Qantas law unto themselves - don't waste your time with ACA complaint

[NoName]

Clearly meaningful enough for you to add an off topic comment.

Nothing off topic about my comment at all. I commented about his original post including unnecessary references to “Donald Trump” and that it sends his post into rant territory. If you can show that he didn’t make those references then you may have a point. Let me know if you are able to do that.

 

[offshore171]

OP: When you contacted Qantas with your complaint, did you bang on about Trump and 'call the ground staff name'


(The last few words have been moderated)

 

[Turbo-g]

Yeah right. A really late FIFO flight departs at 6am. If you think I'm getting up at 3am twice a week for Qantas's pleasure so I can explore around a carpark, you are very mistaken.

For $800+ i certainly would to make sure this doesn't happen..the 05.15 to PBO is my regular

 

[Danielb56]

I stopped reading when I saw “Donald Trump” mentioned. At that point the post became an emotional rant and any reasonable points were rendered meaningless.

I agree...What's Trump got to do with Qantas and his issue. Is he to blame for Qantas' stupidity as well? The connection is nonsense...

I'm surprised Scomo didn't get a mention as well...

And Boris Johnson...

 

[Vic]

Nothing off topic about my comment at all. I commented about his original post including unnecessary references to “Donald Trump” and that it sends his post into rant territory. If you can show that he didn’t make those references then you may have a point. Let me know if you are able to do that.

Well accepting your opinion that Trump has nothing to do with the issue at hand... That would make it off topic. Joining in with further comments about the comment about Trump making this thread pointless, suggests you're contributing to the noise with nothing meaningful to add. I do have to wonder why there is a need to comment at all given the comment about Trump, supposeably stopped you from reading this thread... Yet you still had to comment.

If you stopped reading why even comment?

Personally, it's not clear how anyone with a brain can support Trump to the point of personally attacking someone as we see in this thread. I'm surprised so many people can't understand a basic simile no wonder literacy standards are declining.

 

[support]

I am now going through the last few posts in this thread.

Time to get back on topic.

 

[NoName]

Well accepting your opinion that Trump has nothing to do with the issue at hand... That would make it off topic. Joining in with further comments about the comment about Trump making this thread pointless, suggests you're contributing to the noise with nothing meaningful to add. I do have to wonder why there is a need to comment at all given the comment about Trump, supposeably stopped you from reading this thread... Yet you still had to comment.

The logic you are displaying can be described as poor.

Trump was brought up in the original post. You know, the first post made in this thread. Therefore comments on it in relation to that post is entirely on-topic.

And nowhere did I say it stopped me reading this thread. My comment was in relation to stopping reading the original post, which judging by several other comments was a common reaction

Declining literacy standard - indeed!

Personally, it's not clear how anyone with a brain can support Trump to the point of personally attacking someone as we see in this thread. I'm surprised so many people can't understand a basic simile no wonder literacy standards are declining

Where did you get the idea that I support Trump?

Declining literacy standards - indeed!

 

[serfty]

[moderation hat]

Recent political references in this thread are off topic and can be divisive.​

​

Any further reference to any politician in this thread will be redacted and the member sanctioned.​

[/moderation hat]

 

[Melburnian1]

What I have found when heading into an arguement with a company or govt authority is get the names of the staff you spoke to. Even when in a rush I note the name and put other details in later.

When you start naming the staff with the chain of events companies often want you to go away and it gets sorted.

Excellent suggestion. Time (and if one can, location) is also important to record, as we can quickly forget that. Writing down a quick summary of what was said and by whom helps to jog fallible memory later.

Qantas is run by arrogant bullies who don't really care about resolving customer concerns. The only way to deal with them is to take them to small claims court and win legally.

Good idea in your final sentence, but (in Victoria) IIRC one needs to engage a process server to serve notice on the defendant, and there's also a higher application fee than used be the case. Perhaps 'costs' are recoverable, but some would be dissauded by the formality compared with how it was many years ago.

 

[Melburnian1]

I can see you're really struggling with the logic of this. Qantas departed a plane 3 minutes early that was missing one checked-in passenger. Fact...

While I don't like the gratuitous comment you made about a person who has no relationship to Qantas - you 'lost' me and many others from that point - on the above you are correct.

In Victoria, surface transport operators usually have any departures more than 60 seconds early assessed for a penalty (in a complicated system that also gives bonuses for other things.)

If it's the 0550 hours, it shouldn't depart the gate at 0547. If QFd believes that's acceptable, why have a timetable?

 

[JohnPhelan]

Back to the actual problem - the OP was using a Q-tag (coaster). Whilst he appears to have had no problems with these in the past, many others have. Many QF staff in fact advise people to not use these tags, as they are too prone to tech/physical problems (i.e. they can get caught on the conveyor machinery and ripped off the bag, leaving no ID on the bag to indicate where it is supposed to be going).

If that bag drop machine was working for other pax, my best guess would be that the Q-tag did not overwrite the old data properly, so the reader was confused as to where it was going.

Yes, a problem with the QF-supplied equipment - but a good example of how using technology for the sake of technology is not always an improvement. Use paper tags - they work and they are not overly dependent on the technology to do so.

 

[Daver6]

If that bag drop machine was working for other pax, my best guess would be that the Q-tag did not overwrite the old data properly, so the reader was confused as to where it was going.

I don't think you understand how the technology works, if I've understood your comment correctly. There is no writing or over-writing of the data on the Q-tag. It simply is a RFID. In the sense when the reader queries it, it responds back with a GUID (globally unique ID). The analogy to the paper tag is it uses a laser to scan the barcode (which is also a unique ID). The ID gets associated in the QF system with the passenger's trip (whether its from the RFID or barcode).

 

[woodborer]

I don't think you understand how the technology works, if I've understood your comment correctly. There is no writing or over-writing of the data on the Q-tag. It simply is a RFID. In the sense when the reader queries it, it responds back with a GUID (globally unique ID). The analogy to the paper tag is it uses a laser to scan the barcode (which is also a unique ID). The ID gets associated in the QF system with the passenger's trip (whether its from the RFID or barcode).

That's not how Qantas describe how it works.
RFID devices usually come with a small amount of memory that can be overwritten.

 

[Daver6]

That's not how Qantas describe how it works.
RFID devices usually come with a small amount of memory that can be overwritten.

That's news to me. I'd be interested in hearing how QF have implemented. Can you point me to where QF describes how it works?

 

[jase05]

That's news to me. I'd be interested in hearing how QF have implemented. Can you point me to where QF describes how it works?

A couple of months ago we checked in at ADL for ADL-SYD and I had Q-tags but Mrs Jase didn’t. The check in agent scanned my tags twice and it came up with an error before on the third attempt it went through, On arrival in SYD of course Mrs Jase’s bags arrived but mine nowhere to be seen. Long story short my bags ended up in MEL and the QF staff member said that some Q-tags were playing up. Who knows if that’s the truth or they were just fobbing me off.
I haven’t bothered using the Q-tags since

 

[opusman]

That's news to me. I'd be interested in hearing how QF have implemented. Can you point me to where QF describes how it works?

 

[RichardMEL]

I really would have given up after a few goes and printed a paper bag tag and be done with it imo.

Yes QF were very poor and sure why the staff did not just go old school rather than waste time so the OP missed his flight, but I don't know that it warrants all the other comments made

 

[opusman]

I'm well aware of the various RFID capabities. I'm more interested to know about QFs implementation, of which this doesn't provide any guidance.

Qantas Launches Its Next Generation Check-in System - 2010-07-27 - Page 2 - RFID Journal

Maybe you could Google it yourself if you have any further questions

 

[justinbrett]

If Qantas are to blame for this incident, it's for publishing 45 minutes as the recommended arrival time. I think that's too short - if 30 minutes is the drop dead bag closure time, 15 minutes is not enough time for everybody to be arriving in the terminal and checking their bags. They really should be saying 60 minutes with bags, 45 minutes HLO. AA for instance recommend double the cut off times (ie, their domestic bags close at T-45, they recommend T-90). I understand TSA is slower than ours but T-60 would be reasonable.

15 minutes is not enough time to allow for any setbacks - as this thread has documented.

 

[Daver6]

Qantas Launches Its Next Generation Check-in System - 2010-07-27 - Page 2 - RFID Journal

Maybe you could Google it yourself if you have any further questions

But it's so much easier for me to just post here and look silly