Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qatar Airlines being sued

Old 9th Sep 2023, 22:26
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Age: 67
Posts: 1,913
Received 293 Likes on 123 Posts
Qatar are operating a ghost flight from Melbourne to Adelaide each day, itís in their financial interest to lobby for more slots and axe that route with one new bilateral.

PoppaJo is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2023, 02:12
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 50
Posts: 1,012
Received 83 Likes on 40 Posts
The Covid debate on repatriation is a crock of shit.

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.
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2023, 04:38
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 442
Received 16 Likes on 8 Posts
Qatari government seeking retribution by banning QF staff from J class interline travel.
Fonz121 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2023, 06:12
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 3,266
Received 143 Likes on 62 Posts
Qantas committed to hundreds of repatriation flights during that period.
They may have committed to them, but they operated bugger all of them. Cancelled 9 times out of 10.
​​​​​​​you supported an airline that thinks it's ok to assault women.
Do they? I haven't seen anything that supports that statement.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 10th Sep 2023, 07:09
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2022
Location: North Haven
Posts: 188
Received 139 Likes on 66 Posts
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.
Hundreds?

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.
Mr Mossberg is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2023, 22:38
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bran Castle
Posts: 210
Received 17 Likes on 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Mr Mossberg
Hundreds? Bullshit.

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...t-doha-airport

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.
romeocharlie is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2023, 23:33
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 310
Received 75 Likes on 30 Posts
They may have committed to them, but they operated bugger all of them. Cancelled 9 times out of 10.
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.

Last edited by C441; 11th Sep 2023 at 01:49.
C441 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 11th Sep 2023, 00:00
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 50
Posts: 1,012
Received 83 Likes on 40 Posts
Originally Posted by C441
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.
Charter flights with little financial exposure v airline ops with government support.
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2023, 03:13
  #29 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by C441
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.
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. Donít 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 donít think itís 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 shit 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.
Troo believer is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Troo believer:
Old 19th Sep 2023, 11:42
  #30 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 19 Likes on 11 Posts
Women strip searched at Qatari airport fear similar incident could happen again

Women strip searched at Qatari airport fear similar incident could happen again

By political reporter Stephanie Borys
Posted 6h ago6 hours ago, updated 4h ago4 hours agoA 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.

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
Get Breaking News, and Politicsnotifications to stay up to dateENABLEIn October 2020, women onboard a flight bound for Australia were removed from the plane and forced to undergo examinations without explanation or consent after a newborn baby was found abandoned.

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.

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
Troo believer is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2023, 07:58
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 930
Received 20 Likes on 6 Posts
[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
ozbiggles is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.