Qantas. The Legacy Continues!
Thread Starter
Qantas. The Legacy Continues!
Qantas will be forced to pay Australian travel agents millions of dollars after the Federal Court ruled they're entitled to commissions on fuel surcharges, lawyers say.
Leonie's Travel Pty Ltd, representing all travel agents who sold tickets on behalf of Qantas, appealed against a 2009 Federal Court ruling that the airline was entitled to exclude fuel surcharges when calculating commissions paid to agents on international tickets.
Judges Anthony Besanko, Bruce Lander and Steven Rares on Tuesday upheld the appeal, finding the commission was payable on international tickets from May 2004.
The court, sitting in Sydney, ordered that Qantas account for the money it received from the surcharge and pass on to the travel agents their "underpaid commission".
Although the original class action also involved other airlines, including Air New Zealand and British Airways, the parties agreed the action would continue against Qantas only to determine liability.
Steven Lewis, from the law firm Slater and Gordon, which represented Leonie's Travel, said there was evidence the cost of the commissions up to 2007 would be more than $26 million, a figure which would have increased since.
He said the ruling could have implications for all international airlines.
"The court has made a very clear ruling that the fuel surcharge is part of the ticket price on which commissions must be paid," Mr Lewis said in a statement.
"The matter was run as a test case to establish the law as it applies to Qantas and the other airlines involved in the class action.
"The time has now come for the airlines, which have been using the fuel surcharge to bolster the bottom line since it was introduced in 2004, to stop fighting the travel agents and resolve this major problem."
A Qantas spokesman said the airline was unhappy with the ruling.
"We are disappointed in the judgment and now need time to examine the detail and consider our options," he told AAP on Tuesday.
The case will now return to the original judge who will calculate damages.
Meanwhile, the funder of the litigation said the ruling was a big win for mum-and-dad travel agents, which had been doing it tough for a few years.
"This decision means that they will now receive the full commission on the tickets they have sold over the past six years on behalf of the big international airlines," the head of Litigation Lendings Services, Michelle Silvers, said.
Leonie's Travel Pty Ltd, representing all travel agents who sold tickets on behalf of Qantas, appealed against a 2009 Federal Court ruling that the airline was entitled to exclude fuel surcharges when calculating commissions paid to agents on international tickets.
Judges Anthony Besanko, Bruce Lander and Steven Rares on Tuesday upheld the appeal, finding the commission was payable on international tickets from May 2004.
The court, sitting in Sydney, ordered that Qantas account for the money it received from the surcharge and pass on to the travel agents their "underpaid commission".
Although the original class action also involved other airlines, including Air New Zealand and British Airways, the parties agreed the action would continue against Qantas only to determine liability.
Steven Lewis, from the law firm Slater and Gordon, which represented Leonie's Travel, said there was evidence the cost of the commissions up to 2007 would be more than $26 million, a figure which would have increased since.
He said the ruling could have implications for all international airlines.
"The court has made a very clear ruling that the fuel surcharge is part of the ticket price on which commissions must be paid," Mr Lewis said in a statement.
"The matter was run as a test case to establish the law as it applies to Qantas and the other airlines involved in the class action.
"The time has now come for the airlines, which have been using the fuel surcharge to bolster the bottom line since it was introduced in 2004, to stop fighting the travel agents and resolve this major problem."
A Qantas spokesman said the airline was unhappy with the ruling.
"We are disappointed in the judgment and now need time to examine the detail and consider our options," he told AAP on Tuesday.
The case will now return to the original judge who will calculate damages.
Meanwhile, the funder of the litigation said the ruling was a big win for mum-and-dad travel agents, which had been doing it tough for a few years.
"This decision means that they will now receive the full commission on the tickets they have sold over the past six years on behalf of the big international airlines," the head of Litigation Lendings Services, Michelle Silvers, said.
A Qantas spokesman said the airline was unhappy with the ruling.
"We are disappointed in the judgment and now need time to examine the detail and consider our options," he told AAP on Tuesday.
"We are disappointed in the judgment and now need time to examine the detail and consider our options," he told AAP on Tuesday.
A superior decision made by a superior manager who thought that they knew better.
Whispering "T" Jet
This is another good reason why a termination bonus should not be paid until five years after the recipient has left the employer.
Darth must be laughing all the way to the bank.
Darth must be laughing all the way to the bank.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: An old flying boat station on Moreton Bay
Age: 84
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A sense of perspective would help.
The surcharge and the decion not to make it commissionable was an industry decision, not a unilateral QF decision.
Interesting to see if QF appeal.
The surcharge and the decion not to make it commissionable was an industry decision, not a unilateral QF decision.
Although the original class action also involved other airlines, including Air New Zealand and British Airways, the parties agreed the action would continue against Qantas only to determine liability.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting analogy AN1944 . . . in 1993 the legacy telecommunications carrier Telecom ‘re-branded’ itself to Telstra for a whole raft of reasons. Now no-one remembers the old Telecom.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember the old Telecom...that's why i have never touched any product of Telstra's. Telecom was the most heartless. selfish, power crazy monopoly in the history of this country!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember the old Telecom. Phone line installs for $50, line rental of $10 per month, lots of Australians employed who would fix a phone next day if it wasn't working.... Ahh for the good old days.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a Travel Agent selling over the last few years well over a million bucks a year of QF product, I am very pleased with the ruling. In a way.
If it finally comes through it will be a nice bonus and the surcharges should have never been non commissionable as we had to collect them and explain why the taxes were so high.
The Middle Eastern carriers are about the only ones who don't load their fuel surcharges into the tax area. They allocate them as a "Q" tax which goes into the fare construction line and is commissionable. Most Agents would not understand that as only about 5% of us have the training to issue our own International tickets these days.
The thing that scares me is the retalliation possible by Qantas and other airlines that may be affected. If they turn around and zero commission there is going to be a whole lot of bloodletting in my industry and maybe a major revolt against the Rat. I would not blame them if they did rear up.
I personally chose not to participate in the class action for reasons of affiliation and the support received from QF in our office, and my friends within the Company.
A short term bonus any eventual payment may be, but the downline ramifications are not something I am looking forward to.
Best all.
EWL
If it finally comes through it will be a nice bonus and the surcharges should have never been non commissionable as we had to collect them and explain why the taxes were so high.
The Middle Eastern carriers are about the only ones who don't load their fuel surcharges into the tax area. They allocate them as a "Q" tax which goes into the fare construction line and is commissionable. Most Agents would not understand that as only about 5% of us have the training to issue our own International tickets these days.
The thing that scares me is the retalliation possible by Qantas and other airlines that may be affected. If they turn around and zero commission there is going to be a whole lot of bloodletting in my industry and maybe a major revolt against the Rat. I would not blame them if they did rear up.
I personally chose not to participate in the class action for reasons of affiliation and the support received from QF in our office, and my friends within the Company.
A short term bonus any eventual payment may be, but the downline ramifications are not something I am looking forward to.
Best all.
EWL
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good call EWL.
You can bet- that RG and the Sales guys will have the "list" of those who were in on this class action.
DON'T GET MAD ........GET EVEN
-will be the order of the day.
You can bet- that RG and the Sales guys will have the "list" of those who were in on this class action.
DON'T GET MAD ........GET EVEN
-will be the order of the day.
