Qantas lounge shoe policy - this is concerning

[MEL_Traveller]

I think this deserves its own thread for attention by Qantas.

This thread appears in FT: No shoes, no shirt, no service - Page 12 - FlyerTalk Forums

Passenger refused entry wearing footwear with a toe divider even though it had a back-strap (and is therefore supposedly allowed?).

Supposed medical condition which requires wearing of loose shoes was allegedly ignored - passenger told to go any buy a new pair.

Solution? Passenger wears husband's shoes - 6 sizes to large. And is allowed entry.

Lounge attendant allegedly makes regular visits to ensure passenger remains in her husband's shoes.

I think this is getting a tad ridiculous.

 

[Buzzard]

The whole thing is becoming a joke.

 

[mannej]

Sorry but I disagree with the OP. The quoted post admits to attempting entry in a pair of thongs (anyone can make up an excuse such as for medical reason, when it may just be a bluff so they can wear their expensive thongs), what exactly is the story here?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Sorry but I disagree with the OP. The quoted post admits to attempting entry in a pair of thongs (anyone can make up an excuse such as for medical reason), what exactly is the story here?

The footwear had a 'backstrap' so they weren't thongs.

Given the poster carried a pair of surgical shoes on their next trip, it seems unlikely they were making up a medical condition.

 

[mannej]

The footwear had a 'backstrap' so they weren't thongs.

Given the poster carried a pair of surgical shoes on their next trip, it seems unlikely they were making up a medical condition.

However you do omit the part where she did call them a pair of thongs (Michael Kors does both sandals and thongs), so without a picture it's hard to tell.

I am sorry but I still have no sympathy.

 

[love_the_life]

Sorry but I disagree with the OP. The quoted post admits to attempting entry in a pair of thongs (anyone can make up an excuse such as for medical reason, when it may just be a bluff so they can wear their expensive thongs), what exactly is the story here?

According to the article there was a back strap. Based on what has been posted before this should be acceptable as the shoes are classed as sandals not thongs. There was a photo posted on the other thread of what was acceptable footwear - a pair of sandals with a toe divider. So, IMO QF is becoming silly, especially as the international lounges are not included (as are some of the domestic ones).

 

[Pleb Status]

I cannot understand why thongs are not allowed but sandals (or other types of substantially open shoes) are allowed. Either they both should be banned (no substantially open shoes) or both accepted.

 

[Mattg]

Lounge attendant allegedly makes regular visits to ensure passenger remains in her husband's shoes.

This whole thing is just ridiculous, but this is the part I find most disconcerting. Have QF become the shoe police? Who really cares what shoes someone is wearing.

 

[boomy]

Who really cares what shoes someone is wearing.

Good question. Seriously, life is too short to worry about this kind of rubbish.
Live and let live.

 

[jpboyce]

Supposed medical condition which requires wearing of loose shoes was allegedly ignored - passenger told to go any buy a new pair.

I wonder how much of this drama would've been avoided if the person had some sort of doctor's note with them explaining the footwear rather than going with "trust me".

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I wonder how much of this drama would've been avoided if the person had some sort of doctor's note with them explaining the footwear rather than going with "trust me".

Ok - on the one hand QF is trying to enforce a dress policy which reflects the supposed 'higher and refined' standards of club members.

But on the other it is saying 'our members are such we can't trust them' when they ask for a medical dispensation.

So which is it? 'Higher and refined' or 'they're all cheap scammers'?

 

[blackcat20]

Supposed medical condition which requires wearing of loose shoes was allegedly ignored - passenger told to go any buy a new pair.

(snip)

Lounge attendant allegedly makes regular visits to ensure passenger remains in her husband's shoes.

I got approached in the lounge, after getting past the "door guard" with no issues, and it was suggested that I must have changed my shoes after arrival (I hadnt). I also had a medical excuse (the bright blue strapping around my knee was very obvious) and they left me alone after that. Though fortunately we were on our way out anyway. I find the whole show thing ridiculous too.

 

[ashleyn]

I got approached in the lounge, after getting past the "door guard" with no issues, and it was suggested that I must have changed my shoes after arrival (I hadnt). I also had a medical excuse (the bright blue strapping around my knee was very obvious) and they left me alone after that. Though fortunately we were on our way out anyway. I find the whole show thing ridiculous too.

Surely they are trying to filter out the thong, boardshorts and singlet brigade so a bit of common sense should prevail.

 

[Sdtravel]

Think i read here or on flyer talk this old chestnut many times. Conversation went along the lines of differences between cheap thongs from a vending machine vs expensive designer thongs some which disguise as sandles by having a tiny strap around them.
I think i have ready the door guard and monitoring reports before.

I don't have a huge opinion on the matter but i do support QF efforts with the dress policy.
The policy, news reports of people being rejected have been around for a while. Im fairly sure QC members and FF with lounge access were told ahead of time.

 

[Pushka]

Surely they are trying to filter out the thong, boardshorts and singlet brigade so a bit of common sense should prevail.

Yes but they are between a rock and a hard place. There are perfectly acceptable 'thongs' that are expensive and look great. And then there are the rubber thongs brigade. Really tough discrimination call these days.

 

[BD1959]

If only the "shoe police" were in training for "priority boarding monitoring" ....

... that should keep this thread going another 20 pages!!

Regards,

BD

 

[Daver6]

If only the "shoe police" were in training for "priority boarding monitoring" ....

... that should keep this thread going another 20 pages!!

Regards,

BD

I just scrolled to the end of this thread to post something along the same lines. If they put half this amount of effort into policing priority boarding...

 

[opusman]

I can picture Red Roo in a regular management meeting. "How can we make QF seem more professional?"

Someone pipes up "lets fix priority boarding, it's a complete schemozzle".

Red Roo pretends not to hear. "Anyone got any ideas?"

Finally the high school intern says "I know, how about banning people wearing thongs?"

"YES!" screams Red Roo, problem solved, QF is again Australia's premium airline.

 

[footy99]

I think the fact this policy isn't enforced in 95% of domestic lounges and 100% of international lounges speaks volumes. It's a token gesture to address the odd complaint about fat blokes in singlets that has become a complete unmitigated shemozzle with no upside possible.

 

[JohnPhelan]

This whole thing is just ridiculous, but this is the part I find most disconcerting. Have QF become the shoe police? Who really cares what shoes someone is wearing.

I'm more concerned about it from the safety perspective. I think enclosed shoes should be necessary on aircraft; don't really care about the lounge.