Downgraded from Business Class on Qantas due to "tech crew" [pilot] Travel Requirements

[Austman]

Poochie can be like a dog with a bone. Usually best left alone.

When the question was asked: "But why take us off the plane if this is a regular and acceptable thing to do?"

I was tempted to answer that, in some circumstances, it would be akin to dealing with a dog with a bone.

It was IMO, the way it had to be handled. If it has to come to being handled at all!

I'm sure that the OP and most pax would have handled the situation, on the plane, in a responsible way, but I can imagine the circumstances if it didn't go well.

 

[Pushka]

I agree it's a poor look, especially if the "exec" in the airbridge didn't share the full reason for bumping. I'm sure they have their own reasons for not sharing more, but in the end it's not good and evidently as demonstrated by this thread it leaves customers wanting answers.

I've been moved from a preselected Business seat to another Business seat on a QF A330 before with no explanation before, only to see a likely staff member sitting at my old seat (based on their long conversations with the CSM). The most logical explanation would be that the other seat was broken (as is unfortunately somewhat common with those QF J seats) and they put a person on staff travel there instead. However, it left me wondering and I'm sure some customers would not have been happy with the sudden seat move. It would've been very easy to just tell the passenger why they were moved, but for some reason they don't.

I suppose you could interpret this as they have something to hide (a reason for moving me for staff that I wouldn't like to hear), but I doubt that.

As for why OP was bumped, I feel like Occam's razor should apply here. If the CSM said it was "techs", then it was probably Qantas staff of some sort. I suspect we'll never know if they're tech crew (pilots) or aircraft technicians or whatever. Maybe someone misread or misheard something hence the switch from referring to them as pilots to not.

In theory, could it have been all a lie to cover up for something else (a staff member doing a favour for themselves or someone else etc.)? Yeah, sure. However, I just don't think that passes the pub test, especially in a large organization like Qantas.

As an aside: I do miss the days of the Red Roo account, as they could've usually looked up the flight and given a straight answer immediately, instead of generating 7 pages of speculation.

@Pushka I'm most curious if you've gotten a refund for your upgrade yet. Knowing Qantas, I know the answer is most likely not. For an involuntary downgrade I would hope you get your points back plus another nominal number of points for "Compliments of Customer Contact" or whatever.

Guessed it. Not yet. I’ll follow up in a week. And ask for a good contact. Maybe a tweet to a certain political journalist.

 

[Mr H]

They don’t need to talk their way into anything at all.
Pilots travel J if the flight is work related.

I am sure this is correct, but it is a strange business where staff comfort trumps paying customers who have already been sold the product. If it involved flatbeds for an overnight positioning flight then I could see a health and safety argument, but ADL-MEL is just pure comfort/flexing.

 

[Pushka]

Now, at the least, we know what QF is capable of, and whose decision it was to do this destardy deed.
They could have put those 2 in row 7, but they somehow talked their way, or had their way, to be put into J.
All the "goodwill"/feel good of QF, down the loo.

I think this is exactly what happened.

 

[bcworld]

Guessed it. Not yet. I’ll follow up in a week. And ask for a good contact. Maybe a tweet to a certain political journalist.

To be honest...to test QF's legendary customer service I'd just keep quiet for a while. See if they can proactively refund you for what you didn't receive (let alone any goodwill gesture) without being asked. But I'm fairly sure I know the answer!

 

[NM]

I am sure this is correct, but it is a strange business where staff comfort trumps paying customers who have already been sold the product. If it involved flatbeds for an overnight positioning flight then I could see a health and safety argument, but ADL-MEL is just pure comfort/flexing.

It is not about staff comfort or perks. It is about ensuring these passengers, who are about to be operating pilots, arrive in a fit and proper state to carry out their very important duties as pilots operating a commercial flight after arriving at their destination. As a passenger on the flight they are about to operate, I would prefer they arrive refreshed and ready to perform at their best rather than having been cramped at the back of the bus.

 

[drron]

When we had a problem with an AA plane at JFK going tech and instead of flying JFK - LHR we instead flew JFK - MIA -LHR I as an AA plat with Mrsdrron with no AA status were told we would receive compensation for the delay in arrival. We were flying J. On arrival at LHR I connected to the internet and checked our AA accounts. I had an extra 10000 miles and Mrsdrron an extra 5000 miles.
This is what QF should have done in this case. One of the reasons why I fully switched to Aadvantage.

 

[Flashback]

And what it does show is that anyone travelling on an Award ticket is vulnerable to downgrades for whatever reason, regardless of Airline status. Which makes award flying, especially for lengthy flights, a real risk.

Common reports of that in the BA (or conspiracy theories, rather....!) for those on bookings made using the BAPP 2-4-1 voucher to book 2x Avios tickets for the price of 1 (paying +++ for each person).

That’s what I was wondering too. They were calling them pilots until they actually arrived then used the word techs. But their conversations didn’t sound like they were pilots. No uniforms to distinguish but civvies. At least one lived in Adelaide our departure place.

I'm curious though as to what conversations a pilot would have .... vs what they wouldn't have?

 

[Flyfrequently]

It's not a good look. In fact it's an awful customer experience and one of the worse ways possible you can downgrade someone. This should be settled by some very sweet compensation not just a refund of the points used for upgrade.

Agree @JohnK , I just hope Pushka and Mr P are relaxing in Bali now 🏖

 

[Austman]

So with all the explanations so far, where are we?

1. It was a poor customer experience. No doubt.
2. It could have been much better handled by Qantas.
3. But Qantas had to accommodate some staff in J.
4. Qantas left it to the last minute to implement that requirement. There can be valid reasons for that.
5. When it came to the crunch, Qantas took the affected pax off the plane to explain. They'd likely have to do that, at that point.
6. The affected pax were not quite given their original Y seats back. That can happen all the time when upgrades go wrong at the last minute.
7. The affected pax were treated well on the flight.
8. The affected pax were given some assistance (not 100% as offered) in connecting to their international flight.
9. It was a short domestic flight.

A poorly handled experience? Yes, I'd agree.

Super terrible? I'm not sure.

 

[33kft]

Even if it wasn't operationally necessary for the staff to travel in J, any sort of provision in their EA is hard fought and won against an organisation that they are constantly in negotiation with / unionised against to protect their rights.

I think it would only make sense that your thought process as an eligible J deadhead staff would be - this is in our contract, not enforcing the provision would put its continued existence / enforcement at risk, in writing this into the agreement the airline has taken on the responsibility to manage this situation and given my responsibilities I'm happy for this not to be my problem.

So I certainly couldn't imagine anyone needing to feel guilty on the QF staff side of the fence for having taken those seats, despite the inconvenience to customers. I am sure it could be debated back and forward but my view would be, QF have every opportunity to soften their yield management processes to both oblige their contractual obligations and maintain customer satisfaction, if they choose to run a lean leveraged model they take on that responsibility.

My question is - how do airlines at large manage this risk? Is it that they'd take a more cautious approach to confirmation of upgrade seats, or is it that they'd just manage the situation better? I am thinking along the lines of the carriers who oversell but then offer voluntary financial compensation (although it sounds like the timing of this event wouldn't necessarily have allowed for this). It does make sense to me for the airlines to see their award seat allocations as the "at risk" portion of the inventory should they need to bump people, and off the back of that - would airlines prefer to have some proportion of seats as award seats on every flight to allow them to manage this, vs revenue-only which is better for profits but a PR nightmare in the event of irrops

 

[MEL_Traveller]

The alternative of course is that had this issue been identified slightly earlier, volunteers could have been sought for the downgrade rather than picking on those who paid with extra points.

Very possible 2 other pax, without urgent travel requirements, would have been happy to fly J later, or accept compensation and travel in the main cabin.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

When we had a problem with an AA plane at JFK going tech and instead of flying JFK - LHR we instead flew JFK - MIA -LHR I as an AA plat with Mrsdrron with no AA status were told we would receive compensation for the delay in arrival. We were flying J. On arrival at LHR I connected to the internet and checked our AA accounts. I had an extra 10000 miles and Mrsdrron an extra 5000 miles.
This is what QF should have done in this case. One of the reasons why I fully switched to Aadvantage.

That’s a key question that’s worth examining. What would be a fair compensation for QF to offer in this circumstance (aside from refunding the points for the upgrade)? 10,000 points? Does Qantas provide compensation due to service failures like catering, broken seat/IFE, etc? I know on United this is a common thing with travellers often not even having to follow up on such things. For instance I flew a quick domestic flight from YYZ to DEN and wifi wasn’t working. The SD announced that and said United would get in touch to provide compensation. Sure enough I got 5,000 UA points from United Cares.

-RooFlyer88

 

[Must...Fly!]

Personal opinion is the right compensation (in addition to any refund due) would be 18,400 points, enough for the OP to book a classic reward seat for the same route on a future flight.

 

[ozbeachbabe]

Qantas can print physical standby boarding passes - the seat shows as SBY.

If they were paxing crew on duty travel they wouldn't have had a standby boarding pass so at the very least they would have been in a confirmed economy seat but probably insisted on their entitlement of duty travel which is to travel in J.

 

[DC3]

Oh, Pushka. Now look. Everyone thinks that they have the answers.

 

[Pushka]

Agree @JohnK , I just hope Pushka and Mr P are relaxing in Bali now 🏖

Oh. We are indeed. Thankyou

 

[RooFlyer]

We have now descended to speculating that tech crew ie pilots were drinking in the QP before the bar opened and before a positioning flight

Well, its news to me that 'tech crew' ARE pilots (and only pilots). If you read all that Pushka has written about their age and behaviour in the QP, I'd really, really hope that they weren't pilots! In all the foregoing discussion , I've equated 'techs' as engineering staff.

So anyway, apparently we had a couple of on-duty pilots being a bit rowdy in the QP for an hour or so before a flight (so much so that Pushka felt the need to move away). Pushka said before that at the time, they thought they might be mine workers.

Does anyone want to say that their being identified as pilots makes you feel better about this incident?

They don’t need to talk their way into anything at all.
Pilots travel J if the flight is work related.

And I'd never begrudge an on-duty pilot my J seat (handled appropriately). But I am not in anyway convinced that the young men were pilots who were mucking around in the QP for a while waiting to see where they needed to go next.

 

[Pushka]

Well, its news to me that 'tech crew' ARE pilots (and only pilots). If you read all that Pushka has written about their age and behaviour in the QP, I'd really, really hope that they weren't pilots! In all the foregoing discussion , I've equated 'techs' as engineering staff.

So anyway, apparently we had a couple of on-duty pilots being a bit rowdy in the QP for an hour or so before a flight (so much so that Pushka felt the need to move away). Pushka said before that at the time, they thought they might be mine workers.

Does anyone want to say that their being identified as pilots makes you feel better about this incident?




And I'd never begrudge an on-duty pilot my J seat (handled appropriately). But I am not in anyway convinced that the young men were pilots who were mucking around in the QP for a while waiting to see where they needed to go next.

Yes. I’d always thought engineering. I wouldn’t like to be on a plane they were flying. Too blase and not cognizant of their environment

 

[Princess Fiona]

Well, its news to me that 'tech crew' ARE pilots (and only pilots). If you read all that Pushka has written about their age and behaviour in the QP, I'd really, really hope that they weren't pilots! In all the foregoing discussion , I've equated 'techs' as engineering staff.

So anyway, apparently we had a couple of on-duty pilots being a bit rowdy in the QP for an hour or so before a flight (so much so that Pushka felt the need to move away). Pushka said before that at the time, they thought they might be mine workers.

Does anyone want to say that their being identified as pilots makes you feel better about this incident?




And I'd never begrudge an on-duty pilot my J seat (handled appropriately). But I am not in anyway convinced that the young men were pilots who were mucking around in the QP for a while waiting to see where they needed to go next.

You will never be convinced. In fact you said as much several pages ago.

There are plenty of very young pilots both male and female flying QFLink.
They are an asset to the airline.


Tech crew is the common parlance on QF for staff who go in the coughpit flying the plane.
There are more people than just me that have said that.