View Full Version : The Qantas dilemma: still your national carrier?

Transition Layer
7th Dec 2009, 09:08
While I appreciate the Moderators get a bit fed up with the huge number of Qantas threads running at any time, I think this may deserve a new one.

The Qantas dilemma: still your national carrier?
December 07, 2009

Qantas is in the process of reinventing itself, if you believe the company's own hype. It has spent millions on a customer service training centre in Sydney; at least on domestic routes to begin with, it is in the process of redefining the customer check-in experience to radically reduce the time it takes.

It sees the main brand as a premium carrier, complemented by Jetstar as a cheap alternative, with the group able to offer something for each part of the market.

But, particularly for long-haul travel, I'm wondering whether the Qantas group has already lost the battle for Australian hearts and minds.
The combined Qantas group share of the market is now below 30% on international routes from Australia, where once its share was nearer 50% (admittedly in the much more regulated old days). Its market share continues to shrink in spite of the invention of Jetstar, which was designed to increase it.

On the US route, Qantas is being clobbered by new capacity from V Australia and Delta, although Qantas still has the lion's share.

Between here and Europe, Qantas is being swamped, not only by traditional rivals like Singapore Airlines, which continues methodically and relentlessly to increase its Australia market share (in spite of this year's pause caused by the global slowdown), but also by the new Arabian Gulf carriers, Emirates, Etihad and Qatar.

More than a million Australians - about 20% of everyone heading overseas - are going to Europe, but only 40% of them to English-speaking Europe (that is, the UK).

Yet Qantas now has only two European destinations where it flies its own planes - London and the German business capital, Frankfurt.

Its key competitors have far more comprehensive European networks. Emirates, for example, now has more than 20 European cities.

In the past two decades, Qantas has axed Manchester, Paris, Rome and Athens - not because it couldn't fill its planes on those routes, but because there weren't enough business travellers to make those routes pay.

Jetstar plans to return to Rome and Athens. But I think Jetstar will not only struggle to find acceptance from Australians if it flies to Europe, but also needs to tap new markets for visitors to Australia - and most (though not all) of those are in Northern Europe. Think Spain, Germany's many big regional cities, Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Ireland -- countries from where travel to Australia is already (or potentially) the strongest.

Do you think of Qantas if you're heading to Europe? How would Jetstar go against Singapore Airlines and Emirates? Has the horse already bolted, particularly since its chief low-cost rival, AirAsiaX, already flies daily to London and has just secured rights to fly to Paris?

I'm up to reading comment number 20 out of 269 and every one has been anti-QF.

7th Dec 2009, 09:46
Maybe Clive Dorman will have a crack at Westpac next....after all they are
"not the Jetstar of Banking" (http://www.theage.com.au/business/were-not-the-jetstar-of-banking-westpac-20091207-key5.html)

stubby jumbo
7th Dec 2009, 10:46
Strewth !

I just finished trawling through nearly 300 of the Blog posts from todays SMH Travel blog of QF.

I counted about 12 in favour.

I off to take a Bex .......and have a good lie down !

'Hope Dixon reads it- his overwhelming endorsement should be a great boost to his ego........NOT:mad::mad::mad:

Eastwest Loco
7th Dec 2009, 11:17
My mainly high end Corporate clients, who generally choose premium Y or Business class prefer the rat - the comfy old shoe as I do.

There has been some leakage to quality overseas players simply due to price, but if QF provides a price they can justify to management, that is where they will roost.

Transition Layer, whether they are good or bad (and they generally are pretty damned good overall) the great white rat and its ladies and gentlemen is still home. It is ours and we are theirs.

Try EK during Rammadam and get the raghead crew on your side of the cabin in J class - no munchies for X hours and bouncing off everything with total confusion. Garuda's delightful but confused service anytime. Air Pacific - are we there yet? What was the question but lovely.

No Airline is perfect, but we know what he have with the Rat, and I will personally attest that I like it and it is the direction my bum will be heading if a seat is available.

Best regards


7th Dec 2009, 11:55
Dixon is the criminal that got away.

Question is why do the QF share holders allow the criminals on the current board to get away with it. i.e. paying Dixons extra bonus due to change of tax rules.

(My grandfather never used to pay so much tax, maybe we can go to his ex employers and ask them to pay the difference between todays tax and what it was when he started working. What do you think):ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

7th Dec 2009, 12:28
As an expat living in Germany I am surprised at the lack of advertising done here by the QF group. We are swamped with EK,ETIHAD, Turkish Airlines et al, but no QF. My family and I flew here SQ in J class. Very disappointing experience, if QF had the real lie flat seats in J it would have been the rat definitely.

SQ J class was, in my opinion, sub standard and I had a better run with the rat in 08 when flown here for the interview.

Our son just returned home after flying from SY and he was full of praise for the CC and the service he received. Although an aircraft change from 2 class 744 to 3 class 744 saw a glitch with his exit row booking out of FRA. The reissue was mishandled by the 'computer' but the check in supervisor in FRA smoothed everything and the CC on the FRA/SIN leg looked after him really well.

So it will be the taste of home for us on our trips back to Australia.

teresa green
8th Dec 2009, 04:02
There is one thing never mentioned in these posts about the Rat. That is the Govt. of the day, can at any time day or night, demand that QF be made available in the name of national security. I know this has been the case since and probably before WW2. They can overide the unions, the shareholders, and God forbid, the TSV refueller if necessary, though I don't know just how many tech and cabin crew would be excited at being hauled out of their beds, and made fly to a warzone or whatever the emergency. So if the Rat shrinks to a mouse, who takes over? You can only cram so many troops into the Hercs etc, as was the case when QF 707s became troop carriers during Vietnam. Not that its likely, but the Govt have never given up that right, and I doubt have any plans to do so. Off the forum a bit I know, but something I find interesting.:confused:

Transition Layer
8th Dec 2009, 04:18
Has anyone from the FAAA (and I know there's a few of you out there) thought about publishing some of the unfavourable comments in your newsletter?

Whilst we all agree that cutbacks and some poor decisions by bonus-hungry management have played their part, the number of comments following this article referring to surly, rude, inattentive flight attendants is astonishing.

If some Cabin Crew hate the job so much that it affects the level of service they provide, then they simply shouldn't be there. The future of the airline and therefore the future of thousands of other jobs depends heavily on those people walking up and down the aisle every day.

8th Dec 2009, 05:02
TL, unfortunately publishing those comments in a newsletter will do nothing to change the attitude of those responsible for them.
Those sort of people, whilst in a minority, really do give us all a bad name.
I'm sure most of them do get challenged about their attitude from time to time, but rarely would it get onto their personal record unless a passenger actually names them in a complaint.
Ground staff also have their share of staff with such an attitude.

8th Dec 2009, 05:53
the FAAA doesnt need to publish the comments of a few disgruntled anonymous passengers. The vast majority of crew do an outstanding job under very challenging circumstances. Speclal meals ordered and not turning up, sub standard food from catering, insufficient catering, In flight Entertainment not working, seats not reclining, seating requests not met, frequent flyer points unable to be redeemed, old broken aircraft, and criminals managing the company in some cases. Ie Freight fraud, ripping off owners (shareholders) APA bid etc.

When the things that are out of the control of the flight attendants are working ok, then perhaps you might be able to have a crack at the crew. As i said before its a handful of crew that dont give a rats anymore.... if ever, and that's not uncommon in any workplace. Managing them out of the business is the responsibility of the OBM's and Cabin Crew Management not the FAAA elected officials.

Cabin crew do an amazing job in spite of successive incompetent management types who trawl the corridors with clip boards in hand trying to find a hair out of place or a shoe heel too high.

Going Boeing
8th Dec 2009, 06:48
A source recently told me that there is a type of manager that has been identified as a "blocker". Joyce has had a few consultants going through the management structure for a while now and they have created a list of all the "blockers" that are preventing effective two-way communication between senior management and workers. Those who suspect that they are on the list should start looking for a new job because the axe will fall soon.

All up, I'm starting to get a bit of confidence about the direction that Joyce wants to take the airline (& I freely admit that I was originally disapointed about his getting the CEO gig). He is spending time (& money) on mainline, reinventing the premium product, whereas his predecessor was totally focused on Jetstar.

I agree with TG about the reserve military capability that Qantas provides for the Australian Government. I understand that the Qantas B707's had a few extra features that made them more suitable for troop transportation than the standard aircraft and the current widebody fleets would be very effective in support of any large scale military deployment. A good example of this is the way that the British used civilian aircraft and ships to support the deployment to the South Atlantic during the Falklands War. The QF LH Certified Agreement even has a section on flying in Warlike circumstances. V Oz B777's would be able to provide a similar capability but I don't know if there is any provision to make the capability available to the government.

8th Dec 2009, 06:54


Whilst not as far from home as you, I agree your sentiments re QF (:ok:) and SQ (:hmm:).

I don't care how "cute" the F/As are, as long as they have proper catering for me (:mad:) and I can actually see the movie on my PTV screen (:mad::mad:).

So far QF 2, SQ 0 on those (pretty simple) criteria.

Pegasus 747,

Cabin crew do an amazing job in spite of successive incompetent management types


ditch handle
8th Dec 2009, 08:05
source recently told me that there is a type of manager that has been identified as a "blocker". Joyce has had a few consultants going through the management structure for a while now and they have created a list of all the "blockers" that are preventing effective two-way communication between senior management and workers.

Going Boeing,

You've described everybody in cabin crew management.

Most of my CC colleagues have resigned themselves to the fact that nothing will change with the toxic, self serving and ideologically driven nature of our department.

Your post will give hope.......

Transition Layer
8th Dec 2009, 10:02
509 comments now...including this one from the author of the original article:

Phew! I have never experienced anything quite like this in four decades in the journalism business - an avalanche of reaction against the national carrier. It wasn't pre-meditated on my part: at 9am on Monday (07/12/09) - two hours before the blog went live - I had not even decided what the subject was. I had simply thought to steer the discussion towards Qantas's coverage of Europe in view of its new, ferocious competition. I suspect Qantas management has already detected disenchantment in its market research, but I'd suggest this blog adds to its intelligence in an alarming way. There was no "push-polling" in the way reaction to this blog was solicited. On the other hand, people don't generally respond to a blog in such numbers if they're happy little Vegemites. The early indications are that this is one of the largest online audiences ever attracted to a travel blog at this site. - CLIVE DORMAN.

8th Dec 2009, 12:00
Here in Germany I can find as many people who can find fault with Lufthansa, complaints of poor service, mucked up check in, poor food, etc. as there are in Australia complaining about QF.

My recent flight to Paris was a dog's breakfast on the return leg. Checked in on line to be told at the gate that the 4 aisle seats we reserved were no longer available. Why? - Change of aircraft with fewer seats. When we insisted that there must be some available as we had gone from an A321 to A319 due poor load, yep there were. We arrived early which threw the LH system into chaos - parked on the cargo apron at FRA (which is about 5ks from the LH arrival gate) and bussed to the terminal. End result our 20 minute early arrival turned out to be 5 minutes late at the gate! None of this was relayed to the pax until just before the doors opened. AND the CC were the first off the aircrfat to sit in the nice new crew bus whilst we wandered over to the PAX bus, incluidng the lady with the baby, toddler and carriage, all without help or guidance from the LH groundies or CCs.

So every airline has its problems, just some make the news more than others. Bashing QF in Australia is a bit like bashing the Dockers in Perth, mostly to be ignored and largely full of fabrication. (well maybe not in the case of the Dockers!!)

8th Dec 2009, 13:55
Here in Germany I can find as many people who can find fault with Lufthansa, complaints of poor service, mucked up check in, poor food, etc. as there are in Australia complaining about QF.

Likewise Poms in the UK - bagging BA is a national sport. Lots of them reckon the sun shines out of the Rat's freckle.

8th Dec 2009, 16:58
For a Pom, anything British is fair game for bagging.

I hope Qantas does get its act together again. I don't think Joyce has a choice. He has to stop the bleeding. It used to be that Qantas could be relied upon for generally ontime flights, clean aircraft and for making long, tedious international flights somewhat palatable and almost pleasant, but then Dixon came along.....and after experiencing a series of long delayed and diverted flights with missed connections, U/S inflight services and cut-to-the-bone cabin services, I took my money and my bum elsewhere. It looks like a lot of other people did too.

Unfortunately for Qantas, the airlines I use now don't need to do much to retain my loyalty. If I'm indicative of the pre-Dixon era customer who was pushed out, then it's going to cost Qantas the equivalent of Dixon's bonus or more and a lot of time to get disenchanted customers back again.

qf 1
8th Dec 2009, 17:28
if the blokers days are up I O days are numbered,he cost the company 160 m with that LAME dispute,or is he like Joe Tripodi,a cockroach that never dies

9th Dec 2009, 03:23
I have read all of the posts on that blog.
In reality,my 'grain-of-salt-meter' would put it like this:

20% of posts = competitor input
20% of posts = disgruntled QF staff or ex-staff
20% of posts = bagging for the sake of bagging (as a society,we are now whinging more than the POMS)

So that leaves 40% of posts possibly from actual customers. That is still a serious problem if our customers think that way about us. Joyce really has to do something about it.I work every trip with angry crew (cabin and tech) who really no longer give a toss. Yes we are all responsible for our motivation,but really management need to take some responsibility for crew motivation as well.There are simple things which are low-cost that could increase morale:

Increased flexibility in rosters
Better, less expensive and more flexible staff travel (it's only an empty seat) And fairness-why do tech crew get first class travel and not cabin crew :rolleyes:
Opportunities for promotion or moving to other departments (currently non-existent in the cabin crew world)
Development opportunities (yes we all did the exceptional program-WOW that really changed my life:ugh:)
Managers who REALLY understand what our job is about (not someone recently poached from Coles)
A bit of compassion for personal circumstances

A great lecturer at a university I once went to said "the principle of managing a customer service environment is if your staff are generally happy, then your customers will be too".
I fear my manager,if she wants to speak to me then I know I am in trouble-I avoid her like the plague. And the CSSs and CSMs are so focussed on how you wear your badges/hair/makeup,they dont actually see how well you do your job.They have to fill in a thousand pieces of paper every flight.It really is a poisonous environment to work in.And led by managers that have never even been in the role:mad: By the time I have done a 14hr sector to JNB,been blasted about what and what is not procedure, written up at for not having a oneworld badge or using a waiters cloth I dont really have enough energy for the customers.Sometimes great service makes up for the fact I forgot to put a oneworld badge on,but not at Qantas-they will turn someone happy to deliver great service into 'I dont give a toss' over a f*ckin badge !!!!! :mad:. It really is a micro-focussed cabin crew department, they never see the big picture -do the customers care if you forgot a badge?:ugh:

I'm not saying management can make every individual happy every day,but it seems no-one is happy anymore,and the customers,therefore the sahreholders,arent either.

There needs to be a massive,total change in the way managers do things.Cos everyone (customers,crew,groundstaff) are miserable at the moment:{

9th Dec 2009, 04:22
And fairness-why do tech crew get first class travel and not cabin crew

Only captains do. Duty travel is a different story.

Why? Probably because its part of their award. Maybe because they have earned it. Sometimes some positions like it or not have a pecking order.

I wish I could get it on staff travel too.

stubby jumbo
9th Dec 2009, 04:33
......agree CE.

Whatever happened to the 90's management buzz word-EMPOWERMENT.

I still remember Greg Bee banging on about this in between his "revelation"-Pan Am diagram.

I'm not going to go into my usual tirade against CC management( if you're interested ....its in my past rants). As CE said -IF at least 40% of punters have written into this blog. Thats still heaps who have bothered to do it ! There is a massive amount of frustration coming through, In fact I really think they want to like Qantas-but can't bring themselves to do it because they've had it beaten out of them by poor service ( I'll include CC in the mix there !), delayed flights, abysmal IFE, crap (Perry) food and a bothched fleet renewal program (777:ugh:)

Where to from here?

Hell, its not going to be easy. Just walking around the Q Buildings precinct yesterday.....with staff eyes looking down-no eye contact, no smiling-just get out of my way !:hmm:

Qantas staff need to feel good about themselves and proud to work for the Aussie airline again.

Its going to take a great deal of Leadership, Trust and confidence building.

The Dixon era has left massive scars right through this once proud airline. The best thing now is that he is GONE.

We are better than the Asian /Arab airlines..........but please can management get out of their offices and away from their KPI spreadsheets-walk the talk, get out on board or in the operation and finally STOP with the constant berating, beatings and negativity.

Then......we may be able to get the Rat back to a place where we can be proud to talk about it .

9th Dec 2009, 04:40
And fairness-why do tech crew get first class travel and not cabin crew

Like all benefits contained within the award, it has been achieved through negotiation - in this case a number of years ago when negotiations were conducted in a less adversarial environment.

Is it important to you? Then take it to the FAAA along with the benefit you wish to trade in your next EBA negotiation.

9th Dec 2009, 05:52
Acutally, staff travel is a discretionary benefit, excluding duty travel - it rarely is included in EBAs.

One thing you may not know:

The executives (read basically any person who holds the term 'Manager' 'Head Of' or 'Executive') yeah, around about a few thousand of them, did not get any bonuses this last financial year gone. What they did get, however, is a new staff travel category that will now trounce any non-executive on staff travel (including Captains - even on a long-service or high priority trip). Not considered 'remmuneration', so no need to report it .... after all it is just a 'discretionary benefit'

Bout time everyone on staff travel could upgrade to any class, based solely on years of service, not position tiltle. It should be a benefit for those who dedicate years to the airline, not a benefit that gives managers (who have been there for a few months) ability to grab a seat before those who have been there for years.

Just another example of our 'transient' management featherering their nest:

Can't get a bonus? Let's make ourselves superior forever on staff travel instead:mad:

9th Dec 2009, 06:26
Award conditions aside, in many industries or companies it would not be unusual for the senior manager (frequently of 15-20 years' standing) in charge of a business unit containing assets worth several hundred million $$, having up to 20 direct reports and responsible for revenue and expenditure worth several hundred thousand $$ per day, to travel first-class on a work trip.

9th Dec 2009, 06:32
People.... You do not have to give away something in EBA negotiations...

9th Dec 2009, 07:03
Meanwhile, whilst you lot are discussing such mundane things as who gets to sit where, great things are happening up at the village in Brisbane.

I agree with the sentiment that Geoff Dixon has screwed QANTAS, and his successor Alan Joyce has a lot of work to do, but he doesn't have much time to repair the damage.

Expect an announcement from the village soon.

Watch this space..........:ok:

9th Dec 2009, 07:42
QF ceased to be the national carrier a long time ago, at least since the 1980's when the Federal Government removed its legislative monopoly protection as an Australian international carrier and hence it's domestic stranglehold on international air travel. The other change that occurred which everyone has lost sight of, has been the steady whittling away of the protection QF enjoyed from overseas carriers via the restriction access to international routes vis a vis overseas carriers. The Department of Transport has for years being increasing competitive pressure on QF on virtually all routes into and out of Australia by having to license more and more carriers to keep Australian access to overseas destinations. It is Catch 22 and the old QF or the more recent variant was never in a competitive situation vis a vis lean and mean carriers operating out of Asia and elsewhere. The rise and rapid growth of new international carriers such as Emirates who are able to gain entrance to the Australian market via new routes such as Oz-Arab Emirates, merely sealed the fate of QF. And in case you had not noticed the explosion in the corporate, bizjet world creamed off the high wealth customers everywhere and from everyone including QF. Don't see many CEO's of major global corps or their ilk travelling first or business class on a major airline do you?

You may not have liked Geoff Dixon's methods or him but his understanding of how the game had changed around the world and what this meant for QF was spot on. Want some parrallels - look at the state of every other legacy carrier in any country you like to name, they are all up the creek dependent on bail outs and mergers etc to continue to even trade, most of them are insolvent and have been for a long time. Who would have thought that the once virtually unassailable and proud JAL would be now looking for a merger partner outside of Japan?

Better get used to it guys, the world has changed, the QF we all knew is now part of history and if you want to savour that history then go to Longreach where it is all now being parked. This is not to condone the events, it is a very sobering state of affairs to realise that in embracing globalisation and that includes air travel we sold off the family silver then the farm. You can argue over minutae such as the quality or otherwise of the cabin service, etc., but the fatal blow caused by Dixon unwittingly was to begin to trash the people who made up QF and in the process trashed the brand loyalty in the process, you can't expect to make your staff's life a misery and then expect them not to transfer some of that angst to the customers, which they did in spades with predictable results.

And last but not least Jetstar is the future not QF because Jetstar like the Virgin is targeted at the real market for air travel, younger people, the less flush with cash and the time rich but penny poor. The dress differently , they colour the aeroplanes differently, the ticket and book differently and they do it in a way the technosavy younger generations understand and adapt to. Gen Y has no loyalty and no expectations exactly the sort of customer your mass marketer wants, you can dish out any crap, change the format and they will keep buying it as long as it is cheap.

As for the Big Ret Rat on International? Well to my knowledge no scheduled premier class start up has survived and prospered anywhere, so QF International will continue to diminish as it bleeds its business and first class customers to other carriers and to the corporate jet world. My guess is in about five years they will be lucky to have 15% of the international market especially once the Chinese really get going! If it was my business then I would damn well want Jetstar to prosper and hold onto the business being bled from QF by similarly modelled carriers.

stubby jumbo
9th Dec 2009, 08:08
...'some very astute observations grip-pipe.

Don't agree with all of it.....but your assessment is well put.

You mentioned China. I ( initially- reluctantly ) flew with Air China to PEK last month. I wanted a direct flight + Shanghai is now a terminator for QF.

I was very very impressed with Air China. Brand new kit-A330-200's. An Aussie pilot in the left hand seat on both sectors. Service-friendly and efficient, ontime, everything worked! Mix of punters onboard all appeared happy.

I chatted to the CSM equivalent in the galley-he said that Air China are working to the goal of being the #1 WORLD airline by 2017.


9th Dec 2009, 11:10
Grip-pipe in all respect mate I completely disagree with you. Those that live with/work with/are young Australians will attest that generation Y possess two chief characteristics; firstly young Australians are very patriotic and proud to be Australian, more so than those of yesteryear. Secondly, they rely upon status symbols/quality products to define themselves and are happy to pay for it (think of the iPhone). Because of such, Qantas should appeal to this generation as it a national icon and supposedly offers a quality product. However, Qantas mainline currently marginalises this market in its marketings and are therefore limiting its appeal. Should Qantas capitalise upon the “Australianess” of the brand, improve its hard product and embrace the younger market in its advertising campaigns it would be in a much healthier position.

9th Dec 2009, 14:18
his understanding of how the game had changed around the world and what this meant for QF was spot on I can't let that go. It's just BS. He cannibalised the airline and ran it as a cash cow (in order to sell it). Short term profit, long term agony- which is evident in the bind it finds itself in now (and going forward). A further key to its survival was its protection from competition- something most other legacy carriers do not have. Dixons "great leadership"? BS.
And last but not least Jetstar is the future not QF because Jetstar like the Virgin is targeted at the real market for air travel, younger people, the less flush with cash and the time rich but penny poor Really? You want to target market at people with no money?..............nope, thought about that and still don't get it.

The real issue is here so QF International will continue to diminish as it bleeds its business and first class customers to other carriersWhy wouldn't QF address why the moneyed customers are going elsewhere?
I have constantly questioned why the airline is moving toward lowering it's yield. Read the annual report. That is, ultimately, the only place the "Jetstar strategy", Dixons brilliant legacy, can take you.

dragon man
9th Dec 2009, 18:37
Spot on Ferris. GD will go down in QFs history as the greatest failure of a CEO we have ever had. The cost will be felt for many years and possibly we will never recover. The brand has been trashed well and truly and if Clifford thinks " by any measure Geoff did a great job" so we will give him $12mill then the problems are not going to be easily fixed and certainly not from board level.

9th Dec 2009, 20:20
7378FE, you mean the new ***/***. ******* and ***/** coming. I think most know about that by now. :ok:

9th Dec 2009, 23:24
Not another 777 rumour?:bored:

9th Dec 2009, 23:31
I am twenty something Australian and I can tell you I don’t like Qantas one bit. It may have been an Australian Icon in the past, but really is it anymore? The biggest joke I find is that at one point Virgin Blue actually had a higher Australian ownership rate than this supposed icon – so if I was really being patriotic I would have been flying Virgin (haven’t seen recent figures relating to Australian ownership).

If older people could get over the fact the Richard Branson own part of Virgin Blue, they might actually see that it is a majority Australian owned airline. I prefer to fly Virgin (and even Tiger) as I find they treat me well as a valued customer. Whenever I fly Qantas I always feel like that I should feel privileged to be there and that I’m just something the staff has to put up with.

You also claim that we rely upon status symbols/quality products to define ourselves – I don’t actually have an iPhone but I would like one. I actually want it for the fact it is a functionable piece of technology not just as a fashion piece. It may surprise you but I’m sure if this product didn’t work, people wouldn’t buy it. For Qantas to be able to sell itself under this guise they would actually have to offer a “quality” product. I have never flown Qantas internationally and I NEVER will (even though supposedly the A380 service is brilliant), because the offering on their DOMESTIC service is so poor I would never want to put up with that on a long-haul flight.

Also in my view Qantas should not try to capitalise upon the “Australianess” of its brand anymore than it already does (I’m not actually sure how they could try and do it anymore than they do). I actually think the fact it markets itself as so Australian is one of its biggest downfalls. The reason why everyone is so quick to bag Qantas is because it markets itself as so Australian. Virgin has its major maintenance done overseas as well, but no one ever talks about that – why? Because Virgin doesn’t bang on itself being the Sprit of Australia and other such nonsense.

10th Dec 2009, 06:36
When comparing the brands you have to remember that Virgin is not specific to either aviation OR Australia, whereas Qantas will only ever be associated with Australia and with aviation.

From an international perspective the two brands are very different. Living in Ireland, to me Virgin was either £99 seats to EWR or the short-lived LCC based in SNN. Qantas was the airline you flew when you wanted to go to Australia - you associated Qantas with Australia.

Virgin Blue may be largely Australian owned but the Virgin brand sure isn't.

10th Dec 2009, 07:07
From casualobserver:
I have never flown Qantas internationally and I NEVER will (even though supposedly the A380 service is brilliant), because the offering on their DOMESTIC service is so poor I would never want to put up with that on a long-haul flight

"Qantas' domestic offering is so poor" ,compared to who??? Virgin? JetStar?, Tiger?. Ever travelled domestically in America?

" I would never put up with that on a long-haul flight", well there is a difference between long-haul and short-haul ,believe it or not!

This concept is not unique for Qantas either.

Casualobserver, you obviously must be a well seasoned traveller to come up with those observations!:cool:

10th Dec 2009, 08:21
:ugh: :ugh::ugh: Enough said.

10th Dec 2009, 11:38
When listening to p.a. announcements from the flight deck, I get a tremendous sense of security hearing an Australian voice. I also prefer laid-back Australian service, rather than the formal service that comes from other cultures. Why? Because I'm Australian and that should be Qantas' biggest selling point to someone like me.

I fly annually between Europe and Australia, so not frequently, and while I like flying, I don't like the 24 hour Europe-Australia flight in Y class. In this situation the type of seat, the condition of the cabin, the attitude and attentivenes of the cabin crew and the standard of food outweigh the nationality of the crew.

In the last few years my partner and I have flown long-haul on Air France, Austrian, Cathay, B.A., Qantas, JAL, Malaysia, Emirates and Ethiad.

Of these, Qantas stands out as the worst experience and cost the most dollars - I pay for my own tickets. The flights left late because of tech problems, the cabins were the shabbiest, the Australian staff were disengaged, the IFE systems were the least reliable and had the smallest program choice - no individual screens on one flight from Melbourne to Tokyo - and the quality of the food was worst. I'm not fussy and I don't expect great things from Y class food, but the last Qantas meal I had was so bad it went uneaten.

I'd rather support the "national carrier" ahead of the other carriers I've tried by why would I when the others' product is better and costs less?

The Professor
10th Dec 2009, 15:31
"...you only have to step on board a flight from x to y on UA or AA and realize how impressive the Qantas domestic offering is."

Which is to say how much QF use perceived value to mask high operating costs. American carriers serve as a useful indicator of where QF domestic service is heading.

Of course, the coming real collapse will render all these arguments as irrelevant.

Joyce's Armageddon warning (http://www.theage.com.au/national/joyces-armageddon-warning-20091210-km90.html)

10th Dec 2009, 18:27
I might be the odd one out, but I'm one Australian who doesn't have an issue with US domestic airline services. I travel on them regularly and they really are a bus service (Jetstar?), but that's all they need to be They get passengers from point A to point B mostly on time and safely and passengers deal with them as commuter transport. When there's only one or two domestic flights a day from A to B, passengers have different expectations, but when there's 50 flights on 4 or 5 airlines and the flight time is only an hour or three, US passengers don't have much expectation for inflight or terminal services. Southwest Airlines has a very simple check-in process and acceptable flight services, makes a profit and continues to set the benchmark for domestic airline operations.

International flights of several hours duration are different. Passengers have different expectations. The degradation of Qantas international service was disappointing. There were cost savings to be achieved. Dixon went way too far and tried to make Y class into a cattle truck by applying the Jetstar model across the board. He and the board dug the hole and Joyce is trying to scramble back out before the hole gets deeper. It's good to see. Dixon wasn't going to stop until he ran out of dirt (or labor). I have confidence that Joyce is at least looking to make the company sustainable again.

IMHO, the biggest advantages Qantas international held was service, reputation, reliability, codeshare and route protection. The first three were pummelled under Dixon. The last two are being whittled away fast by competitors.

10th Dec 2009, 20:38
Two small addendums.

First my observations of Gen Y were meant as an example of changing markets and demographics. The great success in the growth of air travel over the past 30 years has been making cheap air travel available to more and more people. Personally I cast no aspersions on the younger generation but merely observe and it is perfectly understandable they have these attitudes because they have been progressively done over by their elders and various antisocial forms of managerialism that have flourished in the name of corporate excess; the very same people who expect both loyalty and respect but who never had to pay for their training, pay for their endorsements, be paid half of what their peers obtained for the same work and had expectations of secure employment. If they are in it for themselves that is because they have to be that is the world we unwittingly created for them.

Never said I admired either Dixon or his methods so if I could clarify he is representative of a breed of take no prisoner managers who have hollowed out company after company all over the world under the guise of shareholder value adding but merely enriched themselves doing it. But if you put the actions into context then the actions are defensible and feasible, because if Geoff had'nt done it then somebody else would have, simple.

Just QF once was gives it no entitlement to what is or what is to be not in todays world.;)

10th Dec 2009, 20:55
look at the state of every other legacy carrier in any country you like to name, they are all up the creek dependent on bail outs and mergers etc to continue to even trade, most of them are insolvent and have been for a long time :cool:Was Lufthansa a legacy carrier? They look in pretty good shape to me
they colour the aeroplanes differently I assume then if someone brings out a multi couloured rainbow painted aircraft you will be first in queue to get on:ugh:

I NEVER will (even though supposedly the A380 service is brilliant), because the offering on their DOMESTIC service is so poor I would never want to put up with that on a long-haul flight. Yeh, I hate it too. The fact that sitting in economy and actually getting a choice or meals and watching the television, getting a blanket or pillow if needed...

10th Dec 2009, 23:01
Last time I checked Qantas competed with Virgin Blue and Tiger on domestic services - not the American domestics - so who really cares how they compare to an American domestic carrier - if i was in America I certainly wouldn't be booking a Qantas domestic flight. Also I found it odd someone commented on the fact that I said I would never fly Qantas International because I dont like the Qantas Domestic Product. Yes, I understand the product will be different give the different nature of short-haul and long-haul (and even commented that I have heard good things about the A380 product), but the thing is, I would argue the vast majority of Australians will fly domestically before they fly internationally. The Qantas domestic product is what most Australians will judge Qantas on. If it is not up to standard (which I think it isn't especially when it is marketed as superior to the others) that does not give a good impression of Qantas Group as a whole. If the domestic product was upgraded and I did find it to be superior maybe I would consider flying Qantas interntaionally - but at the moment I know the domestic isn't too my liking, why would I waste a significant amount of money to fly them internationally?

I would argue Virgin Blue has a much superior domestic service than that offered by Qantas. In my opinion Virgin Blue has friendlier staff than Qantas who on the whole appear to actually enjoy their job. The inflight entertainment is streets ahead, including in the inflight magazine (The Qantas one is full of ads). The interior cabins are no where near as shabby and from what we have heard on here Virgin is getting ready to replace some of these planes already. I personally think the food service on Virgin is also superiror - most domestic flights in Australia aren't that long - you don't need a full meal and I'd rather have something that I know what i'm getting rather than a pot luck meal. I've personally found that Virgin has greater on time running than Qantas and actually apologies for their delays (20 mins late is still a delay in my opinon, Qantas usually acts like nothing happened). The other thing I enjoy when I fly Virgin Blue is that quite often we are allowed to disembark and board via the rear door, for the life of me I don't know why Qantas won't allow this to happen.

I won't argue Tiger has a superior product to Qantas, although the few flights I have had on Tiger have ran smoother and had better service than any flight i've had on Qantas. I will point out though, that their inflight magazine at half the size has probably 10 times the content of the Qantas magazine.

I wasn't actually going to post on this and only did so after someone commented on generation Y. The remark was I am the generation that Qantas should be focussing on to try and increase its business. I was just trying to say why my preference is not for Qantas and none of the responses have convinced me otherwise. Never have I said here that I am a seasoned traveller (I'm certainly not now, but in the future hope to be) and you can take my opinion as you will. Maybe my opinion is different to that of other people of my generation - but maybe it isn't and maybe its time Qantas took some notice.

Capt Kremin
10th Dec 2009, 23:51
A couple of days ago I paxed on a QF A330 to Perth. It was a clean, one year old internationally configured -200 with full IFE (working) that departed and arrived precisely on time. Lunch was served with a choice of meals and free beer and wine for Y class. The crew was a LH crew, they were efficient and friendly. The captain made brief but informative P.A's and the aircraft arrived safely and routinely. The bags arrived swiftly to the carousel.

It was hell I tell you.:ugh:

Before anyone gets started, yes I am aware that there can be delays and other problems. But if anyone on this particular flight found anything to complain about then I will just have to accept that there is just no pleasing some people.

11th Dec 2009, 05:02
I am sorry but I suspect there are a lot of cabin crew posting here or people who have no idea of the reality of the situation.

The service is crap repeat crap, the cabin crew generally consider you a burden (apologies to the good ones) they consider themselves 'safety staff' instead of serving the punters like they are supposed to, with a smile and without attitude. Qantas hasnt got a hope to compete with SIA or the like. It will continue to decline whilst this attitude remains, I for one am a little sad how bad it has become.

Dont shoot the messager but sometimes truth tastes bitter!

ditch handle
11th Dec 2009, 05:09
Granted that, Qantas staff don't do grovelling subservience very well.

Those who want [read need?] that style of service are always going to find the competition's offerings more to their liking.

We all know the type........

11th Dec 2009, 05:50

:ok: I've had the same. Then Perth up to Asia - likewise a good, solid product and I am looking forward to doing it all again in three weeks or so.


there are a lot of cabin crew posting here

... not necessarily, maybe just some who know that crew generally try to do their absolute best with the tools available, day-in, day-out.

The service is crap repeat crap

We must fly on different airlines. Mine has the big kangaroo on the tail and it competes very well with the other god-only-knows-how-many airlines I've regularly flown on in the last 20 years or so.

the cabin crew generally consider you a burden (apologies to the good ones)

luckily the latter category are still the majority so by your use of 'generally', you've just insulted the 'good ones'.

they consider themselves 'safety staff'

by law, that is what they are primarily there for, so I'm glad they have that straight.

instead of serving the punters like they are supposed to, with a smile and without attitude

I've never seen that on any airline's conditions of carriage. But, I always get a smile back when I smile at them.

Qantas hasnt got a hope to compete with SIA or the like

Like Dixon or not (and I don't), QF has a huge cash pile by airline metrics and my experiences of SIA business class 'service' have already been placed on these boards.

Dont shoot the messager but sometimes truth tastes bitter

I won't but your post isn't.

Ditch Handle,

:ok: Unable to sleep at dark o'clock, wanting a bit of a chat, I prefer someone who can actually hold a conversation and is not startled and scared to see a punter pop his head through the galley curtain and wasn't just hired for how they'll look parading around a hotel pool.

11th Dec 2009, 07:06
wow crticised by two flight attendants no wonder punters are leaving in droves good luck with it all, I may have been spot on with the attitude bit, perhaps some real fare paying passengers might like to comment?

Anyway you cant be told and the truth does sometimes elicit responses of similar nature. Perhaps a little self examination of what is going wrong may be in order to improve things a bit. You see I dont have to apologise in anyway as I am a full fair paying punter with choices just like a lot of others.

Anyway Good luck with it all

Orangputi out!

ditch handle
11th Dec 2009, 07:14
I'm quite certain you'll find that Taildragger67 isn't a flight attendant.

However I can't deny the accusation.

11th Dec 2009, 07:46
some real fare paying passengers might like to comment

I already have.


My issue with your comments is that you have yourself 'shot the messenger'; I wrote earlier that QF punter-facing staff, on the whole and in my own experience, do their best with the increasingly limited tools available to them; those limitations are imposed from above. Yes I agree you get some time-servers, but like you, I'm generalising.

So what I am saying is, if you think that all the evils you describe are real, then place the blame where it is due, and don't unload on the poor mug who is trying to deliver good service but will also spring into action and do their best to get you out if the landing goes t!ts-up.

11th Dec 2009, 08:08
to the conversation as i do both, working for the big aussie airline but also travel commercialy on different carriers internationally. QF can compete with all carriers. all carriers have some sort of faults when you travel on them regualy (even SQ has its challenges,especially financial ones in the last 6 month). :eek:
GD legacy of opting to have 2 european, limited Asian and US destination has greatly influenced the current situation. Also the lack of "right aircraft mix" (777old technology)does not help either.
I did travel on the new domestic A332 interstate and it was a vast improvment on the 767(IFE excellent).:D
never a dull moment in this industry

The Professor
11th Dec 2009, 15:52
"Granted that, Qantas staff don't do grovelling subservience very well."

They might want to start then. Unless they dont mind watching Asian and ME carriers steal the customers.

11th Dec 2009, 16:20
"Granted that, Qantas staff don't do grovelling subservience very well."

I don't want grovelling subservience, I want the assured competence, intelligence, friendliness and attention QF staff exuded in the 1970's.

I still remember a family of Poms boarding at LHR mid 70's. Mum and Dad and Two little kids. They were migrating to Australia and their mixed feelings at leaving England were plain to see on their faces.

I knew this because a QF Flight Attendant had seen the same thing, engaged them in conversation, found out that they were migrants, got the kids orange juice "Now this is bottled Australian sunshine", introduced Mum and Dad to Australian beer and wine, found their destination city, told them how much they were going to like it, how lucky they were, and started telling them about the places to visit and things for the kids to do when they arrived. I have never ever seen such a virtuoso performance, it did QF and Australia proud. Wouldn't see it today.

11th Dec 2009, 18:22
I dunno Sunfish, i reckon there are still a few characters about who would give your 1970s orange juice bloke a run for their money!

11th Dec 2009, 20:29
A 1970s flight attendant candidate went through a quite rigorous interview process to be employed.95% of QF CC were then male
Not today.
Qantas began lowering the bar(and wages) about ten years ago.
The service onboard today reflects this.Gen Y are now entering the workforce.They are challenging employees.Just ask the CC manager at Virgin Blue.
Dont blame the employee.Blame the process.
Sing Air girls still have to endure a swimsuit parade as part of their interview.Once they reach a certain age they are out the door.It might be acceptable in a benevolent dictatorship but not in western democracies.Asian women today are treated like their caucasian sisters were in the 1950s.Many western men yearn for those bygone days.These men have a name: chauvinistic misogynists.A name that would apply to most 40 plus males who travel today

11th Dec 2009, 23:22
If you read some of Orangputi's previous posts then you will see how many times he tells us about the wonderful Asian f/a's and their looks.So it's no surprise that he would love to dream about the swim suit parade and wish he was one of the interviewers.
That is what this is all about and nothing QF could do will change his idea of what cabin crew should look like.

It's not in Australian culture to be subservient.That means flight deck crew to the captain or f'a's to the passengers.There is nothing we can do to help those men who want nothing more than to oggle asian f/a's.Come to think about it subservience has nothing to do with it rather some mens preoccupation with Asian women.

I have lost count of the times that a passenger has wanted to talk about anything in the middle of the night.Whether that is politics,climate change,real estate prices,the weather or anything and they always comment that it is something they cannot get from f/a's on Asian carriers.

I know that before I worked for QF and had been travelling around Europe for 12 months when I was coming home the sight of the QF aircraft made me feel I was closer to home already.

No matter how bad the management is QF will always be the Australian international carrier

12th Dec 2009, 00:05
chauvinistic misogynists.A name that would apply to most 40 plus males who travel today

I resemble that! :} :}


P.S. (I'm only over 40, not the other stuff :ok: )

12th Dec 2009, 02:11
A national carrier reflects the social values of the country it represents.
Qantas does this well.
Australia does not tolerate or accept sexism.
If that's what you want as part of the onboard experience try another carrier instead of bitching about it on PPrune

Angle of Attack
12th Dec 2009, 04:29
People go on about SIA, yeah maybe some of their flight attendants have a pretty face, but in fact their service is generally woeful, esp in business class. A lot of those girls spit venom and breathe fire behind the exterior facade in the aircraft! I know that because I have met hundreds of them in a prior life working for an SIA subsidary company! But I reckon Joe public went for Singair years ago as their aircraft were newer and their IFE was light years ahead of QF's, even the A380's IFE is around about the same product as SIA had well over 10 years ago in their 777's!

12th Dec 2009, 08:12
Hey redTbar,

If you spent as much time looking into my previous posts as you did providing the service the punters deserve on board you would be halfway there.

As Qantas clearly is clearly lacking as a product 'on board' probably means that there is a problem somewhere what do you think?

I agree with sunfish it was once a great Airline and arrogance/ cutbacks/ self importance and the world owes me a job attitude has crippled the product.

Anyway good luck with it all from a full J class paying punter

(Hat coat another Airline who knows how to treat its clients rather than a burden)

13th Dec 2009, 01:55
There will always be people who will put QF down because they are lovers of Asia and Asians.Nothing QF crew or any western airline does will ever compensate.Interestingly I have found some of Orangputi's previous posts to show my point.
I have a 2 day layover in Shanghai with another chap and we are both partial to a drink and the local talent any bar suggestions that ensure a good night and a bunk up. We are staying at the Shangri-la.
a good night had by all, plenty of local chicks hanging about.
I have a 3 day lay over in Hukou Hainan coming up and being a bit partial to the local talent 2 questions.
1 where should I stay 4-5 star hotels are fine?
2 with point 1 in mind what bars should a frequent for a good bunk up and a good drink?
You are right I will now dump SQ with their exceptional service and young attentive flight attendants

Now we find out the real reason for orangputi's dislike of QF
As an ex QF employee ( I was an engineer)
When I worked for QF as an engineer you have never met a greater bunch of arrogant overpaid wan#kers (wan#[email protected]) in your entire life.
Or this one about pilots.being called Sir or Captain from the poor engineer who studied harder and has heaps more knowledge about your aircraft and many others like it than you do!
QF will always be an Australian icon even if people like Darth manage to sell it.
There are people like orangputi that will like anything Asian and that is their choice but to the majority of Australians who are proud of their culture QF will always be the national carrier.

ditch handle
13th Dec 2009, 04:55
Looks like Orangputi has been well and truly "outed".

A true "sophisticate" straight out of the Sir Les Patterson mould. :rolleyes:

As I said earlier.

We all know the type.........

Capt Kremin
13th Dec 2009, 05:53
Nice piece of forensic work their RT!

13th Dec 2009, 07:45
There will always be people who will put QF down because they are lovers of Asia and Asians.Nothing QF crew or any western airline does will ever compensateIf you look at the Skytrax awards you will always see it is the Asian carriers who dominate the awards. If it is not Asian it is the Middle East who have a high percentage of asian cabin crew.

I think you need to remove the emotion Tbar and realise that being Australia's International carrier will not suffice in the future.

Asia's airlines are striving for excellence, not resting on history!

The world's most experienced airline. What does that say about service??

teresa green
13th Dec 2009, 11:23
Sunfish, we all wish cabin crew were as in the seventies, but then you have to consider the difference. Firstly, the cabin crew were offered a job for life if they so wished. Secondly, the word contract had never been heard of. Thirdly, cabin crew were mainly selected on their ability and often came from the ranks of trained nursing sisters, or school teachers, etc, thirdly, they did not come from the me, me, me, generation, they came from anything but, so how can one expect the same service, the same respect, the same behaviour? They are from another generation, with different views of the world, be it right or wrong in our eyes. In the last couple of years that I have flown the Rat, I have come across some great C/C, I have also come across some shockers, who should be shown the door, but that also applies to my bank, my wife's treatment in hospital, even going to the local Westfield, where it is impossible to get anyone to help you, (anyone over sixty is invisible) so it is simply the way of the world like it or not, the airlines are no different to any other institution offering some sort of service??!! :(

Metro man
13th Dec 2009, 11:47
Also compare the passengers of the 1970s with those of today. Back then flying was a special event, a better class of people flew, they dressed well (look at cabin pictures of B707s) and behaved themselves. Air rage was very rare.

Back then being an airline pilot was a respected and well paid profession, I don't think I need to go into detail about how conditions have deteriorated.:hmm:

Back Seat Driver
14th Dec 2009, 00:15
I took you up on your challenge Kaboy and found
QF finished 6th down from 3rd in Best Airline (http://www.worldairlineawards.com/main/aoy-2009-release.htm) (not good, but not bad either)
and as for cabin crew,they were judged on these (http://www.worldairlineawards.com/Awards_2009/CabinStaff-09.htm)criterion.
I have flown for a couple of these airlines and on all of them at one time or other, and as far as I'm concerned, if the sh!t was to hit the fan, I'd rather be on a Qantas flight, as proved in QF1 at BKK and the MNL bomber, the CC were awesome. Qantas cabin crew have never been found wanting on the rare occasion they have been called on to perform, in an emergency. Research the MH (won best cabin crew, Skytrax 09) F50 accident in Tawau, Sep 1995 and the cabin crews behaviour, for what you can expect from some of these lauded airlines.

14th Dec 2009, 02:44

far as I'm concerned, if the sh!t was to hit the fan, I'd rather be on a Qantas flight, as proved in QF1 at BKK and the MNL bomber, the CC were awesome. Qantas cabin crew have never been found wanting on the rare occasion they have been called on to perform, in an emergency.


Personally I don't want to have to wait for some sub-50kg F/A to have to detach part of her sarong kebaya and make sure her little clogs are still on, before she can help me get my 90kg frame get out of the fire.

14th Dec 2009, 03:22
Wow RedTbar arent you incredibly clever to go through my previous posts and comment on them, you have missed you vocation instead of being a trolly dolly you could have completed your doctorate in IT.

As I said before if you really think the product is up to a suitable standard than you are kidding yourselves!

I for one are saddened by QF has become, and to be honest you have no idea what position I am in now to comment on my present or personal situation.

Over and out!

14th Dec 2009, 03:37
i think that Red T-Bar really said it all...anything more that you say Orangutang is really superfluous...............

14th Dec 2009, 04:59
Sorry Pegasus you are dead right. How dare a full fare paying punter question the might of the QF flying waitress brigade!

I guess its not my job or livelyhood that is in peril. Go for your life guys continue your arrogance and self importance wow your product is so world class!

Absolute last post good luck guys

14th Dec 2009, 05:18
Significant active failures

Significant active failures associated with the post-accident events were:
• The cabin interphone and passenger address systems became inoperable (due to impact
• The flight crew did not consider all relevant issues when deciding not to conduct an
immediate evacuation.
• Some crewmembers did not communicate important information during the emergency period.

Significant inadequate defences

Significant inadequate defences associated with Qantas Flight Operations Branch activities
• Procedures and training for flight crew in evaluating whether or not to conduct an
emergency evacuation were deficient.
• Procedures and training for cabin crew in identifying and communicating relevant
information during an emergency were deficient.

Reproduced from ATSB report VH-OJH

No airline is going to be better than another when it comes to systemic failure.

We can all produce facts to support our argument.:=

14th Dec 2009, 05:51
No airline is going to be better than another when it comes to systemic failure.
Kaboy,if you want to compare the incident/accident rate on Asian airlines compared to QF then start anytime you want.

As I said this is more about some people here and their particular liking for Asian women than anything else.If your idea of good cabin service is a young little asian f/a who had to endure a swim suit parade as part of her selection process then nothing QF does will matter.
If you look at the Skytrax awards you will always see it is the Asian carriers who dominate the awards. If it is not Asian it is the Middle East who have a high percentage of asian cabin crew.

14th Dec 2009, 05:53
Orangutang would suggest that the only people whose comments about airline service are the fare paying passengers...well the reality is that those are the only people that the surveys speak to or survey are the fare paying pax.

As such Qantas has never been out of the top 10 to my recollection. I think that the majority of crew do an outstanding job with the tools that they are given.

SQ and the airlines that generally beat Qantas in surveys have newer planes, different IFE and lower cost structures. Despite that, CC deliver what most consider world class service.

Qantas is also one of only two airlines that has an investment grade rating. Lufthansa being the other one i think. I think that investors are the ones that Qantas has considered for a long time and the passengers have suffered there is no doubt.

But the problem is private airlines have to pay the piper and that is the shareholder. Most of the airlines that Qantas competes with have generous tax breaks, levels of govt or semi government support and are geographically located not at the end of the route like qantas but in the middle.

Qantas is also one of the biggest supporters of Australian Tourism, and also behaves like a national carrier responding to calls from community and governement when asked and also volunteering when necessary.

Qantas Cabin Crew and retired Crew also have been recognised as pioneers in raising money for UNICEF through the change for good program, supporting orphanages around the world and raising money for the School for the deaf and blind at north rocks.

Some reading the posts on here would think that Qantas Cabin Crew are neanderthals with no interest in passengers at all. Qantas Cabin Crew both Long Haul and Short Haul do an outstanding job and will continue to do so for many years. In fact all Qantas Group Cabin Crew are fantastic in my opinion and i also pay full fares to travel at times and as cabin crew myself recognise poor service for what it is...isolated.

14th Dec 2009, 06:16

Take your argument up with Skytrax, I merely stated the facts. Take a breath and read my post again, I am not comparing any airline to another. What I stated is that when one airline is involved in a systemic failure, I don't believe one is going to be better than another.:ugh:

Unless they have done it so many times, then I think the asian carriers will have it all over QF!

14th Dec 2009, 06:28
you missed a few additional points when you compare QF with Asian & middle East airlines.
1) No Asian& Middle East carrier's board and Ceo's are in for the short term to maximise their salaries and golden hand shakes (like all Australian Boards & CEO's).
2) Asian carriers governments actively support their "national carriers with generous tax and write down (aircraft depriciations)benefits".
3)Middle East airlines don't pay corporate or employee taxes(nor do employees)
4) Taxes in Asia are a lot less then in OZ
5)Most airlines except QF order new types and variations of aircrafts and keep what is working for them( not like QF pinning their hopes on the A380 and the 7 if it ever comes 87),whilst continuing to move old aluminium tubes around the planet (:Dfor QF engineers).
and so on and on. this could be a new book title called "Man & woman continue trying to kill the big roo":eek:
never a dull moment:sad:

14th Dec 2009, 06:55
I merely stated the facts
I don't think so Kaboy.
If it is not Asian it is the Middle East who have a high percentage of asian cabin crew.
It's obvious what you like in cabin service and it has nothing to do with the IFE system.
What I stated is that when one airline is involved in a systemic failure, I don't believe one is going to be better than another.
I noticed that you did not want to take me up on my offer of comparing QF safety/incidents with those of Asian airlines so why don't we start with a particular Asian airline in which the Captain has just got away with murder..literally.
But hey the cabin service was great:yuk:

14th Dec 2009, 07:42
An airline is an airline is an airline.
Differentiating the product...at least in the eyes of the travelling public...is the goal of all airline marketing departments.Unfortunately the perception and the reality rarely coincide
Qantas has differentiated itself by promoting its Australianess and safety record .Australia has become become passe.The safety record aint what it used to be and LCCs have changed the landscape forever.We now have differentiation on price.
Joyce appears to be spending money on the hard product but QF lags behind and will continue to do so for at least for the next two or three years.
An employee needs to be proud of the company that they work for.They need to be proud of the product.
Qantas employees have had little to be proud of for at least the last ten years.Indeed, at Qantas,employees have been seen as a necessary evil.
Asian carriers have exploited their advantage to good effect.Orangputi is a perfect example.The media in Asian countries is very tightly controlled.How often do you see a negative report about Sing Air in the Straits Times ?
Bagging the national carrier in Australia has become a favourite media bloodsport.The arrogance of the QF marketing and media department is largely responsible for this.
Micro managing CC is slowly turning them into atomatons.When Qantas starts treating its employees as an asset rather than a liability the travelling public will see an improvement in service levels.Incidently these service levels are pretty damned good if you believe the company's own research.
This gem from Cabin Services...female flight attendants must now "touch up before they touch down" A famous BA edict of the 70s.Shows you where Qantas management mindset is.The hard product might be ancient but the CC lipstick and name tags are perfect.
Product differentiation....Our lipstick and name tags make Qantas standout from the pack
Time for more new blood at the top AJ

stubby jumbo
14th Dec 2009, 08:04
.......a good example of the management we have to put up with is.......our Rosters have been/are delayed due to CSS/CSM KPI -review training.

WHAT THA!:hmm:

Are these clowns kidding themselves?

Due to the high number of "poor performers"......its time to bring these rogues in for some intensive brainwashing et al.

Lesson #1-Ensure all hosties apply lippy before landing
Lesson#2 -Ensure all crew have name badge on the correct side of their uniform

Need I continue. So some genius discovers that we will have to do another bid run -as we don't have enough Managers.......2 weeks out from Xmas.:{

Agree- Change has to happen ....& fast. Lets begin with a QCC enema.

14th Dec 2009, 08:10


14th Dec 2009, 09:55
Stubby - care to elaborate on your info re rosters, I have a cc friend who is anxiously awaiting their roster!

stubby jumbo
14th Dec 2009, 10:22

......'word is that they are priddy well ready. Apparently ,the FAAA have to have a look first ......then they'll be uploaded.

Peg 747 may have more of an idea.

So maybe Wednesday:D

14th Dec 2009, 10:38
i am still waiting for my roster like everyone else. Apparently on the day that bidding was to close the company placed a course on every CSM's roster. This would have destroyed any bids so the FAAA asked for additional time to adjust bids around the course.

Bids were left open longer thus delaying the rosters. Cant understand why they didnt run everyone else as usual and just delay the CSM's....

Probably something to do with the Computer time that Aircrew resources have to buy etc....

In any case whoever in management that caused this debacle should have his/her KPI's reviewed accordingly

14th Dec 2009, 11:55
Continue with the team he has and accept mediocrity as the norm or change the team and aspire to greatness.
Its take big praties to make big decisions.
Has Joyce got the praties?

14th Dec 2009, 12:00
What I would like to know is why does it still take a week from bids closed to rosters issued?

14th Dec 2009, 18:24
Got to agree with Twiggs on this one.
Why does it take a week from close of bids to issuing of rosters?
I am sure there is a good reason but to us lurkers it seems only the
press of a button away :hmm:

14th Dec 2009, 19:21
The whole process takes four hours.
The results are then analysed to determine coverage and low lines.
If there are any shortfalls found the whole process begins again.
The newness of the system coupled with late introduction of the CSM training course has meant that the bids have to date been run six times.
Hence the delay.
Had the new system become active one BP(269) later these problems would not exist and rosters would have been published on time.
Since it only affects 6000 CC it is not really of any significance(note:sarcasm)
Please excuse thread drift.
What did someone say about mediocrity?
Cabin Services needs a management clean out immediately.
Sick leave over the festive season is expected to reach an all time high

14th Dec 2009, 19:58
Training day for CSM's??????????
Due to the high number of "poor performers"......its time to bring these rogues in for some intensive brainwashing et al.:rolleyes:
I talked to several F/A's about the engagement survey in the last week. I ask if they understood which group their feedback impacted on. ALL were under the impression that is was directed at the CCTM and other managers in the office, not CSM/CSS.
The FAAA should show some engagement and follow up on. :rolleyes:

14th Dec 2009, 20:26
Now that all we have to talk about is the girls having late rosters, time for a 'click'.:cool:

14th Dec 2009, 20:31
You really are a bitter bunch of people.

There are 30000 other employees in Qantas, and you don't see them moaning and complaining anywhere near to the same extent as the cabin crew on this forum. Qantas doesn't owe you a living. If you hate management and the company so much, no one is forcing you to stay. Go! There are thousands of people who will do your job, just look at the recent qcca intakes over the last few years, and on vastly inferior conditions.

No wonder your threads get closed down so quickly. It's just one big bitch session with you guys. If it's not crew numbers, it's IFE, rosters, qcca, managers, centres of excellence, leave, passengers, other airlines cc, etc etc etc :ugh:

If you had to work one week a year and were paid one million dollars, you'd still complain about something. :hmm:

Give it a break, and you complain about the y generation who want everything now, now, now.

stubby jumbo
14th Dec 2009, 21:04
......hey autobrakes-as your name implies-you just want to put a STOP to anything that you don't agree with.

Have you got your Xmas roster yet buddy? Do you know where you'll be for the next 8 weeks?

And as for the "usual argument" about CC being expendable ....."and there are others lining up to do your job"- .......do you really think we haven't heard this before.!!!

Yeah I know that this will probably be the last post.......

BUT......it does relate back to that blog post that started all this in the first place. ie THE MANAGEMENT DECISION MAKING PROCESS

Anyway........I'm off to K-Mart. I hear there is a SALE on Glomesh handbags.

Merry Xmas:oh:

14th Dec 2009, 21:13
Hey buddy, I don't know where I'll be for the next 8 weeks because I'm on a blank line. That's another thing, the amount of times I hear cc complain because they do a reserve line. I do a "reserve line" 6 months of the year, not once every 18 months like you.

So to answer your question, mate, no I don't know where I'll be for the next 8 weeks. :ugh:

14th Dec 2009, 21:29
Autobrakes4 in that case you will understand why on time and early roster publication is important to tech and cabin crew alike.

I don't think this is a particular issue to beat up cabin crew on. Tech crew are just as guilty of being upset (and i think rightly so) if their rosters are late.

Just read Qrewroom.

When you can't plan your lives for more than 4 weeks (as I am on 4 week rosters) it is incredibly frustrating. I understand blank/reserves are worse - having done a few in my early days too.

Over Christmas its pretty important to know if you're going to be with your family/friends or not, which is why people get a bit upset more easily.

ditch handle
15th Dec 2009, 05:03
Looks like CIS has crashed under the weight of 3000+ CC trying to establish, 10 days out what, Christmas holds for them and their families.

15th Dec 2009, 05:14
CIS was apparently turned off as it was slowing down the upload of the rosters. With flight attendants logging in every 10 minutes the roster upload would not have been completed until thursday at the rate it was taking so they switched off CIS for a couple of hours

Roster out within the hour i am told