Narrowing of benefits between WP and 'lesser' elite levels

[goldy]

I'm simply pointing out its a little bit hard to cry poor when your posting these profits (and a little bit rich to "enhance" WP's, but give everything to SG and PS)

This whole "poor me" WP attitude is wearing a bit thin. The WP benefits are as described and its up to you to either take it or leave it. If you choose to leave it, then I hope you find greener pastures elsewhere but please for the love of god can we stop this "SG and PS get too many benefits when compared to WP's" nonsense. SG and PS benefits have NOTHING to do with any WP's. They have their benefits and you have yours and I think you ought to be a tad more appreciative, rather than wasting your time looking over your shoulder and complaining about everyone else getting "everything" when this is clearly not the case.

Rant over......

 

[medhead]

This whole "poor me" WP attitude is wearing a bit thin. The WP benefits are as described and its up to you to either take it or leave it. If you choose to leave it, then I hope you find greener pastures elsewhere but please for the love of god can we stop this "SG and PS get too many benefits when compared to WP's" nonsense. SG and PS benefits have NOTHING to do with any WP's. They have their benefits and you have yours and I think you ought to be a tad more appreciative, rather than wasting your time looking over your shoulder and complaining about everyone else getting "everything" when this is clearly not the case.

Rant over......

Oh FFS, why do you keep misrepresenting what people are saying? NO ONE is saying PS and SG get too much. This is focusing on WP benefits and the fact that their value is being eroded in relative terms. This has been explained to you many times. If you can't understand, stop making false claims about what people are saying.

The only nonsense is your continuing misrepresentation on this point. I can only think it is deliberate.

 

[goldy]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Nevertheless, I can't see what can be done, in a practical sense, without tearing down capitalism as we have come to know it post WWII.

Capitalism could do with a nice little shakeup. Clearly the huge economic problems facing the world at present have not provided the sufficient "jolt" necessary for us to address to obvious flaws in the capitalist model.
Extreme capitalism much like extreme communism is not a good thing, and i would think if we could find a nice sweet spot somewhere in the middle, we just might be ok.

My point, I guess, if I even really have one, is that our current model for companies in the west is devoid of empathy and social responsibility (whatever that even means). Boards are appointed, with a legal obligation, not to improve the lot of the employees, but to act in the best interests of the owners, despite how that sometimes seems to pan out for us poor working class (yep, and I'm one of those).

Forgive my rudeness but im not certain of the benefit in posting something that you yourself dont understand. What were you hoping to achieve?

Imposing some sort of faux morality on companys who are governed by current corporate law is just screaming at the wind I think.

If Companies such as Qantas choose to behave in an immoral fashion, so be it. But don't feign surprise and shock when people vote with their feet and your market share declines to 18% or the government regulate your industry.

 

[Moopere]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Capitalism could do with a nice little shakeup. Clearly the huge economic problems facing the world at present have not provided the sufficient "jolt" necessary for us to address to obvious flaws in the capitalist model.

But that was my point. Being annoyed at capitalism, and how it works is one thing, expecting QF, alone, to change how capitalism works is just farcical.

There just is no point, none whatsoever, to voice annoyance at exec's getting paid bonuses for reaching their own KPI's (set by the ownership generally, whether directly or indirectly), getting foamy at the mouth because 1000 people have lost their jobs in the face of 250M profit, or thinking the CEO is not acting in a socially responsible way .... Its a company, and it has only one reason for being in existence and its nothing to do with giving fellow Australians a job.

To want to change the business model of corporations is fine, but no use screaming at QF alone - get a beret and stage a revolution

 

[goldy]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

There just is no point, none whatsoever, to voice annoyance at exec's getting paid bonuses for reaching their own KPI's (set by the ownership generally, whether directly or indirectly), getting foamy at the mouth because 1000 people have lost their jobs in the face of 250M profit, or thinking the CEO is not acting in a socially responsible way .... Its a company, and it has only one reason for being in existence and its nothing to do with giving fellow Australians a job.

When those executives screw over their employees in order to reach their KPI's and take home extortionate bonus's, well, I have a problem with that. AJ it seems is acting in a socially responsible way.... its just that his notion of "social" only seems to apply to himself and his own backpocket. Not that Dixon et al were any different regarding the equity partners takeover charade. Rumour has it Dixon was set to pocket tens of millions (nearing 100 big ones) out of that deal that would have seen Qantas bankrupted. So please dont try and pull the wool over the eyes of the hard working individuals that are simply trying to make a decnt(ish) living whilst the executives are sat in their ivory towers raping the company!

Qantas cant have it both ways, playing the patriotism card and being the "Spirit of Australia" whilst giving its fellow Australians the boot and replacing them with cheap foreign labour. It just doesn't work like that, not in my book anyway.

 

[Moopere]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

So please dont try and pull the wool over the eyes of the hard working individuals that are simply trying to make a decnt(ish) living whilst the executives are sat in their ivory towers raping the company!

Theres no wool, except, perhaps, in your own eyes. Capitalism, of the type you seem to be really annoyed about, is hiding in plain sight. Its right there, has been this way since prior to WWII.

Qantas cant have it both ways, playing the patriotism card and being the "Spirit of Australia" whilst giving its fellow Australians the boot and replacing them with cheap foreign labour. It just doesn't work like that, not in my book anyway.

Fair enough. BHP is not the "Big Australian" now either I guess, in fact, are there any large, successful, social conscious Australian companies left? If QF stopped calling themselves the 'spirit of Australia' but did nothing else would you then be happy? ie; is it their actions or the apparent deception by way of advertising that is really getting up your nose?

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Oh FFS, why do you keep misrepresenting what people are saying? NO ONE is saying PS and SG get too much. This is focusing on WP benefits and the fact that their value is being eroded in relative terms. This has been explained to you many times. If you can't understand, stop making false claims about what people are saying.

Benefits come and benefits go.

When Anytime Access was introduced for Plats, was there any other corresponding benefit for PS/SGs to keep their relative benefit levels in lock step? Where was the whinging about the relative erosion of PS/SG benefits?

As Goldy has pointed out: WPs have their benefit levels. If it's not good enough for you, then fly someone else.

 

[medhead]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Benefits come and benefits go.

When Anytime Access was introduced for Plats, was there any other corresponding benefit for PS/SGs to keep their relative benefit levels in lock step? Where was the whinging about the relative erosion of PS/SG benefits?

As Goldy has pointed out: WPs have their benefit levels. If it's not good enough for you, then fly someone else.

Sorry, but have you been told today? Goldy is bringing up something for a completely different thread that is misrepresents what people said in the other thread and is off topic in this thread. Well besides the fact that the erosion in differential for platinum benefits is the reason many platinums are annoyed enough to take status matches with other airlines. An outcome that seems counter to building a stronger qantas.

As for ATA introduction. I don't know, was there whinging? I can't imagine why there would have been whinging because increasing platinum benefits doesn't actually diminish PS/SG benefits for the effort they have to expend to get the lower level of benefits. In fact in one case they are saying fly twice as much and you can get even more, in the other case they are saying fly twice as much and the reward we'll give you won't be as big. As such you have presented a completely false analogy.

As for my flying, it should be clear by now that I have changed my flying habits.

 

[Awesom Andy]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

I think the issue is more about PS and SG receiving more benefits, while at the same time, WP benefits are being reduced. While I'm not familiar with the benefits available from other airlines, I'm not sure if the current benefits are the top of the bunch to begin with.

And even the benefits for, say, a PS, isn't all the best either. If I could state one example (probably one of the more extreme ones)... flying HKG-SYD return on Y as a PS on CX would allow me to use business class check-in counters, have access to exit-rows seats for free, and have baggage tagged as business priority. I get none of those on QF, although I would get a few extra frequent flyer points (value depending on how they are used), and 2kg more in baggage allowances (which is virtually never of any use unless you really need those last kgs). I also have a choice of 4 CX flights to choose from. QF has 1 or 2, depending on the day.

 

[goldy]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Oh FFS, why do you keep misrepresenting what people are saying? NO ONE is saying PS and SG get too much. This is focusing on WP benefits and the fact that their value is being eroded in relative terms. This has been explained to you many times. If you can't understand, stop making false claims about what people are saying.

The only nonsense is your continuing misrepresentation on this point. I can only think it is deliberate.

The quote was taken directly from post 865 made by Simsy85 who claims to be a WP in which he stated unequivocally that SG and PS get "everything", so I fail to see where the misrepresentation lies?

You can try to promote and push your perspective on others but IMO the fact remains that I, as an SG really dont give 2 hoots what benefits WP's get, until such a time when/if I qualify for that status and I take an interest in the new benefits I receive. Until that time however, I will pay attention to the benefits I am entitled to and I implore you and your fellow WP's to do the same instead of going off on this random tangent about your eroded benefits in relative terms as it seems to me to be completely irrelevant what any other status gets as it simply does not apply to you.

The ranting and raving about how WP's fly X amount and are therefore entitled to Y benefits borders on the ridiculous. You ought to know as well as anyone that the benefits are what they are, and in the majority of cases (excluding priority boarding) are provided to you pretty much exactly as described. If you dont feel that your WP status benefits are commensurate with the volume of business you send QF's way, then send less of it and enjoy "all" the benefits of SG for half the effort. Plain and simple really!

<Redacted>

Your continued pushing the proverbial uphill about "poor WP's and the relative erosion of our benefits" seems to be the only deliberate misrepresentation. If you dont like it, lump it, and fly with another airline who's FF program better suits your needs.

Benefits come and benefits go.

When Anytime Access was introduced for Plats, was there any other corresponding benefit for PS/SGs to keep their relative benefit levels in lock step? Where was the whinging about the relative erosion of PS/SG benefits?

As Goldy has pointed out: WPs have their benefit levels. If it's not good enough for you, then fly someone else.

Thankyou AnonymousCoward​!

 

[TonyHancock]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

But I suspect you wouldnt dream of being a lowly SG and rather enjoy flashing around your WP card thinking your some MR VIP who "deserves" to have his backside kissed when the reality is that all it does is to overinflate your sense of importance and ego.

I had heard a rumour that having one's backside kissed maybe a benefit of the new platinum one status. I was rather hoping so, it will definitely swing me back to the QF camp.

 

[futaris]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

I had heard a rumour that having one's backside kissed maybe a benefit of the new platinum one status. I was rather hoping so, it will definitely swing me back to the QF camp. View attachment 3608

But aren't Velocity Frequent Flyer offering toasted backsides? (sandwiches)

 

[oz_mark]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

I had heard a rumour that having one's backside kissed maybe a benefit of the new platinum one status. I was rather hoping so, it will definitely swing me back to the QF camp. View attachment 3608

Is this some sort of camp humour?

 

[goldy]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

I think the issue is more about PS and SG receiving more benefits, while at the same time, WP benefits are being reduced.

I could be wrong, but I don't recall ANY reduction in WP benefits in the latest round of enhancements. Its just that the WP's are annoyed that PS and SG's got more than they did before and WP's didnt! A bit schoolyard don't you think?

IMO, the last round of positive "enhancements" for PS and SG was nothing more than a vain attempt by QF to retain those FF's who were deemed "most likely" to jump ship to Velocity. It was not a personal attack on the WP's, but obviously, they see things in a different, somewhat more distorted light.

Is this some sort of camp humour?

Shirley you cant be serious??

 

[TonyHancock]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

I could be wrong, but I don't recall ANY reduction in WP benefits in the latest round of enhancements. Its just that the WP's are annoyed that PS and SG's got more than they did before and WP's didnt! A bit schoolyard don't you think?

The change of the bonus points for 450 SC's was a reduction for me. It is capped at 32,000. With my current booked travel for the next 11 months, under the old setup, I would have received 40,000. (I still have travel to book so the number would have been higher, probably 50,000..........however I'm going to try VA/DJ.)

IMO, the last round of positive "enhancements" for PS and SG was nothing more than a vain attempt by QF to retain those FF's who were deemed "most likely" to jump ship to Velocity. It was not a personal attack on the WP's, but obviously, they see things in a different, somewhat more distorted light.

I agree with this 100%, but will say that over the last year I have felt undervalued by QF.

 

[straitman]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

It was not a personal attack on the WP's, but obviously, they see things in a different, somewhat more distorted light.

This has got to be one of the greater generalisations that I've ever seen on AFF. (My bolding)

 

[Simsy85]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

This whole "poor me" WP attitude is wearing a bit thin. The WP benefits are as described and its up to you to either take it or leave it. If you choose to leave it, then I hope you find greener pastures elsewhere but please for the love of god can we stop this "SG and PS get too many benefits when compared to WP's" nonsense. SG and PS benefits have NOTHING to do with any WP's. They have their benefits and you have yours and I think you ought to be a tad more appreciative, rather than wasting your time looking over your shoulder and complaining about everyone else getting "everything" when this is clearly not the case.
Rant over......

Excuse me?

The WP benefits are as described and its up to you to either take it or leave it.

You couldn't be more wrong. WP benefits keep getting changed. Things keep getting taken away, like baggage allowence, ATA etc, SC needed for PG, cap on the amount of bonus points you can get.

THEY KEEP MOVING THE POSTS

<Redacted>

This thread is about building a stronger QANTAS - well guess what mate WP's spend a cough load of money of QF and if we don't like it, we will change.

I for one will take up the status match with VA. If I like it, i'll spend my travel $$ with them and not QF.

Sure one pissed off WP won't make a difference, but the more and more they piss off, the more that will leave. They might not notice it now, but it will get to a critical mass.

Someone said earlier on that QF have these big golden handcuffs on WP's and it was true. Well VA has just given us the key - lets see what happens.

 

[goldy]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Excuse me?



You couldn't be more wrong. WP benefits keep getting changed. Things keep getting taken away, like baggage allowence, ATA etc, SC needed for PG, cap on the amount of bonus points you can get.

THEY KEEP MOVING THE POSTS

<Redacted>

This thread is about building a stronger QANTAS - well guess what mate WP's spend a cough load of money of QF and if we don't like it, we will change.

I for one will take up the status match with VA. If I like it, i'll spend my travel $$ with them and not QF.

Sure one pissed off WP won't make a difference, but the more and more they piss off, the more that will leave. They might not notice it now, but it will get to a critical mass.

Someone said earlier on that QF have these big golden handcuffs on WP's and it was true. Well VA has just given us the key - lets see what happens.

Excuse you what? I did not misquote you nor did I take your comments out of context.
Qantas has every right, in its absolute discretion, to move the goal posts. Im not saying its right, i'm not saying I agree with it, i'm just highlighting that its just how it is.


Its not always WP benefits that are in the firing line and as has been alluded to earlier regarding the change in loyalty bonus and the capping of it, well that affects every FF. I know the impact is felt more by those that fly more, ie WP's, but i'm sorry, the FF program cannot revolve around WP's and their wants/needs alone. It is a system designed first and foremost to benefit QF and secondly to try and cater to every member.

I actually agree with you that the distinction and corresponding benefits between WP and SG is somewhat limited, and by all means voice your concerns and complaints. I dont believe anyone has an issue with it given that is what this forum is about. But when it goes on and on and on it becomes somewhat tiresome. I get that many of you arent happy, and im not sure I would be either, but the cold hard facts are that, Qantas "owe" you, me or any FF's diddly squat. We either shut up and deal with it, or we try not to get hit by the door on the way out!

This has got to be one of the greater generalisations that I've ever seen on AFF. (My bolding)

It may be a generalisation, but unfortunately the shoe fits. I dont recall hearing ONE WP stand up and say they are pleased that they have escaped the latest rounds of "enhancements". Instead, the same people (not all WP's) find some obscure tangent to whinge on about like those that have been mentioned previously. Why they care what another "lower" member gets is beyond me. Whats next? complaining about what other OWE's get that they dont? Give me a break![/SIZE][/COLOR]

Itd be handy if they could also stop being brutes. No one deserves the vitriol that they dish out.

 

[straitman]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

It may be a generalisation, but unfortunately the shoe fits. I dont recall hearing ONE WP stand up and say they are pleased that they have escaped the latest rounds of "enhancements". Instead, the same people (not all WP's) find some obscure tangent to whinge on about like those that have been mentioned previously. Why they care what another "lower" member gets is beyond me. Whats next? complaining about what other OWE's get that they dont? Give me a break![/SIZE][/COLOR]

Itd be handy if they could also stop being brutes. No one deserves the vitriol that they dish out.

Alternatively many WPs, myself included, (& certainly not my wife) have made no comment at all, let alone whinged about any of 'the latest rounds of "enhancements".'

Please don't include all of us, and don't put words in our mouths, to help your argument when it is not relevant. That's why it is a generalisation.

 

[samiam]

Re: Building a stronger Qantas

Alternatively many WPs, myself included, (& certainly not my wife) have made no comment at all, let alone whinged about any of 'the latest rounds of "enhancements".'

Please don't include all of us, and don't put words in our mouths, to help your argument when it is not relevant. That's why it is a generalisation.

Here, here... I have seen very few specific examples to support the vicarious generalisation, and comments such as this...

I dont recall hearing ONE WP stand up and say they are pleased that they have escaped the latest rounds of "enhancements".

.. IMO, are just plain stupid. Why would anyone do that?