Qantas Platinum One experiences?

[Happy Trails]

On my last EK flight I was greeted by the purser as a "chairman's member".
If only.

 

[Mr_Orange]

On my last EK flight I was greeted by the purser as a "chairman's member".
If only.

"chairman's member", geddit... c'mon people, work with me here, "chairman's member"

 

[Happy Trails]

"chairman's member", geddit... c'mon people, work with me here, "chairman's member"

I won't rise to that remark.

 

[Hvr]

"chairman's member", geddit... c'mon people, work with me here, "chairman's member"

So many lines, so many ways to get suspended.

 

[silverlining]

@Marki

After being greeted on the plane one of the FA's came over and asked if I had flown on that plane before or would I like a tour - when I said I had flown on it before they chatted for several minutes about what I thought was good about it or what they could do better. The customer engagement was exceptional. The rest of the FA's were highly attentive during the flight, the service was great and the food was superb. On landing they came and escorted me to the door where I was invited off with First Class, before the rest of the business cabin. Its those little things that go the furthest..........................

 

[dfcatch]

Oh dear
To be honest I really don't get the whole shadow thing as I'm a firm believer that you get the seat and only the specific seat that you pay for. It sounds like the CSM agrees with me all be it I wouldn't have been quite so blunt in the expression were I not behind a keyboard.

We'll have to disagree on this one PF.

Whilst shadows are NOT a published benefit and should never be expected, it is simply good business practice to allow your best flyers to be a little more comfortable where possible.

By way of example let me give three different scenarios:

A/ plane is not full, and you lose your shadow to a NB (or worse a non-QFF member) simply because some agent plonked them there.

B/ plane is full and you lose your shadow.

C/ plane is not full but you lose your shadow to a WP.

Whilst I'd prefer my shadow, I'm happy to accept B&C as your point is correct (I have paid for my seat).

But it's a kick in the cough to "Preferred Seating" and just simple "look after your best customers" - when you plonk someone from down the back into a premium shadow for no legitimate reason on a non-full flight.

 

[Princess Fiona]

We'll have to disagree on this one PF.

Whilst shadows are NOT a published benefit and should never be expected, it is simply good business practice to allow your best flyers to be a little more comfortable where possible.

By way of example let me give three different scenarios:

A/ plane is not full, and you lose your shadow to a NB (or worse a non-QFF member) simply because some agent plonked them there.

B/ plane is full and you lose your shadow.

C/ plane is not full but you lose your shadow to a WP.

Whilst I'd prefer my shadow, I'm happy to accept B&C as your point is correct (I have paid for my seat).

But it's a kick in the cough to "Preferred Seating" and just simple "look after your best customers" - when you plonk someone from down the back into a premium shadow for no legitimate reason on a non-full flight.

Some good points which I agree with.
However how do you know that there isn't a legitimate reason to move a passenger from the back to a forward bulkhead seat?

 

[dfcatch]

Some good points which I agree with.
However how do you know that there isn't a legitimate reason to move a passenger from the back to a forward bulkhead seat?

I don't - my comment is a general one (in response to your general one).

But on the specifics - too many questions outstanding, but on the available information......

- not sure that promising the shadow to someone down the back constitutes a "legitimate reason".

- if the seat down the back is out of service, the OP has already stated that the plane was not full (ie. Other seats are available)

- if the person down the back was Tony Hancock, then the lounge/gate/check-in agent could have already usurped the shadow.

Can't imagine any other "legitimate" reasons why a shadow should be usurped on a non-full flight.

 

[Princess Fiona]

I don't - my comment is a general one (in response to your general one).

But on the specifics - too many questions outstanding, but on the available information......

- not sure that promising the shadow to someone down the back constitutes a "legitimate reason".

- if the seat down the back is out of service, the OP has already stated that the plane was not full (ie. Other seats are available)

- if the person down the back was Tony Hancock, then the lounge/gate/check-in agent could have already usurped the shadow.

Can't imagine any other "legitimate" reasons why a shadow should be usurped on a non-full flight.

Don't know the specifics of the OP's would be shadow stealer I agree.
I can think of a couple of reasons that a CSM might think are legitimate reasons to move someone into a forward bulkhead seat on a non-full flight:
Tight connection on arrival
Some type of medical issue eg Cam boot, leg splint etc where passenger cannot sit in an emergency exit row but would be more comfortable in a bulkhead row

 

[pjm99au]

I have overheard mid flight a request from a passenger behind me to a FA to move to the free bulkhead seat next to me to which the FA responded that I was one of QF's more frequent travellers and that they like to keep a seat free next to those passengers when possible for their comfort. I was very grateful to the FA for not putting me in the uncomfortable position of having to respond to a request and for dealing with the passenger directly. Other than in circumstances where the FA has no other choice this should to my mind be the default policy.

Now if only the gate staff and check in staff had the same considerations......

 

[boomy]

I can think of a couple of reasons that a CSM might think are legitimate reasons to move someone into a forward bulkhead seat on a non-full flight:
Tight connection on arrival

I lost my shadow a few times due to that reason and it's ok as long as the passenger is moved forward before landing, not at the beginning of the flight.

 

[Happy Trails]

If it's a legitimate case, then the CSM should simply assert their authority and make the move, rather than wheedling, followed by sulking as reported by Pleb Status in post #952.

 

[dfcatch]

Yep as above.

PF - if that's the case then I would always be more than happy to acquiesce if asked appropriately and provided the reasons.

I have on more than one occasion given up my pre-selected seat to accommodate other requests (eg. Family with kids seated apart).

I do however expect to be "asked", explained the reason, and offered a comparable or better seat. (Ie. Not being moved to a rear middle).

It's the same thing about losing a shadow - for the right reasons and being handled in the right way.

From what the OP has posted (albeit with limited information) - it appears the wrong way, and probably the wrong reasons.

 

[mickeyc747]

I have lost my shadow on a number of occasions but it usually to either Chairmans Lounge members or staff travel in J class at the gate. I have only ever once had lost the shadow in flight and the CSM came up to me and said excuse me Mr Mickeyc747 do mind if we sit this gentleman from the main cabin in 1C for landing as his wife is in labour, then announced a rapid decent into Adelaide, whilst I thought it was outstanding customer service to ask, I would not have been bothered if she sat him there as the Captain made the announcement that he had clearance for a rapid decent into ADL due to the pax wife in Labour. What was a 30 minutes late departure turned into an on time arrival.

 

[Princess Fiona]

Yep as above.

PF - if that's the case then I would always be more than happy to acquiesce if asked appropriately and provided the reasons.

I have on more than one occasion given up my pre-selected seat to accommodate other requests (eg. Family with kids seated apart).

I do however expect to be "asked", explained the reason, and offered a comparable or better seat. (Ie. Not being moved to a rear middle).

It's the same thing about losing a shadow - for the right reasons and being handled in the right way.

From what the OP has posted (albeit with limited information) - it appears the wrong way, and probably the wrong reasons.

I totally agree.
I'm not big on shadows but understand that others are and it is in QF's interest to look after their best customers.

 

[dfcatch]

I totally agree.
I'm not big on shadows but understand that others are and it is in QF's interest to look after their best customers.

I'll remind you of that when I seat myself next to you in 4B someday

 

[serfty]

I'll remind you of that when I seat myself next to you in 4B someday 

Ha!

Having met you both, I'd be delighted to sit in the third seat in the row; A or C ... not a problem ...

 

[QF WP]

I'm sure you would never choose 4B willingly, dfcatch - it would only to be to sit next to Princess Fiona (a thought to which I must confess, I would as well!)

 

[Kangol]

I lost my shadow a few times due to that reason and it's ok as long as the passenger is moved forward before landing, not at the beginning of the flight.

Completely agree.
I was once in PE coming back from LHR and close to descent, the CSS asked me if I would like to ask my friend sitting in Y downstairs (this was before the A380 refurb) to come up to PE so we can disembark together. Obviously PE had some free seats.

The "medical issue" of a leg splint and making the pax more comfortable is an invalid reason.. if that is the case then that indicates QF's stance is to provide greater comfort to non/low-status pax over higher status pax.

 

[dfcatch]

I'm sure you would never choose 4B willingly, dfcatch - it would only to be to sit next to Princess Fiona (a thought to which I must confess, I would as well!)

QF WP - I believe I did once (as a WP), use Trippin-the-Rift's P1 coat-tails to "fly-ahead", and then proceeded to steal both his and awilcockson's shadow

The gall of some WP's to steal the shadow of two P1s!!