RSA MEL F Lounge Qantas Official Response (Refused Drinks)

[RooFlyer]

<snip>

What's all the cacophony about self-serve va no self-serve anyway?

Some-one asked what the problem was if you got refused service of drinks ("RSAed") when there was self serve available. And off we went .

I too have got a F lounge visit coming up, early morning. I might have to take a video round the lounge AND an audio recording of my asking a staff person if there is self serve available then, or not, and post them. But of course that may not be sufficient for some, when you can simply telephone Qantas and ask.

 

[burrco]

Not sure what self service drinks has to do with the poor service highlighted by the thread starter. However to add my data point: on my last F lounge visit not only was there no self service wine the bar fridge was locked with a sign directing users to ask staff for ALL drinks (including soft drinks).

Qantas is well known for it's inconsistencies - so I'd say it's a brave type of person who uses phrase like "always, never" etc in relation to most things Qantas does.

 

[Spongbob]

I'd say it's a brave type of person who uses phrase like "always, never" etc in relation to most things Qantas does.

I never use the word "always", and always use the word "never".

 

[Brisbane Flyer]

I hate to admit this, but...a few years ago and mate and myself drank so much in the Mel Flounge we both passed out, only to woken by staff and escorted to the flight to Hong Kong...Maybe those were the good old days, all I can remember is we had an incredible weekend in Hong Kong for the Sevens.

Cheers
BF

 

[blackcat20]

Sorry RSA is not a thing in this lounge.

Again, just because it didn't happen to you doesnt mean it's 'not a thing in this lounge'. It has been reported here by at least three groups of people, who were there on different occasions. Why do people think their experince is the only possibility?

 

[straitman]

I agree Princess Fiona. This thread is starting to do my head in.

Remaining OT for just a moment.

As a mod this thread is doing my head in :!:

 

[OzEire]

I too have got a F lounge visit coming up, early morning. I might have to take a video round the lounge AND an audio recording of my asking a staff person if there is self serve available then, or not, and post them.

The emoji strongly hints that you are joking but please don't record anyone (and certainly don't post it) unless you have their permission.

Back on topic, I too am eagerly awaiting an official response.

 

[mannej]

The emoji strongly hints that you are joking but please don't record anyone (and certainly don't post it) unless you have their permission.

Back on topic, I too am eagerly awaiting an official response.

Yes I do wonder what the surveillance act implications of this would be in VIC.

 

[FrustratedQP]

Yes I do wonder what the surveillance act implications of this would be in VIC.

Unless the legislation has changed, in the Mel Flounge, only one person party to the conversation needs to be aware that it is being recorded and in the Syd Flounge, without warrant, all persons party to the conversation are required to be aware that it is being recorded.

 

[RooFlyer]

Unless the legislation has changed, in the Mel Flounge, only one person party to the conversation needs to be aware that it is being recorded and in the Syd Flounge, without warrant, all persons party to the conversation are required to be aware that it is being recorded.

Yes that's my understanding of the respective legislations . It's awareness, not permission.

I was half joking above, but may ask the question!

 

[Hvr]

Unless the legislation has changed, in the Mel Flounge, only one person party to the conversation needs to be aware that it is being recorded and in the Syd Flounge, without warrant, all persons party to the conversation are required to be aware that it is being recorded.

Given airports are on Federal land surely Federal laws would apply rather than state laws?

 

[medhead]

Splutter - but! That just can't be true! Some-one here has called Qantas and has been told that its always available :shock: . You, serfty and all the others who have reported 'not available sometimes' are all in it together, right?

Point of order, madame speaker. They were told that they put it out as soon as there were enough guests, which is not the same as always available. They were also told that they do this everyday. But with the requirement for there to be enough customers before they put out the self service wine, even that is not the same as always available.

Ok...so I just rang the first lounge in Melbourne...took me 2 seconds, and asked them if the wines are available for self serve every day, and her response was that yes, every single day !...no exception...and often they are put out as soon as there are enough guests, so from the early hours......so your perception that they were not out was incorrect. (as were all the others who were unaware of this)

 

[amaroo]

Remaining OT for just a moment.

As a mod this thread is doing my head in :!:

I agree.

In lieu of any official confirmation. Is it a fair assumption to assume the issue (RSA) is limited to Jetstar Dom flights departing from INT ports?

 

[Ansett]

I agree.

In lieu of any official confirmation. Is it a fair assumption to assume the issue (RSA) is limited to Jetstar Dom flights departing from INT ports?

I would suspect rather strongly that your assumption is correct and the lack of response from QF only stands to confirm this. On that basis that would suggest that ALL domestic flights would be subject to this RSA and limit to drinks. Taking this further this would also extend to on-board service too.

 

[JohnK]

Did they help you to the plane afterwards?

Why do people think that is a lot to drink and leaves you paralytic?

It's not a one size fits all.

 

[RooFlyer]

Point of order, madame speaker. They were told that they put it out as soon as there were enough guests, which is not the same as always available. They were also told that they do this everyday. But with the requirement for there to be enough customers before they put out the self service wine, even that is not the same as always available.

Well, OK

 

[FrustratedQP]

Given airports are on Federal land surely Federal laws would apply rather than state laws?

OT for sure. As there is no Federal Legislation with regard to listening devices, it cannot be inconsistent with State Legislation, ergo, state legislation applies.

 

[medhead]

Well, OK

There is also a pesky little "often" in there as well. Often is not exactly the same as always.

 

[footy99]

I agree.

In lieu of any official confirmation. Is it a fair assumption to assume the issue (RSA) is limited to Jetstar Dom flights departing from INT ports?

50-50. The main alternative being a particular employee misunderstanding their RSA training and thus incorrectly applying it on various occasions outlined here.

100-1 on either of those being admitted in an official capacity - thus the official silence on the matter.

 

[FrustratedQP]

50-50. The main alternative being a particular employee misunderstanding their RSA training and thus incorrectly applying it on various occasions outlined here.

100-1 on either of those being admitted in an official capacity - thus the official silence on the matter.

I agree, if every Licenced premises in Australia, applied the same 'RSA rules' there would be no need for designated drivers, RBT, etc, it's not about the amount of alcohol consumption that on average, results in a particular blood alcohol level, it's about behaviour and being affected or not affected. I am very experienced in observing alcohol intake -v- behaviour and I can tell you the variation is huge. That's why RSA is about behaviour and not intake. If your staff/managers don't understand that, then perhaps it's time for a refresher course.