"Best fare of the day" policy

[duffshot]

Ironically, it seems some of the money saved on travel has gone towards pointless advertising in the Perth Qantas domestic terminal. Look out for it as you come down the escalator if you're lucky enough not to work for us.

Steve

It's not that "rhymes with Alice" one is it?

 

[StevePER]

It's not that "rhymes with Alice" one is it?

Could be.

Next week will be my first Virgin Blue experience under the new policy. In order to utilise the best fare of the day we were given the choice of either getting home around midnight on Thursday or staying an extra night and losing half a day's work on Friday. I chose the latter.

I think it's fantastic that we have saved about $100 on a flexible ticket, and it will only cost an extra $250 in additional expenses and half a day's lost work.

Steve

 

[Damien]

Next week will be my first Virgin Blue experience under the new policy. In order to utilise the best fare of the day we were given the choice of either getting home around midnight on Thursday or staying an extra night and losing half a day's work on Friday. I chose the latter.

I think it's fantastic that we have saved about $100 on a flexible ticket, and it will only cost an extra $250 in additional expenses and half a day's lost work.

...which further highlights the amount of thought that the decision makers put into their efforts.

 

[oz_mark]

Could be.

Next week will be my first Virgin Blue experience under the new policy. In order to utilise the best fare of the day we were given the choice of either getting home around midnight on Thursday or staying an extra night and losing half a day's work on Friday. I chose the latter.

I think it's fantastic that we have saved about $100 on a flexible ticket, and it will only cost an extra $250 in additional expenses and half a day's lost work.

One of those great mysteries I get with my travel as well. I am sure costs related to flying must form some part of a KPI, whereas other travel related expenses don't seem to.

 

[simongr]

Just in defence of the bean counters and the earlier comments that "accountants should never be put in charge of blah blah blah" can I explain somethign as an accountant myself. Accountants dont sit there thinking up ways to screw the staff in the business. They also dont sit there thinking up ways to shave 50c here and there. What generally happens is that someone in the business makes a bad investment/hiring choice and the business underpeforms. Then senior management dont get their bonus - which means their wives dont get their new Mercs. Next thing is that the CEO phones his CFO and says "we need to hit budget next year - make it happen". So the CFO has a couple of options:

- Make the business perform better - well given he has no control over the hiring decisions of the other managers, cant change manufacturing processes to be more efficient and if he suggests changing enterprise awards for excessive allownces in underperfoming business units is told "oh that would be bad with the unions"

- Take a pay cut for him and the senior management team - see comments above on buying new merc

- Cut costs that he can control - sadly things like flights, staff entertaining, workspace environment (hey everybody lets moves to open plan -its really about improving communication and not about cramming more of you into a smaller space leading to a lower cost per body ratio) are things that are in the accountants control.

I completely agree that when making these decisions people need to take account of the total cost of the decision - and the cost is also measured in terms of staff engagement with the business of which travel policy can for some people be akey factor.

So please next time you feel inclined to blame the accountants for having to travel DJ/JQ make sure you look at how well your business is performing against budget/target. Most places I go are happy to have some lattitude with high performers and also this can act as an incentive for other units.

 

[Yada Yada]

Good points simongr.

To which I would add... if anyone has been flying QF in economy, switching to DJ is actually an improvement. :!:

 

[StevePER]

To which I would add... if anyone has been flying QF in economy, switching to DJ is actually an improvement. :!:

May I ask how? I found the seats were uncomfortable, the flight was long and tedious, and the "pay for everything" philosophy was annoying. I am in The Vlounge now (luckily Sydney has one, unlike Perth) and it's a bit disappointing. The beer fridge is locked and there is no sign of party pies or sausage rolls. The only redeeming feature is the staff!

Steve

 

[acampbel]

... I am in The Vlounge now (luckily Sydney has one, unlike Perth) and it's a bit disappointing. The beer fridge is locked and there is no sign of party pies or sausage rolls. The only redeeming feature is the staff!
....

Whhhhaaaaaaatttt !!?!!

It's all very well not requiring beer goggles to appreciate Virgin's dubious hiring practices , but I sometimes (Fine - always) like an ale or two when waiting for the flight home. Did you post at brekky or does The Lounge have licensing hours designed by wowsers?


Cheers (?),


Andrew

.

 

[NM]

It's all very well not requiring beer goggles to appreciate Virgin's dubious hiring practices , but I sometimes (Fine - always) like an ale or two when waiting for the flight home. Did you post at brekky or does The Lounge have licensing hours designed by wowsers?

The post was time-stamped 12:40pm. Note that the QF domestic bar does not open until 1:00pm.

 

[oz_mark]

The post was time-stamped 12:40pm. Note that the QF domestic bar does not open until 1:00pm.

Alcohol is not available till after 1.00 pm in The Lounge as well.

 

[simongr]

The post was time-stamped 12:40pm. Note that the QF domestic bar does not open until 1:00pm.

Didnt the bar used to open at 3PM? That might have been golden wing but I am not sure.....

 

[NM]

Didnt the bar used to open at 3PM? That might have been golden wing but I am not sure.....

Its been quite a few years since 3pm was beer-o'clock.

 

[serfty]

Didnt the bar used to open at 3PM? That might have been golden wing but I am not sure.....

As NM posted, it's been that way for around 3 years. I was told that the bar opening time was moved forward to 1pm because the QP's were becoming absolute Zoo's around 3-4pm with all the Golden Wing refugees moving to the QP's. This gave those wishing an HP or two the opportunty to take earlier departures; thereby easing the beer o'clock crush.

 

[Yada Yada]

May I ask how? I found the seats were uncomfortable, the flight was long and tedious, and the "pay for everything" philosophy was annoying. I am in The Vlounge now (luckily Sydney has one, unlike Perth) and it's a bit disappointing. The beer fridge is locked and there is no sign of party pies or sausage rolls. The only redeeming feature is the staff!

Well, I find the Virgin Blue seats very comfortable, there is on average more legroom than on QF, I'd rather pay for something I want to eat/drink than be given something I don't want, and find the VLounge great. Granted, the A330 is a nice plane to fly on to/from PER and is a bit faster. But even flying J on this run I've found the QF FA's grumpy and unaccommodating.

 

[straitman]

Well, I find the Virgin Blue seats very comfortable, there is on average more legroom than on QF, I'd rather pay for something I want to eat/drink than be given something I don't want, and find the VLounge great. Granted, the A330 is a nice plane to fly on to/from PER and is a bit faster. But even flying J on this run I've found the QF FA's grumpy and unaccommodating.

The scarebus fleet is by design slower than the Boeing fleet. Maybe this is another example of JQ deliberately flying slower to save fuel.

 

[NM]

The scarebus fleet is by design slower than the Boeing fleet. Maybe this is another example of JQ deliberately flying slower to save fuel.

I think the original comparison was between QF and DJ, rather than JQ, but here are some interesting numbers for LRC (Long Range Cruise) speeds for various aircraft (in Mach):

737NG: 0.785
A320: 0.79
763: 0.80
A330: 0.82
777: 0.84
A350XWB: 0.85 (design)
787: 0.85 (design)
744: 0.855
748: 0.855 (design)

And a couple of older aircraft with impressive cruise speeds were the 727 (0.87) and 747SP (0.86). Both the 747SP and 727 could maintain long range cruise of 0.92 if desired - with the obvious side affect of increased fuel burn.

Of course each operator will have their own crew instructions for operation of each type. Its a trade-off of lower cruise speed to reduce fuel usage (and hence cost) vs maintaining schedule integrity and aircraft utilisation. I suspect the higher fuel costs may be influencing the decision towards reducing cruise speed in current times.

 

[straitman]

I think the original comparison was between QF and DJ, rather than JQ

....oops! I meant DJ!

And a couple of older aircraft with impressive cruise speeds were the 727 (0.87) and 747SP (0.86). Both the 747SP and 727 could maintain long range cruise of 0.92 if desired - with the obvious side affect of increased fuel burn.

Of course each operator will have their own crew instructions for operation of each type. Its a trade-off of lower cruise speed to reduce fuel usage (and hence cost) vs maintaining schedule integrity and aircraft utilisation. I suspect the higher fuel costs may be influencing the decision towards reducing cruise speed in current times.

A friend of mine did a high speed long range cruise from Europe to HK one night so he wouldn't miss the last ferry home. Only burnt an extra 10 ton of fuel :!: