Firstly Elroy: wish I'd read your post earlier, have just posted on the topic "Qantas pilot recruitment" and our views are very similar
EW Loco: always great to hear from you, amazingly articulate even for an "adopted" Taswegian (think about that, meant to be a compliment!)
Even Jetstar can change - remember how in the early days it was "the way to go" (according to AJ) to have non-allocated seating, now seating is allocated.
They have screwed up with Jetstar Intl, keeping people captive and hungry for a (max) 5 hour domestic flight you can get away with, sectors of 10+ are another thing.
The evolution may well be:
-Jetstar Intl will go to free meals and "improve" the service in Business Class, the quality and quantity of the said nourishment TBC;
- GD will increasingly be quoted as saying "Qantas can no longer absorb losses on the xxx-xxx route but we are happy that we will still service or loyal customers from within the QANTAS group with the benefits of...."
That does NOT have to necessarily be Jetstar btw! - why not Australian Airlines, Jetstar Asia, Jitkinnekt or even NatJets - all part of the Qantas GROUP??
I agree with Elroy - the aim is low cost salary, NOT low cost airline and Jetstar (and the other options available) will be utilised as required and one day the QF "mainline" brand will be dominant again but at a lower cost base.
EWLoco a question if I may - I know airline tickets pretty "liberal" regarding the obligation of airlines to fulfill their "contract" however, for example using your quoted situation of substituting Jetstar Intl for Qantas IF it could be shown that QF (or the CE in particular, that's where the buck should stop)) sold a seat on a full service airline KNOWING, or having REASONABLE INTENT that there would be a substitution to a non full-service airline, isn't that out and out misrepresentation to the consumer and hence deemed illegal??
A job for Slater & Gordon (or similar)??
Regards to all.