Priority boarding on QF domestic - what is the story?

[simongr]

There didn't used to be signs or any form of Premium Boarding at all. Then a few of us got on our high horses and raised the issue here - a lot. Still nothing happened so we went on the offensive a little more - I personally emailed or tweeted QF every time it failed. Not long after that up went the signs and the process started to improve. Personally I find it not perfect - then I find many elements of service provision in virtually every industry in this country to be below par. When I fist moved here I couldn't believe the lack of service provided by people in service oriented roles - but I certainly have found it improving. I just wish as drewbles says that they looked to change their process rather than just getting feedback on their process.

I am glad that you are taking it to VCAT as that way you wont waste the resources of NSW government on a trivial claim.

 

[Berlin]

Haaaaa... This is suddenly becoming one of those threads where I wished they had a smiley eating popcorn on here, love it!

 

[medhead]

My approach was not twitter but to send them feedback via customer care. There were a number who hit qantas about this issue. In particular, that it was a published benefit that was never provided. I must also say outright that there were other on AFF who pushed much harder than I did. I'm certainly not claiming any responsibility for the change.

Perhaps ironically, I think the reduced staffing on 737s will actually make PB work better. They seem to be past the mindset from 734 crews that one person scanning means one boarding lane.

 

[Berlin]

Thinking of my experiences, yes- in many cases it seems to work fine these days but not in all. However, I can't help but getting the feeling this is mainly due to the fact that the actual lines are fairly clearly separated at most gates and not because staff is eagle eyed watching the PB queue. How many times have people witnessed the QF crew really telling off someone at the front of the queue and sending them back to the long one for not being in the correct line? That's what they should do and I've witnessed it on pretty much every AA flight when someone is trying to sneak in...

 

[ajw373]

Not sure if it has been mentioned somewhere in the past 265 pages, but yesterday flew on QF787 SYD-CBR which left Sydney at gate 13. As regular Sydney users would know the boarding lines for gate 12 and 13 are just a few metres apart. Now if you stand looking at these two gates how on earth is someone meant to work out what is the priority line and which is the normal line? The way it worked yesterday both lines for gate 13 were makred through singage as priority. The line to the left which I know was priority because of the single PA announcement about it was marked as priority, but the line to the right, which would be the left line for gate 12 was ALSO marked as priority, just not announced as such. Anyway not to worry the non priority line was actually shorter.

One last thing I don't fully follow is why golds don't get domestic priority but do get international priority. Must admit I only just realised this myself, making my first economy trip since dropping to gold. Just confusing, just like lounge access where internationally golds can use the business lounge, but domestically they cannot. Now I do understand the reasons etc and don't disagree, but it is just confusing. What they should have done was when creating the domestic business lounge given it a name anything other than business.

 

[dodgeyhack]

How many times have people witnessed the QF crew really telling off someone at the front of the queue and sending them back to the long one for not being in the correct line? That's what they should do and I've witnessed it on pretty much every AA flight when someone is trying to sneak in...

The complete opposite in fact. The other day I had a flight attendant tell me, while scanning my golden passbook boarding pass, that I should have jumped the queue!

 

[Berlin]

The complete opposite in fact. The other day I had a flight attendant tell me, while scanning my golden passbook boarding pass, that I should have jumped the queue!

:shock::evil:

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Change at a rapid rate is something that large companies just can't manage to do unfortunately.

errrm... yes they can if there is a financial incentive. Payment to reserve exit row seats? Introduction of fuel surcharges? Increase in call centre charges for handling bookings? Major changes all implemented pretty quickly and consistently.

Financial benefit for introducing and maintaining priority boarding (in the context that platinums likely have golden handcuffs?) ... almost zero?

 

[tuapekastar]

errrm... yes they can if there is a financial incentive. Payment to reserve exit row seats? Introduction of fuel surcharges? Increase in call centre charges for handling bookings? Major changes all implemented pretty quickly and consistently.

Financial benefit for introducing and maintaining priority boarding (in the context that platinums likely have golden handcuffs?) ... almost zero?

While what you say re introducing those changes quickly is true, to be fair they are IT type changes which once implemented are automatic, whereas PB requires thousands of staff to actively do the right thing every flight/every pax - a somewhat more onerous task, and very subject to flaws in execution (not that it is an excuse not to have implemented PB properly by now).

 

[Downwind]

I am glad that you are taking it to VCAT as that way you wont waste the resources of NSW government on a trivial claim.

If by "Trivial" you mean "QF making false representations that induce me to contract, and then they don't meet the terms of the agreement" then I'll gladly waste the resources of the Victorian government......


Without attempting to preempt the judicial process, my guess is the contracts will be declared frustrated, with only a minor element of the contract outstanding. I'd be happy with an order in my favour and a token compensation of 1c per breach.

This is not and never was about the money, but rather proving a point that QF is not above the law and its about time they behaved that way!

 

[straitman]

errrm... yes they can if there is a financial incentive. Payment to reserve exit row seats? Introduction of fuel surcharges? Increase in call centre charges for handling bookings? Major changes all implemented pretty quickly and consistently.

Financial benefit for introducing and maintaining priority boarding (in the context that platinums likely have golden handcuffs?) ... almost zero?

OK, I'll add a word. Major change at a rapid rate is something that large companies just can't manage to do unfortunately.

I believe you are kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

 

[Downwind]

OK, I'll add a word. Major change at a rapid rate is something that large companies just can't manage to do unfortunately.

I believe you are kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

How is PB a major organisational change? Even if it was, don't advertise it, until you get it sorted. If you need to work on it for 2 years before its ready, do it in your own time, and not the customers.

But as was said earlier, QF is very adept at "major changes" when it is in their financial interest to do so. When it isn't, they're quite happy to drag their feet kicking and screaming!

 

[serfty]

You instruct your staff to do PB.

You tell them to police the queue, and they don't consistently do so, if at all.

You tell them again and they still don't consistently do so.

You tell them again .. and again ..

So you then take the step of the step of putting PB in their PD and performance review and they still don't consistently do so.

You tell them again .. and again ..

Do you sack them for not consistently doing so?

 

[Downwind]

You instruct your staff to do BP.

You tell them to police the queue, and they don't consistantly do so, if at all.

You tell them again and they still don't consistantly do so.

You tell them again .. and again ..

DO you sack them for not consistently doing so?

short answer.... YES. If I dont perform in my job, my backside is out the door so why should QF staff be any different? I suspect however that it may not necessarily be the staff but rather a lack of appropriate training and followup but after 2 years, somethings got to give.......

 

[MEL_Traveller]

You instruct your staff to do BP.

You tell them to police the queue, and they don't consistantly do so, if at all.

You tell them again and they still don't consistantly do so.

You tell them again .. and again ..

DO you sack them for not consistently doing so?

I was thinking about this. Perhaps the crew don't want to act as security bouncers? Their primary focus is on safety, service second. If you were a member of the crew would you want to have the angst of turning pax away during boarding? I suppose the answer is to have dedicated gate staff to handle this.

 

[serfty]

The more I think about this the more I see it as the base answer.

Not going to happen though, as it would require recruiting more staff.

 

[SeatBackForward]

I was thinking about this. Perhaps the crew don't want to act as security bouncers? Their primary focus is on safety, service second. If you were a member of the crew would you want to have the angst of turning pax away during boarding? I suppose the answer is to have dedicated gate staff to handle this.

Which is why I think the AA model works well compared to QF. But do you think QF will fork out the $$ to pay for extra ground crew - not likely when they're already trying to replace them with automated gates.

 

[medhead]

You instruct your staff to do BP.

You tell them to police the queue, and they don't consistantly do so, if at all.

You tell them again and they still don't consistantly do so.

You tell them again .. and again ..

DO you sack them for not consistently doing so?

You may have forgotten the step of putting PB in their PD and performance review.

 

[tm.smile]

Which is why I think the AA model works well compared to QF. But do you think QF will fork out the $$ to pay for extra ground crew - not likely when they're already trying to replace them with automated gates.

Perhaps the automated gates could be helpful in improving PB by having dedicated lanes where passengers with status can board... that and a new boarding proceedure might be a good reset to stress premium boarding.

The flip side perhaps the cattle can use automated lanes and PB users the staffed queue (incentive to do less handling)...

 

[SeatBackForward]

Perhaps the automated gates could be helpful in improving PB by having dedicated lanes where passengers with status can board... that and a new boarding proceedure might be a good reset to stress premium boarding.

The flip side perhaps the cattle can use automated lanes and PB users the staffed queue (incentive to do less handling)...

I imagine it would be the other way around. Generally, FF's are the ones with QF cards, or with mobile device boarding passes - so they are more likely candidates to use automated gates. HOWEVER..even NB's can have both of those.

No doubt the automated gates would need some sort of configuration during the boarding process to specify that they'd only accept WP, WP+, OWE, CL or J passessgers - this shouldn't be too hard, but I can see the problems already:

1. Passengers not entitled to use the automated gates, uses the gate, gets red light and refusal, what do they do? cut in to the general queue? vent frustration at machine, barge through??
2. Passengers who are entitled to use the gate, but for whatever reason, have not put their entitlement onto their booking, and so its not reflected on the BP..(this isnt an automated gate specific problem)
3. Why have a gate sitting idle if all the PB passengers are already boarded? it would be better to allow the general queue to use this gate too when there are no premium pax.

I don't think the automated gates solve the problem, QF simply need more ground staff to enforce PB, it simply wont work otherwise, and should no longer be a published benefit.

Even if they did do the opposite of the above, Automated gates for general boarding and staff for PB, the same problem occurs when someone not entitled to PB, goes to the staff member (and I would hazard that they are more likely to walk to a person than to a machine). Does the staff say "no sorry" or let them on? we're back to the present situation then.