How best to give Qantas some feedback

[RooFlyer]

An airline can only control a small patch of that area.

Yes - their particular patch du jour.

 

[Assassin]

Sorry - you = OP, not you...

For what it's worth, I received ~S$184 in cash in Singapore when my bag didn't turn up and then another $400 (which took me a few months to chase) for the extra two days.

 

[Longtoo]

I sent my feedback to QF via their web form. There is character limitation on the form although it is not stated anywhere at all. Thus, i had to shorten the text. Based on the consultation here, I clearly separate what I think QF direct responsibility and indirect responsibility which they can pass on to Sydney Airport.

The feedback was sent on 5 July. No response from QF so far. Again, I did not ask for any compensation.

 

[jpp42]

I agree with Longtoo that he should direct all his complaints about Sydney Airport to Qantas, for them to pass on or make known to Sydney Airport in whatever process they have for this. It is wrong to suggest there is "nothing [Qantas] can do" about conditions at Sydney Airport. Qantas are a major tenant and pay Sydney Airport for their services - of course they can suggest improvements. He is unlikely to get a direct response or see immediate change, but both parties will make note of customer feedback in a general sense.

Also, despite comments from "TheSupposedInsider" it is totally wrong that Qantas has no influence whatsoever on what gates are used for various flights. While sometimes operational considerations can cause last-minute changes, especially if a flight is running late, Qantas clearly prioritizes certain flights for certain gates. Trans-Tasman flights very frequently use remote stands, and you will never find the SYD-AKL-JFK premium service boarding via bus, or from a gate in the 50-63 pier far away from the lounge. This is not due to some mysterious goodwill of Sydney Airport, this is specifically negotiated and planned by Qantas, with appropriate fees paid where relevant. It's perhaps not surprising that SYD-BKK, a leisure-heavy route, would be lower priority and get a remote stand/bus gate.

Again, I did not ask for any compensation.

Had you asked for compensation for the faulty in-flight entertainment and/or delayed baggage, you might have gotten some. I am not sure why you didn't, it might help reduce the pain and is something Qantas can and likely will do.

 

[justinbrett]

I agree with Longtoo that he should direct all his complaints about Sydney Airport to Qantas, for them to pass on or make known to Sydney Airport in whatever process they have for this. It is wrong to suggest there is "nothing [Qantas] can do" about conditions at Sydney Airport. Qantas are a major tenant and pay Sydney Airport for their services - of course they can suggest improvements. He is unlikely to get a direct response or see immediate change, but both parties will make note of customer feedback in a general sense.

Also, despite comments from "TheSupposedInsider" it is totally wrong that Qantas has no influence whatsoever on what gates are used for various flights. While sometimes operational considerations can cause last-minute changes, especially if a flight is running late, Qantas clearly prioritizes certain flights for certain gates. Trans-Tasman flights very frequently use remote stands, and you will never find the SYD-AKL-JFK premium service boarding via bus, or from a gate in the 50-63 pier far away from the lounge. This is not due to some mysterious goodwill of Sydney Airport, this is specifically negotiated and planned by Qantas, with appropriate fees paid where relevant. It's perhaps not surprising that SYD-BKK, a leisure-heavy route, would be lower priority and get a remote stand/bus gate.

I'm pretty sure the airport limitations are well known to QF and they in part sign off on them. Complaining about it won't really change anything - airports have master plans and will expand infrastructure as demand and resources allow. I'm sure QF would love more gates too so they didn't have to board via bus, they're just working with what they have.

Before the TBIT expansion opened at LAX recently, QF usually boarded the BNE 787 at the bus gates (vs SYD/MEL from the main terminal).

It was horrendous and I'd challenge Longtoo about how chaotic their experience was, as nothing could beat the TBIT bus gates. It wasn't a once off either, several times I flew to BNE from there it was always the same. It was like a scene from the movie 2012, everyone scrambling to get on the last ship. Priority boarding meant nothing because you all ended up on the same bus; I was one of the last to board even as WP sitting in J. There's only so many gates, QF obviously could only get two and prioritised the SYD/MEL flights.

 

[AustraliaPoochie]

Of course we all "hope" the feedback does get to someone at QF who can deal with it.
But in the end, we just do not know/can't tell 100% for sure.
The QF liaison girl we had on here was a good thing, but that went off long ago.
Maybe she was still here in 2016, or maybe her spot was vacated before that.
Now, its up QF.
They can ignore, for all we know.
But its now only QF, AirNZ also has a bad rating, airlines apart from maybe SQ, are know to only worry when its someone VIP that has had something gone wrong.
If they had got something to say in reply, they would have done it by now.
As mentioned, you can still write to AJ before he goes into retirement, via a snail mail letter, but he probably gets tonnes of letters, and its vetted, so who knows, maybe it does not get to him either.
They would probably also have procedures to prevent the same thing that happened in Perth a while back, not that you would go that far.

 

[RooFlyer]

Complaining about it won't really change anything -

It wasn't framed or described as a 'complaint' - it was feedback. Good businesses like and even encourage feedback and take note of it (even if they can't necessarily act on the individual circumstance); at the least, it demonstrates 'customer engagement'.

It may not be the individual experience that prompts some action or change, but a change in trend or volume of feedback (or complaints). Just imagine if they suddenly got a surge in feedback about ... I dunno, falls at a particular terminal or maybe pick-pocketing. You'd hope that they'd investigate to see if there was an actual issue, or something that could be improved for their customer's sake, even if the airline's operations wasn't directly responsible.

And hopefully they wouldn't just rationalise "LAX is worse, so suck it up, Princess ....".

 

[jpp42]

Before the TBIT expansion opened at LAX recently, QF usually boarded the BNE 787 at the bus gates (vs SYD/MEL from the main terminal).

I remember at one point, TBIT had some remote stand gates with the passengers accommodated inside a large shed/hangar. You rode a bus to the hangar, and there were ramps or stairs up to the aircraft level in a totally covered area, which then led to a short jetbridge to the plane. This was way better than Sydney's setup where you have to step outside into the rain/weather (sometimes for the whole climb up the stairs, although they do seem to have more covered stairs these days).

Also, I've been to numerous remote gates at AUH, another airport that uses them heavily even for LH international, and they always ensure priority boarding "works" by checking it at the bus boarding point, and they fill up the first buses only with priority passengers. This seems like an easy way to fix this, but we know that Qantas isn't really all that concerned about PB.

I'm pretty sure the airport limitations are well known to QF and they in part sign off on them. Complaining about it won't really change anything - airports have master plans and will expand infrastructure as demand and resources allow. I'm sure QF would love more gates too so they didn't have to board via bus, they're just working with what they have.

As RooFlyer said, it's still important to let airlines know where the pain points are - the attitude of "it will never change, so I shouldn't provide feedback" is toxic. Sure, no one is building more gates at T1 tomorrow, but if they see a trend in customer feedback the airlines might adjust the priority of this in their longer-term plans. Or other steps could be taken - perhaps the airport, on behalf of its customer, the airlines, could increase the amenity of the remote stands with something like what I describe above at LAX.

 

[justinbrett]

It wasn't framed or described as a 'complaint' - it was feedback. Good businesses like and even encourage feedback and take note of it (even if they can't necessarily act on the individual circumstance); at the least, it demonstrates 'customer engagement'.

It may not be the individual experience that prompts some action or change, but a change in trend or volume of feedback (or complaints). Just imagine if they suddenly got a surge in feedback about ... I dunno, falls at a particular terminal or maybe pick-pocketing. You'd hope that they'd investigate to see if there was an actual issue, or something that could be improved for their customer's sake, even if the airline's operations wasn't directly responsible.

And hopefully they wouldn't just rationalise "LAX is worse, so suck it up, Princess ....".

Sure, but one must remember there is nothing inherently wrong or unsafe about using remote stands - as I'm sure you've experienced; years gone by this was the norm.

If people are "falling" or experiencing pick-pocketing that's quite another matter.

Anybody is free to pass whatever feedback they want, but I think it's a bit futile in this area. It's better for QF to board all aircraft by aerobridge and I'm sure QF will push for that as far as they need to, in order to support their operations. It's not really a mater of passenger comfort - but sure - give feedback on that if you choose to. I'm just pragmatic in realising that one goes straight in the bin.

As RooFlyer said, it's still important to let airlines know where the pain points are - the attitude of "it will never change, so I shouldn't provide feedback" is toxic. Sure, no one is building more gates at T1 tomorrow, but if they see a trend in customer feedback the airlines might adjust the priority of this in their longer-term plans. Or other steps could be taken - perhaps the airport, on behalf of its customer, the airlines, could increase the amenity of the remote stands with something like what I describe above at LAX.

They'll build more gates in order to process more pax and/or attract more airlines (and possibly higher landing fees). Not because individual pax complain about the bus.

Feel free to believe otherwise, but that's not reality.

 

[RooFlyer]

Not because individual pax complain about the bus.

Straw man argument. No one is talking about individual complaints (or feedback) in this context. Both jjp42 and I specifically referred to coughulative complaints/feedback and trends. Any business who ignores an increasing trend or a spike in feedback issues - positive or negative - deserve all the problems that will inevitably follow.

It's not really a mater of passenger comfort

That's where we diverge - I look at it from the passenger point of view (since I'm always the passenger) - where passenger comfort (or at least mitigation of discomfort) is important, while you seem to look at it from the airline's point of view "this is how its done, and its not as bad as ....".

Some airlines DO take customer comfort into account when using remote stands and try to mitigate its negative aspects. It inevitably takes more hands-on and thoughtfulness which in turn will usually cost more. But it can be done, if the airline cares enough, such as:

* Not despatching a bus from the boarding gate until the aircraft is definitely ready to board - avoid 5-10 minutes in a hot bus at the stairs

* Providing a separate bus for premium pax and send this last (S7 in Russia does this!)

Within the realms of airline control, in cop-operation and communication with the airport.

If people are "falling" or experiencing pick-pocketing that's quite another matter.

How much another matter? Like remote gates, terminal security and safety is primarily an airport issue. If the airline's passengers start to send a lot of feedback or complaints on remote gate boarding processes, falls or theft, why wouldn't an airline take the issue up with the airport to see if the issue can be mitigated or resolved?

 

[justinbrett]

How much another matter? Like remote gates, terminal security and safety is primarily an airport issue. If the airline's passengers start to send a lot of feedback or complaints on remote gate boarding processes, falls or theft, why wouldn't an airline take the issue up with the airport to see if the issue can be mitigated or resolved?

Because you're conflating discomfort / inconvenience issues with actual crimes and safety incidents.

You don't give feedback for a fall or robbery - there are processes in place to deal with them and they absolutely should be addressed.

Straw man argument. No one is talking about individual complaints (or feedback) in this context. Both jjp42 and I specifically referred to coughulative complaints/feedback and trends. Any business who ignores an increasing trend or a spike in feedback issues - positive or negative - deserve all the problems that will inevitably follow.

Remote stands have been in use since the dawn of aviation; I fail to see the sudden spike in feedback that people don't like buses. We already know this. As you've detailed it's much more of a bother/staff cost for the airline to use remote stands, there's far more incentive on their part to get an aerobridge vs doing it for the pax (though obviously it's a win-win).

 

[RooFlyer]

Remote stands have been in use since the dawn of aviation; I fail to see the sudden spike in feedback that people don't like buses. We already know this.

You are simply not understanding the argument being made, so I'll need to spell it out. IF there is a spike or upward trend in negative feedback or complaints at some time, about remote gates, thefts or anything, then it would be a poor business that doesn't look into the spike or trend and if its 'real', try to mitigate the issue, whether or not its under their direct control.

Concerning the use of airbridges Vs busses, just say over a period of a few weeks a whole bunch more people than usual complained or commented to Qantas on poor experiences with remote stand boarding at Sydney Airport, I would hope someone would take note and think - hang on, I wonder what's causing that - what's changed? Have a look and if they can identify the issue, then fix it to what it was before. OR, if they get a flurry of positive feedback - have a look and see what or who has brought this about and then encourage or emulate it.

Not just shrug and say "Well, we've always had boarding at remote stands, nothing to see here."

If they hear about a rise or spike in pick-pocketing in their terminal, in just the same way, you'd hope someone in Qantas takes note, takes it up with the airport authorities to make sure they are taking it seriously, and addressing the issue. Not just say "Ah, someone else will care of it".

But bluntly - its about giving a damn, even if its not your 'fault'. Isn't the standard spiel of any airline "Your safety and comfort are our top priority"?

 

[Peasant]

I'm going a bit off-topic here but a few weeks ago I sent (constructive) email feedback after some pretty ordinary experiences across the 16+ international flights I've done in the last month.

I was surprised to receive an email response three days later, asking me for a convenient time to call. I duly replied with my preferred date and time.

Two days after it had passed, they emailed back apologising for missing it, then asked for another time. This time I blocked time in my calendar but lo and behold, no call a second time.

I sent back a fairly terse response and asked for the contact details of a real person so that we can agree on when the call will be. Perhaps unsurprisingly, silence.

Sometimes QF really does not help itself.

 

[justinbrett]

You are simply not understanding the argument being made, so I'll need to spell it out. IF there is a spike or upward trend in negative feedback or complaints at some time, about remote gates, thefts or anything, then it would be a poor business that doesn't look into the spike or trend and if its 'real', try to mitigate the issue, whether or not its under their direct control.

Concerning the use of airbridges Vs busses, just say over a period of a few weeks a whole bunch more people than usual complained or commented to Qantas on poor experiences with remote stand boarding at Sydney Airport, I would hope someone would take note and think - hang on, I wonder what's causing that - what's changed? Have a look and if they can identify the issue, then fix it to what it was before. OR, if they get a flurry of positive feedback - have a look and see what or who has brought this about and then encourage or emulate it.

Not just shrug and say "Well, we've always had boarding at remote stands, nothing to see here."

If they hear about a rise or spike in pick-pocketing in their terminal, in just the same way, you'd hope someone in Qantas takes note, takes it up with the airport authorities to make sure they are taking it seriously, and addressing the issue. Not just say "Ah, someone else will care of it".

But bluntly - its about giving a damn, even if its not your 'fault'. Isn't the standard spiel of any airline "Your safety and comfort are our top priority"?

Well again - crimes and safety incidents shouldn't be left in the feedback system - they should be immediately referred to the appropriate channels, but I guess you're not getting that point. That's not to say the airline doesn't care, quite the contrary, it's their duty to ensure appropriate action is taken and that is how its done. Both of those channels have their own trend reporting. That's not even to say the channels aren't within the airline itself - just that it's not the general feedback channel.

I took the original argument to be the fact that bus gates were being used, not a specific incident in the way they were being used. Sure, go nuts if you have constructive feedback on that, but if it's just "I don't want a bus, I want an aerobridge" then I refer you to my previous comments.

I've never said anyone shouldn't submit feedback, just giving a realistic appraisal on whether its worth your time, but ultimately do as you see fit.

 

[MelbFlyer]

Qantas don't care about feedback.

+100 to this.

I've had well over 100 calls with Qantas to attempt to change my reward booking with reward seats I can see online (changing to a different time / flight class) - all with the same BS responses:

- We can't see the classic reward seats you can see online
- Those classic reward seats you see online are available only for new bookings
- There are no classic reward seats for that time / day (yet as I'm on the phone, I can literally see it!)
- You can make a booking online, but it will fail when attempting to finalize payment

I then asked them to escalate / check on why they can't see the reward seats I can see online - They then asked me to make an enquiry via their website.

I told them that I've done many of them without response, and specifically asked them to make one for me internally whilst on the phone.

They then gave me the enquiry number over the phone and since then I've still received not one response.

I also emailed the [email protected] team (asking why if we can see reward seats online, why they can't be used for existing bookings - ie. I see a business reward seat on the day of my existing flight, and I want to replace my economy leg with this business reward seat), also without response either.

Completely and utterly useless. Once I take my 6-leg rewards itinerary later this year, I'm done with Qantas and will probably sell off my remaining QFF points.

The ONLY saving grace would be - if Qantas implement a system in their Manage My Booking page where we can change our reward flights online, rather than calling.

Not holding my breath for a second though.

 

[AIRwin]

I'm done with Qantas and will probably sell off my remaining QFF points.

At least redeem for something other than flights?

 

[jrfsp]

With your wallet

 

[Eastwick20]

I thought remote stands were actually cheaper then air bridges for airlines in terms of airport charges.

I know at some European airports the low cost carriers such as Ryanair/EasyJet actively take/choose remote stands where they can as it's a cost benefit over an airbridge gate.

If this is also the case for Sydney then QF having leisure heavy routes on a remote stand might be better for business ( not so of course for passengers )

 

[jpp42]

I know at some European airports the low cost carriers such as Ryanair/EasyJet actively take/choose remote stands where they can as it's a cost benefit over an airbridge gate.

Yes, Jetstar does this where possible (as well as gates which are not remote, but still have no jetbridges like T4 at Melbourne and gate 58/59 at SYD domestic). But remote stands still cause some operational difficulties, since all different staff who need to access the airplane as part of the "turn" have to get shuttled out by bus or car as well. I suspect this is what was meant above when it was stated Qantas doesn't like remote stands for their own reasons, regardless of passenger amenity. And the cost difference is probably not all that huge (it's not like buses come free either - it takes more staff to operate the buses than the bridges for sure).

I've never said anyone shouldn't submit feedback, just giving a realistic appraisal on whether its worth your time, but ultimately do as you see fit.

I still maintain your attitude is unhelpful in general. Yes, providing feedback doesn't always get an immediate result due to various factors that means airlines and airports won't always be able to provide a perfect experience. But all airlines are at least to some degree customer focused, because people will vote with their wallet and leave them with no customers if they aren't. It should be encouraged to provide feedback so that airlines (and their suppliers, like airports) can change to meet those needs BEFORE the customers find alternatives. I got the idea you used to work for an airline(?) or are otherwise in the industry, but you are not doing your (former) employer any favours by encouraging customers not to provide feedback - customers should always be encouraged to do so, which is why many companies even incentivize it in various ways. Sure, explain the realism of why it's difficult to do something, like to provide more jetbridges (lack of space, lack of capital investment appetite, etc) , but don't just tell people to give up on making things better. It's a terrible approach to business, and a depressing way to live your life in general IMO.

 

[justinbrett]

I still maintain your attitude is unhelpful in general. Yes, providing feedback doesn't always get an immediate result due to various factors that means airlines and airports won't always be able to provide a perfect experience. But all airlines are at least to some degree customer focused, because people will vote with their wallet and leave them with no customers if they aren't. It should be encouraged to provide feedback so that airlines (and their suppliers, like airports) can change to meet those needs BEFORE the customers find alternatives. I got the idea you used to work for an airline(?) or are otherwise in the industry, but you are not doing your (former) employer any favours by encouraging customers not to provide feedback - customers should always be encouraged to do so, which is why many companies even incentivize it in various ways. Sure, explain the realism of why it's difficult to do something, like to provide more jetbridges (lack of space, lack of capital investment appetite, etc) , but don't just tell people to give up on making things better. It's a terrible approach to business, and a depressing way to live your life in general IMO.

I don't speak for an airline, and I've never told anyone not to submit feedback. I've also not shared my employment history so you can stop speculating.

My comments were related specifically to the (subjective) lack of aerobridges, not feedback in general, in that you are stating the obvious when you pass this feedback. If you would like to believe that if enough pax complain about busses then they'll build more aerobridges, then I won't join you in whatever alternate reality you live in.