Qantas Staff Travel
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Capt Cynical
I was told the other week that some of the CC had to pax to LAX in the rear middle seat of a chokkas economy cabin
Last edited by PPRuNeUser0198; 9th Aug 2009 at 06:28.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 58
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QUOTE-
"Cabin crew on paxing duty are confirmed J upgradable to P, so I am unsure as to how they were down the back?"
______________
They were down the back because cabin crew on duty travel are confirmed Y/C upgradable to J/C, P/C.
CSMs are supposed to be firm J/C but even so that doesn't guarantee they won't experience the delights of seat 69F.
"Cabin crew on paxing duty are confirmed J upgradable to P, so I am unsure as to how they were down the back?"
______________
They were down the back because cabin crew on duty travel are confirmed Y/C upgradable to J/C, P/C.
CSMs are supposed to be firm J/C but even so that doesn't guarantee they won't experience the delights of seat 69F.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is certainly appropriate that crew on duty travel do not have lounge access. Part of the benefit to have club access is to escape the crowds and noise. Having crew in lounges just adds to congestion, crowds, noise etc.
Ditch - looking in the system I can see a number of tech crew paxing on firm J (D) class, so I am perplexed by the firm Y network-wide comment...
Ditch - looking in the system I can see a number of tech crew paxing on firm J (D) class, so I am perplexed by the firm Y network-wide comment...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet-A-One & Cart Elevator
Many thanks for your responses. I have been away for a few days and am just getting back to this thread.
In order of arrival – Jet-A-One . . . I do indeed appreciate the 50th passenger metaphor on a 50 passenger bus. There would be a very small marginal cost of carrying the extra passenger. However, the question remains how that ‘additional benefit’ should be attributed across the entire passenger group. Using your reasoning, one person should derive all the benefit.
With modern yield management algorithms and management systems these things are pretty much predictable . . . there is sufficient knowledge of the elasticity of supply/demand such that aircraft (or theatres, concert halls, etc) can be filled with highest possible yield. To charge some people the maximum possible and ‘give away’ very low yielding products/services/seats to others is one way to manage the issue, but there are others.
Secondly, to Cart Elevator’s third point . . . having a loyal staff (through incentives such as decent staff travel schemes) does in turn increase the satisfaction (and loyalty) of customers is valid. It is an excellent point . . . although I would argue that the staff (and extended family) benefits already represent an exceptional incentive.
But to your second point about full fare paying customers subsidising the staff travel scheme. I ask if someone to buy a product or service at 10% of the advertised price (plus taxes and charges) on the assumption that it is ‘at cost’, then it presumes the offering company is making somewhere around a 90% margin. My reading of QF’s annual reports (and year to date) is that EBIT is nowhere these numbers.
And to your first point . . . it is of course a folly that customers should expect the seat beside them should remain vacant. That would be unreasonable as you should only expect what you pay for.
And yet . . . this all assumes that customers do not notice the ‘on board’ shenanigans of what ‘unofficially’ goes on once everyone is on the aircraft – the flash of the staff card, the nod/wink, late shuffling of seats such that ‘persons unknown’ are mysteriously provided with additional benefits. For example, you wouldn’t expect all the J passengers to be ‘crammed’ together (albeit in their very expensive and luxurious $6,000 seats) so that mysterious others have the benefit of a lots of space, would you?
Is this a wind up . . . I can assure you it is definitely not. But am I asking that ‘full service’ airlines deliver against their purported value proposition – yes, because it is is all our interests.
To both Jet-A-One and Cart Elevator, I rather liked Caneworm’s comment “always reckoned this would be a great job if it wasn't for those pesky passengers” – and have you ever thought about the real meaning behind the rather amusing term of “self loading freight”?
Happy to continue the conversation.
Best to all
Cheers
Pedota
Many thanks for your responses. I have been away for a few days and am just getting back to this thread.
In order of arrival – Jet-A-One . . . I do indeed appreciate the 50th passenger metaphor on a 50 passenger bus. There would be a very small marginal cost of carrying the extra passenger. However, the question remains how that ‘additional benefit’ should be attributed across the entire passenger group. Using your reasoning, one person should derive all the benefit.
With modern yield management algorithms and management systems these things are pretty much predictable . . . there is sufficient knowledge of the elasticity of supply/demand such that aircraft (or theatres, concert halls, etc) can be filled with highest possible yield. To charge some people the maximum possible and ‘give away’ very low yielding products/services/seats to others is one way to manage the issue, but there are others.
Secondly, to Cart Elevator’s third point . . . having a loyal staff (through incentives such as decent staff travel schemes) does in turn increase the satisfaction (and loyalty) of customers is valid. It is an excellent point . . . although I would argue that the staff (and extended family) benefits already represent an exceptional incentive.
But to your second point about full fare paying customers subsidising the staff travel scheme. I ask if someone to buy a product or service at 10% of the advertised price (plus taxes and charges) on the assumption that it is ‘at cost’, then it presumes the offering company is making somewhere around a 90% margin. My reading of QF’s annual reports (and year to date) is that EBIT is nowhere these numbers.
And to your first point . . . it is of course a folly that customers should expect the seat beside them should remain vacant. That would be unreasonable as you should only expect what you pay for.
And yet . . . this all assumes that customers do not notice the ‘on board’ shenanigans of what ‘unofficially’ goes on once everyone is on the aircraft – the flash of the staff card, the nod/wink, late shuffling of seats such that ‘persons unknown’ are mysteriously provided with additional benefits. For example, you wouldn’t expect all the J passengers to be ‘crammed’ together (albeit in their very expensive and luxurious $6,000 seats) so that mysterious others have the benefit of a lots of space, would you?
Is this a wind up . . . I can assure you it is definitely not. But am I asking that ‘full service’ airlines deliver against their purported value proposition – yes, because it is is all our interests.
To both Jet-A-One and Cart Elevator, I rather liked Caneworm’s comment “always reckoned this would be a great job if it wasn't for those pesky passengers” – and have you ever thought about the real meaning behind the rather amusing term of “self loading freight”?
Happy to continue the conversation.
Best to all
Cheers
Pedota
Last edited by Pedota; 9th Aug 2009 at 13:39.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NSW,Australia
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T.G.
I renewed my passport in March, I dont know why as I have not left the country since I retired in 03.
I did it just in case I have to attend a funeral
or more hopefully a wedding or christening OS sometime in the next 10 years. 
Keep fishing in gods own country.
Meanwhile I will keep in digging holes in the golf course.
I renewed my passport in March, I dont know why as I have not left the country since I retired in 03.
I did it just in case I have to attend a funeral
or more hopefully a wedding or christening OS sometime in the next 10 years. Keep fishing in gods own country.
Meanwhile I will keep in digging holes in the golf course.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But to your second point about full fare paying customers subsidising the staff travel scheme. I ask if someone to buy a product or service at 10% of the advertised price (plus taxes and charges) on the assumption that it is ‘at cost’, then it presumes the offering company is making somewhere around a 90% margin. My reading of QF’s annual reports (and year to date) is that EBIT is nowhere these numbers.
The cost to staff is a figure arrived at by the company for various reasons known only to themselves and is not indicative of the cost of operating the airline.We pay the same additional taxes that any pax pays.
The number of times I was bumped off a flight minutes before departure because the 'full' paying pax has just turned up with some sob story was amazing even though you as a pax have a certain requirement to be on time....That is over a 30 year time period.The seat we are given....if lucky....is just a spare seat not a confirmed one.
This is no different than any business giving their staff some tangible benefit for their employment and as a tool to increase staff morale.
There is also the benefit to the business of paying lower wages in return for this 'benefit'.
And to your first point . . . it is of course a folly that customers should expect the seat beside them should remain vacant. That would be unreasonable as you should only expect what you pay for.
And yet . . . this all assumes that customers do not notice the ‘on board’ shenanigans of what ‘unofficially’ goes on once everyone is on the aircraft – the flash of the staff card, the nod/wink, late shuffling of seats such that ‘persons unknown’ are mysteriously provided with additional benefits. For example, you wouldn’t expect all the J passengers to be ‘crammed’ together (albeit in their very expensive and luxurious $6,000 seats) so that mysterious others have the benefit of a lots of space, would you?
All I can say is Pedota...you have a very fertile imagination...it sounds to me another example of simple jealousy in that some people cannot stand the thought of others receiving something they are not....
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T-Vasis...I don't know where you work but...
Ditch is right and Cabin Crew are only Y/C firm.....
I wish I had a dollar the number of times myself and the rest of the cabin crew paxed in Y/C....
Ditch is right and Cabin Crew are only Y/C firm.....
I wish I had a dollar the number of times myself and the rest of the cabin crew paxed in Y/C....
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Wonderworld
The rotten thing is JQ positioning crew get a higher upg category than QF staff on leisure travel.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Ditch/Lowerlobe - I have never noticed the cabin crew, only tech.
Typical - drivers always thinking they are a step above the rest...Crew are crew and the duty travel priority should be the same. You cannot operate with either one...Disgrace!
Typical - drivers always thinking they are a step above the rest...Crew are crew and the duty travel priority should be the same. You cannot operate with either one...Disgrace!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 58
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Commercial considerations
Not too many J/C revenue seats left on a 744 if you've got a whole cabin crew compliment paxing with J/C firm status.
I personally find the current arrangements satisfactory.........
I personally find the current arrangements satisfactory.........
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would not think an entire cabin crew would pax that often? Would seem very uneconomical. Certainly not seen it in all my years. Only ever a few. If I was a crew member I certainly would not like being down the back, considering some of my 'colleagues' were sitting up the front. It should be one rule for all - I wont deviate from that belief.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 58
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough and I respect your principled view.
Lots of paxing going on at the moment though with cancelled services and Dugong reliability problems.
P/C, J/C space available works for me. It does the troops who work in the cabin good to immerse themselves in the Y/C "experience" from time to time.
Stops them getting, "uppity" ..............
Lots of paxing going on at the moment though with cancelled services and Dugong reliability problems.
P/C, J/C space available works for me. It does the troops who work in the cabin good to immerse themselves in the Y/C "experience" from time to time.
Stops them getting, "uppity" ..............