TBIT 'Qantas' Business Lounge - extremely confused, as are staff

[LordChaos]

Strictly speaking, I think the correct terminology for the TBIT Business lounge is that it is "a oneworld lounge, operated by Qantas."

I suspect that is the case - the multiple levels of misdirection appear to stump even Qantas themselves - as witnessed by the fact they had to 'place me on hold for a discussion' before being able to answer the access question (in the affirmative, as noted above)

 

[Princess Fiona]

I was initially denied entry to the TBIT J Lounge in June.
WP flying QF J LAX-JFK.
The agent (female) stated that I had to use the F Lounge and wasn't permitted to access a different lounge as my BP had already been scanned.
Refused to accept anything that I said to the contrary. She eventually stated that as the lounge wasn't busy (it was 7am) that she would allow me to look around for 5 minutes. This was after I said I hadn't been there and just wanted to look around.
While I was in there the First Host came to speak to me and apologise for the error at the door.
Truly bizarre and should never have happened.

 

[serfty]

Another report on FT of being denied:

Originally Posted by no2chem
I was denied access today to the oneworld lounge at LAX TBIT. I was flying on an AA domestic itinerary, but I have oneworld sapphire with airberlin gold, which should grant me access.

I have been granted access in the past (as recently as last Friday) , but I usually fly in the evenings when the dragons are trying to keep the lines down. I took the name of the dragon down, he eventually showed me some email that said all domestic itineraries have no access, but this seems contrary to oneworld rules.

Question is, who do I complain to? AA (operating carrier), AB (ffp), QF (lounge op) or oneworld? Anyone had this happen to them before? Maybe I'm in the wrong here?

 

[Ewing]

5 years ago was a very different lounge arrangement at TBIT - one in which experienced elites avoided the TBIT lounges altogether.

Indeed.

I'd usually arrive on AA into T4 and would stay in the Flagship lounge as long as possible.

The lounges (both VA and QF) are quite pleasant these days.

 

[serfty]

Also, a discussion point from FT as well:

Originally Posted by London Dude
Oneworld's own press release on the new LAX lounge states that:

"The new Business Lounge is available to passengers booked in First or Business Class on oneworld airlines departing from the terminal, or customers holding Emerald or Sapphire status in any oneworld member airline's frequent flyer programme booked in any cabin on a oneworld member airline flight from the terminal."

So they can deny you entry if your OW flight leaves from a different terminal but not if you're on a domestic OW flight departing from that terminal....

https://www.oneworld.com/news-inform...unge/maximized

 

[opusman]

The oneworld lounge access rules are here : https://www.oneworld.com/ffp/lounge-access. There are no exceptions or terminal-specific rules relating to the LAX lounge listed. I'm guessing the press release was written before any-terminal access at LAX was allowed.

 

[serfty]

The oneworld lounge access rules are here : https://www.oneworld.com/ffp/lounge-access. There are no exceptions or terminal-specific rules relating to the LAX lounge listed. I'm guessing the press release was written before any-terminal access at LAX was allowed.

No doubt - however, going forward I suspect it more than likely the web page you quoted gets changed ...

... note that AA are sending several domestic flights out of TBIT these days ...

 

[dfcatch]

The email from AA is correct - however it refers to AA elites (who are indeed ineligible for lounge access when on domestic itineraries).

However the dragons have misinterpreted this as being "AA pax", of course the email could have been poorly written as well.

Probably written by one of those high-quality US Airways staff members.

 

[serfty]

A copy of "the email" was posted on FT today. There is a serious disconnect somewhere.

Originally Posted by sisamouth
I had a domestic flight out of LAX on AA about a week ago. I am a Citi AAdvantage Executive Platinum card holder, but was not allowed in the OneWorld Business lounge. I was told that this was because my flight was domestic and not international. The clerk provided me with a copy of this email as proof of their policy:

From: <Author> <...@qantas.com.au>
Subject: Lounge Access
Date: September 17, 2015 at 12:06 PM
To: QantasFirst <[email protected]>, <...hallmark-aviation.com>, conciergeoneworldlounge <[email protected]>, ... <[email protected]>, ...<...@hallmark-aviation.com>
Cc: ...<[email protected]>, ...<[email protected]>, ... <...@qantas.com.au>, ...<[email protected]>, ...<...@hallmark-aviation.com>, ...<[email protected]>

Hello Everyone,

I understand that there is some increasing confusion around lounge access, particularly in the mornings with American Airlines and other domestic flights. The AA website and access policy is a little contradictory, but this is a Qantas Lounge. I had a phone call with <redacted> this morning to clarify.

In a nut shell

• Any one on an AA or other OW Domestic flight, originating their journey in LAX regardless of status or cabin to be flown, does NOT have access to the Qantas First or Business Lounges.

• If an eligible guests has come in on an international flight (i.e. from Australia) and has a connecting flight on a oneworld carrier they are eligible to use one of the lounges.

• If we witness or know of a passenger soliciting to eligible guests attempting to gain lounge access we are to deny access to that person. Same goes for people saying that their colleague will be coming shortly can they come in, they must wait till the eligible member arrives.

• If someone bullies or forces their way into the lounge we have Jeff's full support to call the Airport Police to have this person(s) removed from the lounges and contact the Qantas Duty Manager to inform them of our actions.

It is important that we protect the integrity of the lounges and to not dilute the experience of those that are genuinely eligible. By allowing all and sundry in we compromise the service and product that we offer and cannot recover costs form other airlines when we allow extras in who do not have access.

When I return from Sydney in a couple of weeks we will hold some team briefings and training sessions so that we are ready when the connector tunnel opens between T4 and TBIT.

Shouldn't I have had access to this lounge?

 

[grussellt]

I think <Redacted: name of email Author> should preferably refer to the LAX lounge as "International Business Lounge operated by Qantas/British Airways/Cathay Pacific" as declared on the Qantas website. Of course it is also referred to as "oneworld Los Angeles Lounge" on the oneworld site.

 

[serfty]

I have redacted the names ...

This very paragraph contravenes Qantas' own published rules:

...
The AA website and access policy is a little contradictory, but this is a Qantas Lounge ...

• Any one on an AA or other OW Domestic flight, originating their journey in LAX regardless of status or cabin to be flown, does NOT have access to the Qantas First or Business Lounges.

Lounge Locations | North America | Los Angeles International Airport Tom Bradley Terminal | International Business


[TABLE="class: basic"]
[TR]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Eligible oneworld Status[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Emerald[/TH]
[TD]Next onward flight that day must be on a oneworld operated and marketed flight.#
One guest allowed and must be travelling on a oneworld operated and marketed flight.#[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: alt"]
[TH]Sapphire[/TH]
[TD]Next onward flight that day must be on a oneworld operated and marketed flight.#
One guest allowed and must be travelling on a oneworld operated and marketed flight.#[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

and

[TABLE="class: basic"]
[TR]
[TH="colspan: 2"]Eligible Qantas Members[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Platinum One Frequent Flyer[/TH]
[TD]Next onward flight must be on a Qantas, Jetstar Airlines+ or oneworld operated and marketed flight.#
One guest allowed and must be travelling with the member on the same flight.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: alt"]
[TH]Platinum Frequent Flyer[/TH]
[TD]Next onward flight must be on a Qantas^, Jetstar Airlines+ or oneworld operated and marketed flight.#
One guest allowed and must be travelling with the member on the same flight.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Gold Frequent Flyer[/TH]
[TD]Next onward flight that day must be on a Qantas^, Jetstar Airlines+ or oneworld operated and marketed flight.#
One guest allowed and must be travelling with the member on the same flight.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="class: alt last"]
[TH]Qantas Club Member[/TH]
[TD]Next onward flight that day must be a Qantas, or Jetstar Airlines+ flight number.
One guest allowed and must be travelling with the member on the same flight.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

+ Jetstar refers to Jetstar (JQ), Jetstar Asia (3K) and Valuair (VF). # A oneworld marketed flight refers to a flight with a oneworld flight number, eg QF1 or AA222. A oneworld operated flight refers to the actual aircraft or 'metal' on which you fly, eg Finnair aircraft. Note: Complimentary invitations cannot be used in the Los Angeles oneworld lounge.

 

[blackcat20]

Any one on an AA or other OW Domestic flight, originating their journey in LAX regardless of status or cabin to be flown, does NOT have access to the Qantas First or Business Lounges.

They really dont understand the access rules to their own lounge. No wonder there is so much confusion, and people being incorrectly denied. We had no issue entering on a domestic AA flight (a T4 flight too) and thats the way it should be. The lounge is dead during the day anyway (I think I saw two other people) so its not like its a crowd control issue.

 

[serfty]

They really dont understand the access rules to their own lounge. No wonder there is so much confusion, and people being incorrectly denied. We had no issue entering on a domestic AA flight (a T4 flight too) and thats the way it should be. The lounge is dead during the day anyway (I think I saw two other people) so its not like its a crowd control issue.

Unfortunately, for many USA denizens, AA IS oneworld and can be used interchangeably.

Most of these 'early' morning PAX travelling AA would indeed likely be AAdvantage elite travelling domestic and indeed do not have access. They seem to have thrown the baby (in the form of non AA *O elites) out with the bathwater ...

 

[Princess Fiona]

With the mention of the tunnel I suspect what will happen is that you'll require a BP for a TBIT flight to access the Lounges there.

Just realized that's pretty much exactly what the original OW press release stated.

 

[Princess Fiona]

They really dont understand the access rules to their own lounge. No wonder there is so much confusion, and people being incorrectly denied. We had no issue entering on a domestic AA flight (a T4 flight too) and thats the way it should be. The lounge is dead during the day anyway (I think I saw two other people) so its not like its a crowd control issue.

I agree with you there. It's rather disappointing that an email from some reasonably high ranking QF people has so many basic errors and incorrect assumptions about lounge access.

 

[grussellt]

It could be that the tunnel will be a sort of new challenge for those aspirants who think they can climb up to the heights of an International Business Lounge from the depths of an Admirals Club. The losers will have their card marked "ineligible - likely to dilute the experience of genuine customers".

 

[serfty]

I agree with you there. It's rather disappointing that an email from some reasonably high ranking QF people has so many basic errors and incorrect assumptions about lounge access.

Unfortunately, for many USA denizens, AA IS oneworld and can be used interchangeably.

Most of these 'early' morning PAX travelling AA would indeed likely be AAdvantage elite travelling domestic and indeed do not have access. They seem to have thrown the baby (in the form of non AA *O elites) out with the bathwater ...

They would see many more AAdvantage elites trying to use the lounge than non AA *O elites; so the letter with it's broad stroke would likely be correct most of the time.

 

[Princess Fiona]

They would see many more AAdvantage elites trying to use the lounge than non AA *O elites; so the letter with it's broad stroke would likely be correct most of the time.

The email makes perfect sense if it's referring to AAdvantage Plat/Exp members.
I suppose we don't know if there's more to it or its part of a chain of emails about AAdvantage elites. Knowing the way the Lounge staff can operate and having had first hand experience of this, they'd need to make it pretty clear to them that this is referring ONLY to AA elites and does not apply to other *O elites. One of the posters on FT was denied access with AB Gold when they clearly should have had access.

 

[serfty]

With the mention of the tunnel I suspect what will happen is that you'll require a BP for a TBIT flight to access the Lounges there.

Just realized that's pretty much exactly what the original OW press release stated.

Yep "from the Terminal" is mentioned: https://www.oneworld.com/news-infor...zxhd/content/new-los-angeles-lounge/maximized

The email makes perfect sense if it's referring to AAdvantage Plat/Exp members.
I suppose we don't know if there's more to it or its part of a chain of emails about AAdvantage elites. Knowing the way the Lounge staff can operate and having had first hand experience of this, they'd need to make it pretty clear to them that this is referring ONLY to AA elites and does not apply to other *O elites. One of the posters on FT was denied access with AB Gold when they clearly should have had access.

I closely looked at that - in the terse world of today, it is simply:

Subject: Lounge Access

 

[dfcatch]

The email IS referring to AA elites as that is what the issue is and where it originated from.

The author - used lazy sloppy wording and subsequently created even more confusion with the poor agents.

Serfty - would you mind PM'ing the name of the author?

I am meeting with LAX lounge management next week so I will address the issue directly.