Qatar Airlines being sued
Qatar are operating a ghost flight from Melbourne to Adelaide each day, it’s in their financial interest to lobby for more slots and axe that route with one new bilateral.
The Covid debate on repatriation is a crock of ****.
QF operated repatriation charters which when you calculate the cost per seat, average out numbers, account for the empty sector, etc they ran at pretty good operating rates.
QR, EK, SQ all operated regular airline services hence the seat costs were eye watering, however all government owned airlines.
UA, not sure of which other US airlines operated, and this I don’t know but I think the had strategic government contracts.
QF didn’t fly until it didn’t cost them money to fly, say what ya like about government handouts.
QR to Australia for more flights = yes.
QF operated repatriation charters which when you calculate the cost per seat, average out numbers, account for the empty sector, etc they ran at pretty good operating rates.
QR, EK, SQ all operated regular airline services hence the seat costs were eye watering, however all government owned airlines.
UA, not sure of which other US airlines operated, and this I don’t know but I think the had strategic government contracts.
QF didn’t fly until it didn’t cost them money to fly, say what ya like about government handouts.
QR to Australia for more flights = yes.
Qantas committed to hundreds of repatriation flights during that period.
you supported an airline that thinks it's ok to assault women.
The following users liked this post:
Qantas committed to hundreds of repatriation flights during that period. The crews involved spent countless hours away from their families in hotel quarantine while State "leaders" made up the rules on a daily basis. Qatar (and other operators) weren't subject to the ridiculous rules and quarantine requirements in their home countries that we were. The only thing that's embarrassing is the fact that you supported an airline that thinks it's ok to assault women. The fact we're even discussing letting this airline make more money off Australians is beyond my comprehension.
The ridiculous rules bit, I referenced Qantas and the govt, point stands.
I supported an airlline that thinks it's ok to assault women? Did I? Where and when? And to my knowledge and reading Qatar airlines did no such thing, it was the airport authorities that did this.
Great reply though, well researched and thought out.
Hundreds? Bull****.
The ridiculous rules bit, I referenced Qantas and the govt, point stands.
I supported an airlline that thinks it's ok to assault women? Did I? Where and when? And to my knowledge and reading Qatar airlines did no such thing, it was the airport authorities that did this.
Great reply though, well researched and thought out.
The ridiculous rules bit, I referenced Qantas and the govt, point stands.
I supported an airlline that thinks it's ok to assault women? Did I? Where and when? And to my knowledge and reading Qatar airlines did no such thing, it was the airport authorities that did this.
Great reply though, well researched and thought out.
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...rways-decision
Can't imagine why women are suing Qatar if theres no correlation between them and the airport authorities. Same point stands with the current senate inquiry into blocking Qatar from operating more flights into Australia - I'm not sure why they'd be punitive towards the airline if they nothing to do with the incident in 2020.
Sorry there's no peer-reviewed, well-researched articles for you. Just a couple of news websites.
They may have committed to them, but they operated bugger all of them. Cancelled 9 times out of 10.
Qatar, Singair and other airlines received massive support from their governments to cover what was a huge loss-making operation. Yes, Qantas received subsidies but to match the flights of those other airlines they would have needed substantially more or would simply have run out of money.
Last edited by C441; 11th Sep 2023 at 00:49.
The following users liked this post:
Qantas operated 160 repatriation flights between March 2020 and September 2021. Additionally, they did many more freight flights, particularly with the 330. Just ask the 330 pilots (particularly S/Os) who spent long, continuous periods in quarantine both in Australia and in very ordinary overseas hotels, with very ordinary food and detention-like conditions.
Qatar, Singair and other airlines received massive support from their governments to cover what was a huge loss-making operation. Yes, Qantas received subsidies but to match the flights of those other airlines they would have needed substantially more or would simply have run out of money.
Qatar, Singair and other airlines received massive support from their governments to cover what was a huge loss-making operation. Yes, Qantas received subsidies but to match the flights of those other airlines they would have needed substantially more or would simply have run out of money.
Thread Starter
Qantas operated 160 repatriation flights between March 2020 and September 2021. Additionally, they did many more IFAM freight flights, particularly with the 330. Just ask the 330 pilots (particularly S/Os) who spent long, continuous periods in quarantine both in Australia and in very ordinary overseas hotels, with very ordinary food and detention-like conditions.
Qatar, Singair and other airlines received massive support from their governments to cover what was a huge loss-making operation. Yes, Qantas received subsidies but to match the flights of those other airlines they would have needed substantially more or would simply have run out of money.
Qatar, Singair and other airlines received massive support from their governments to cover what was a huge loss-making operation. Yes, Qantas received subsidies but to match the flights of those other airlines they would have needed substantially more or would simply have run out of money.
And why would Australia, which is a very wealthy country, not use its national airline called Qantas to do those flights over some other airline with no affiliation with Australia other than landing here and shipping money they make offshore for good. Don’t forget that as an island nation a long way from most of the World we need a national airline with the capability that Qantas can deliver. You don’t think it’s not considered as part of our strategic defence capability then think again.
Many crew did very long periods of isolation and or quarantine both here or overseas. Some over a year I believe. It was a weird time that I personally never want to go through again. From being stood down, to doing currency in the sim in isolation, to being locked up overseas then to return and not being able to leave your home then back for another trip to then be denied entry and told you must quarantine in the **** hole called Howard Springs, it was unique insight into human nature and the overbearing hypocrisy of our governments both federal and state. No wonder no other airline did the repat flying. It would have been unworkable. Throw Border Force into the mix and what disgrace it was.
The following 2 users liked this post by Troo believer:
Thread Starter
Women strip searched at Qatari airport fear similar incident could happen again
Posted 6h ago6 hours ago, updated 4h ago4 hours ago
A parliamentary committee was formed after the government blocked Qatar's bid for extra flights into Australia.(AAP: Richard Wainwright)The lawyer representing Australian women subjected to invasive body searches at Doha airport say they're worried there is an ongoing risk to women flying Qatar Airways.
Five of those women have commenced legal proceedings against Qatar Airways, the Qatar Civil Aviation Authority and MATAR, a Qatar Airways subsidiary.
"Given the response from the airline to our clients' concerns and their experiences, they certainly strongly remain of the view that risk is continuing," said Michael Bradley, the lawyer representing the women.
The incident is back in the spotlight this week, as a parliamentary committee examines the government's decision to block a Qatar Airways request to increase its flights into major Australian airports.
Transport Minister Catherine King has repeatedly stated the decision was based in the national interest but has so far refused to outline what those reasons are.
Appearing before the committee today, Mr Bradley said his clients were in favour of the decision.
In July, they wrote to Ms King urging her to take the incident into account when making her final call.
Mr Bradley also said his clients were concerned that a similar incident could occur again and there was a risk to women if they flew Qatar Airways.
Catherine King has faced criticism for her decision to block Qatar sending additional flights to Australia. (ABC News: Luke Stephenson)Mr Bradley said his clients had not received an adequate response or apology for what had occurred.
"There was no meaningful response [from the airline], they refused to engage at all and that has continued," he said.
"Their posture remains defensive and aggressively so."
Previously, Qatar Airways has denied responsibility for the incident.
"We recognise the distress and concern the litigants experienced," a statement issued by the airline stated in February.
"The events in question formed part of a criminal investigation by the Qatari Police which the airline had no control over."
Ms King has previously stated that the October 2020 incident was a factor in her decision to block Qatar's request.
Flight Centre's managing director and chief executive Graham Turner said he thought it was in the "national interest" for the government to reverse its decision.
"I think until they review it and hopefully change it, this is not going to go away," he told the committee.
"Airfares are going to stay high for at least the rest of this year and probably well into next year and significantly due to the demand and capacity not being back on certain routes.
"I think it really does need a review."
Mr Culbert agreed a review should be conducted.
"I think it is important that you never provide static analysis to a dynamic situation," he said.
The Qatar decision has also raised questions about whether changes are needed to slot management and bilateral air service agreements.
Mr Culbert said bilateral air service agreements needed to be examined.
He pointed to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) having 168 flights per week and not using them all, while Qatar had 28 and wanted more.
"At Sydney airport, we are only 75 per cent recovered on the Middle East market compared to pre-COVID, we have an airline that wants to add new services but they can’t because the bilateral is full," Mr Culbert said.
"At the same time we have 84 flights a week from the UAE that aren't being used at all.
"That is just inefficient."
Qantas and Qatar have confirmed that they will send representatives to appear before the inquiry next week
Women strip searched at Qatari airport fear similar incident could happen again
By political reporter Stephanie BorysPosted 6h ago6 hours ago, updated 4h ago4 hours ago
Key points:
- A parliamentary committee is investigating the government's refusal of extra flights for Qatar
- The government has said a factor of that decision was a 2020 incident when five Australian women were forced to undergo invasive body scans
- The lawyer representing the women says they are concerned a similar incident could happen again
Five of those women have commenced legal proceedings against Qatar Airways, the Qatar Civil Aviation Authority and MATAR, a Qatar Airways subsidiary.
"Given the response from the airline to our clients' concerns and their experiences, they certainly strongly remain of the view that risk is continuing," said Michael Bradley, the lawyer representing the women.
The incident is back in the spotlight this week, as a parliamentary committee examines the government's decision to block a Qatar Airways request to increase its flights into major Australian airports.
Transport Minister Catherine King has repeatedly stated the decision was based in the national interest but has so far refused to outline what those reasons are.
Appearing before the committee today, Mr Bradley said his clients were in favour of the decision.
In July, they wrote to Ms King urging her to take the incident into account when making her final call.
Mr Bradley also said his clients were concerned that a similar incident could occur again and there was a risk to women if they flew Qatar Airways.
"There was no meaningful response [from the airline], they refused to engage at all and that has continued," he said.
"Their posture remains defensive and aggressively so."
Previously, Qatar Airways has denied responsibility for the incident.
"We recognise the distress and concern the litigants experienced," a statement issued by the airline stated in February.
"The events in question formed part of a criminal investigation by the Qatari Police which the airline had no control over."
Ms King has previously stated that the October 2020 incident was a factor in her decision to block Qatar's request.
Call for review of Qatar decision
The committee sought views from the Australian Travel Industry Association, Flight Centre, Sydney Airport and Airport Coordination Australia about the government's decision to block additional Qatar flights.Flight Centre's managing director and chief executive Graham Turner said he thought it was in the "national interest" for the government to reverse its decision.
"I think until they review it and hopefully change it, this is not going to go away," he told the committee.
"Airfares are going to stay high for at least the rest of this year and probably well into next year and significantly due to the demand and capacity not being back on certain routes.
"I think it really does need a review."
Mr Culbert agreed a review should be conducted.
"I think it is important that you never provide static analysis to a dynamic situation," he said.
The Qatar decision has also raised questions about whether changes are needed to slot management and bilateral air service agreements.
Mr Culbert said bilateral air service agreements needed to be examined.
He pointed to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) having 168 flights per week and not using them all, while Qatar had 28 and wanted more.
"At Sydney airport, we are only 75 per cent recovered on the Middle East market compared to pre-COVID, we have an airline that wants to add new services but they can’t because the bilateral is full," Mr Culbert said.
"At the same time we have 84 flights a week from the UAE that aren't being used at all.
"That is just inefficient."
Qantas and Qatar have confirmed that they will send representatives to appear before the inquiry next week
[QUOTE=Troo believer;11500570]Exactly.
And why would Australia, which is a very wealthy country, not use its national airline called Qantas to do those flights over some other airline with no affiliation with Australia other than landing here and shipping money they make offshore for good. Don’t forget that as an island nation a long way from most of the World we need a national airline with the capability that Qantas can deliver. You don’t think it’s not considered as part of our strategic defence capability then think again.
Shipping money offshore for no good? I guess that is what Joyce will be doing soon too. Qantas (or any other airline) didn’t do any of that stuff for free. They all get money for it from somewhere.
I’m pretty sure if an Australian airline crew try to prevent the AFP from extracting passengers from an aircraft there would be a few issue too. What happened to those women was not right, but I’m not sure the Airline had any part in it
And why would Australia, which is a very wealthy country, not use its national airline called Qantas to do those flights over some other airline with no affiliation with Australia other than landing here and shipping money they make offshore for good. Don’t forget that as an island nation a long way from most of the World we need a national airline with the capability that Qantas can deliver. You don’t think it’s not considered as part of our strategic defence capability then think again.
Shipping money offshore for no good? I guess that is what Joyce will be doing soon too. Qantas (or any other airline) didn’t do any of that stuff for free. They all get money for it from somewhere.
I’m pretty sure if an Australian airline crew try to prevent the AFP from extracting passengers from an aircraft there would be a few issue too. What happened to those women was not right, but I’m not sure the Airline had any part in it
Thread Starter
One of the women forcibly strip-searched at Doha Airport says she believes gender is partly behind Qatar Airways’ refusal to apologise
We all love the cabins, the service and all the shiny pictures on the brochures but, if you are going to fly on airlines from this sh*thole part of the world there is risk that you take.
Why should Qatar Airways apologise when they didn’t do the security. It’s done by an airport contractor
QATAR Airways needs Australia more than Australia needs them. Ban them from Australian airspace until there is a proper apology from the Qatari government to all the women involved and punitive compensation is paid. A big blank area in their route network will negate any claims of being a world airline.
QATAR Airways needs Australia more than Australia needs them.
Destinations served by Qatar from Doha:
Abidjan, Abu Dhabi, Abuja, Accra, Adana, Adelaide, Addis Ababa, Ahmedabad, Alexandria, Algiers, Almaty, Al Ula,[58]Amman–Queen Alia, Amritsar, Amsterdam, Ankara, Athens, Atlanta, Auckland, Baghdad, Bahrain,[48]Baku, Bangalore, Bangkok–Suvarnabhumi, Barcelona, Basra, Beijing–Daxing,[59]Beirut, Belgrade, Berlin, Birmingham,[60]Boston, Brisbane, Brussels, Bucharest–Otopeni, Budapest, Cairo, Cape Town, Casablanca, Cebu, Chengdu–Tianfu,[61]Chennai, Chicago–O'Hare, Chittagong (begins 11 March 2024),[62]Chongqing,[61]Clark, Colombo–Bandaranaike, Copenhagen, Dallas/Fort Worth, Dammam, Dar es Salaam, Davao, Delhi, Denpasar, Dhaka, Djibouti, Dubai–International, Dublin, Durban, Düsseldorf,[63]Edinburgh, Entebbe, Erbil, Faisalabad, Frankfurt, Gassim,[64]Geneva, Goa–Dabolim, Guangzhou, Hangzhou, Hanoi, Harare, Ho Chi Minh City, Hong Kong, Houston–Intercontinental, Hyderabad, Isfahan, Islamabad, Istanbul, Istanbul–Sabiha Gökçen, Jakarta–Soekarno-Hatta, Jeddah, Johannesburg–O.R. Tambo, Kano,[65]Karachi, Kathmandu, Khartoum, Kilimanjaro, Kochi, Kolkata, Kozhikode, Kuala Lumpur–International, Kuwait City, Lagos, Lahore, Larnaca, London–Gatwick, London–Heathrow, Los Angeles, Luanda, Lusaka, Lyon, Madrid, Mahé, Malé, Manchester, Manila, Maputo, Marrakesh (resumes 1 April 2024),[66]Mashhad, Medan (begins 15 January 2024),[62]Medina, Melbourne, Miami, Milan–Malpensa, Mogadishu, Montréal–Trudeau, Moscow–Sheremetyevo, Multan, Mumbai, Munich, Muscat, Nagpur, Nairobi–Jomo Kenyatta, Najaf, Neom Bay (begins 9 December 2023),[67]New York–JFK, Nice,[62]Osaka–Kansai (resumes 1 March 2024),[62]Oslo, Paris–Charles de Gaulle, Penang,[68]Perth, Peshawar, Phnom Penh, Phuket, Port Harcourt, Prague, Ras Al Khaimah,[62]Riyadh, Rome–Fiumicino, Salalah, San Francisco, São Paulo–Guarulhos, Seattle/Tacoma, Seoul–Incheon, Shanghai–Pudong,[69]Sharjah, Shiraz, Sialkot, Singapore, Sofia, Sohar, Stockholm–Arlanda, Sulaymaniah, Sydney, Tabuk (begins 14 December 2023),[70]Ta'if, Tbilisi,[71]Tehran–Imam Khomeini, Thiruvananthapuram, Tokyo–Haneda,[72]Tokyo–Narita, Toulouse,[73]Trabzon,[62]Tunis, Venice (resumes 31 March 2024),[74]Vienna, Warsaw–Chopin, Washington–Dulles, Yanbu,[75]Yerevan, Zagreb, Zanzibar, Zürich
Seasonal:Antalya, Bodrum, Málaga, Mykonos, Sarajevo, Windhoek–Hosea Kutako
Try catching a flight to most of them on Australia's "world" airline.
Australians need airlines like Qatar.
Last edited by Traffic_Is_Er_Was; 7th Dec 2023 at 05:43.
Australians need airlines like Qatar.
Time to apologise and pay up.
But the Qataries did apologise, almost immediately. The women want the Airline to apologise and pay up. The Airline did nothing wrong. They should be suing the Airport, not the Airline, but they aren't game enough to take on the Qatar state. The Airline is a much softer target.
Or more correctly, if as you say the government is the owner of both, then anything that happens while traveling on their aircraft or in their airport is their responsibility. But that's too hard.
Both the airline and airport are owned lock, stock and barrel by the government and the airline is the operator of the airport, as the airline is the airport operator any thing that occurs on its grounds is down to the airline IMHO.