour" to their line - purple.
3. Strategically and discreetly place the following throughout the lounge

QF can defray the costs of the name change via the sponsorship, there's no further confusion around the name of the lounge, and (depending on the quality of the blend that the distiller provides), the scotch drinkers will be happy too.

P.S sorry for the size of the image - not sure how to shrink it for posting.

 

[samh004]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

They could rejig the tables again in the same way which would also neatly deal with the anomoly of most AA 1st domestic flights earning .

Don’t give them ideas Dave!

But I see what you mean, and a domestic F and J lounge does make more sense.

 

[dk4]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

The AA "domestic" issue is a red herring and is based on AA's definition of domestic on the AA site ...

Perhaps.

1. But I would read the AA intent as trying to "broaden" the meaning of "domestic" to include Caribbean, Canada & Mexico (ex MEX) rather than "restricting" the meaning of "domestic".

2. AAdvantage's model rewards loyalty with complimentary upgrades and standby tools, rather than a complimentary domestic lounge access tool (other than a discount on Admirals Club membership). It would be reasonable to expect a large proportion of AA elites (who desire lounge access) will have AC cards, and membership of that club gives the card holder Qantas Club access anyway.

3. This would allow Qantas (and any future owner of the QFF program) to enhance loyalty from Australian based fliers, by making (primary earning) membership of the AAdvantage program (over QFF) less appealing to them.

4. So it would be a win-win to both QF & AA if QF was to adapt the "no domestic lounge access" policy toward AAdvantage Sapphires.


BUT there is also something to be said for changing the name of the QF domestic premium cabin to "domestic first", and upping the SC & points rewarded for those buying tickets in this cabin, given the direction Virgin Blue has signalled it will be taking.


PLUS love the JW idea LOL, but my guess is that QF already has some form of comprehensive agreement with Chivas?!

 

[ajw373]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Less being the key bit. They *have* called it a business lounge
It is , imo, no different to BA deciding that they will not allow OWS into their business lounges or a OWE into their 1st lounges, the latter being viewed ( it would seem ) as wrong from this thread. Surely should expect all the carriers to abide by the OW policy rather than being able to make up new rules on the fly

No the main jist of this thread is nothing alike. BA's lounge access policy said the guy should have been there but he was wrongly asked to leave. That is a legit gripe.

Qantas on the other hand have created a new domestic lounge with very clearly defined access rules. Now whilst I agree with you 100% that having the word business in the lounge name creates confusion, the bottom line is if they allowed access to one world sapphires they may as well not have a separate lounge. The access rules are quite sensible too.

 

[ajw373]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Perhaps it would be to QF's benefit if they could get an agreement not to let QF members in... in fact , would it not be of benefit to both airlines if all lounge access based on status was withdrawn?

The easiest thing to do would be to change the name and then copy AA 100%

 

[anat0l]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Why is it seemingly ok to come up with ways to restrict entitled access to QF lounges whilst castigating BA for not allowing someone in

Well, to take a page from Arguing by Dave Noble (i.e. basing it on the way and style that you have argued before), fundamentally all the talk about why QF seemingly flout the ow rules is not relevant to this thread and the OP.

To put it simply, the OP and the premise of this thread is that the oneworld rules state that the OP was fully entitled to enter the BA T5 GF, but instead they were removed (that's right - not refused but admitted and then removed). And the answer we can all agree on - as it would seem - is that the OP should have been granted access as per the ow rules.

The issues related to QF's flouting of the access rules is a separate issue which has no impact on the outcome of the OP's issue. So I will happily castigate BA about their flouting of the rules and we'll leave the whole other issue of QF's flouting the rules to another argument (even if it coexists in this thread) and another lynching if necessary.

 

[dk4]

Re: platinum - thrown out of galleries first at heathrow, waiting for explanation

Except that that would be a breach of OW entitlements.

I'm not talking about across the board Sapphire restrictions, I agree that Qantas lost the right to restrict access to any of its "Business Lounges" to other airlines' Sapphire elites when it signed up to oneworld, except maybe AA's. (And QF needs to remedy this situation OR accept their obligations to partner elites; there are two useful ideas presented already in this thread.)

HOWEVER, AA has the right to determine lounge access rules for their card holders. AA does NOT have to comply with 1W rules for its own program members, only those cards presented from other alliance airline programs.# (In the same way that QF or BA don't have to comply with 1W rules for their own program members, but must for elites from other programs.*)

Lounge access is not available when travel is wholly within the U.S., Canada, Mexico (except Mexico City), Bermuda, The Bahamas, and the Caribbean.

Clearing up any ambiguity by adding “Australia” to that list would be fairly simple. And as QF is the only 1W carrier to participate in the Admirals Club program, perhaps it would be quite reasonable for this restriction to be added formally?!

Perhaps it would be to QF's benefit if they could get an agreement not to let QF members in... in fact , would it not be of benefit to both airlines if all lounge access based on status was withdrawn?

LOL. seriously!?!

SUMMING UP, * I feel BA should honour the 1W terms, just as QF should. However, AA & QF (via the AC & QP) have a "special relationship", and there may be commercial validity in extending AAdvantage domestic lounge access restrictions formally to "Australia", as a commercial benefit to both partners.

# possibly part of the reason for QF enforcing the 4 ~ segments rule for QFF status?!