News Article: Jetstar passengers kicked out of airport

[oz_mark]

It is a wonder that spokesman could hold a straight face on TV.

There would have been alot more passengers than normal at 1am. So there is no way that the security staff didn't double-check with the upper level supervisors before closing the doors.

This is SACL. They would need to be able to send the bill to someone for keeping the doors open.

 

[straitman]

This is SACL. They would need to be able to send the bill to someone for keeping the doors open.

... or throw everyone out then charge a readmission fee :!:

 

[Dave Noble]

The spokesman from SACL stated that they did not have any request to keep the airport open and if they had then they would have done so.

True. But would it be likely for a LCC to be prepared to foot the bill for the costs of keeping the airport open overnight, given that weather is not their responsibility?

Dave

 

[rhjames]

True. But would it be likely for a LCC to be prepared to foot the bill for the costs of keeping the airport open overnight, given that weather is not their responsibility?

Dave

I expect not. It comes down to what has been said before - if people take a risk with a low cost airline, they have to accept the conditions. The whole reason the seats are cheap is because there aren't extra services.

 

[JohnK]

I expect not. It comes down to what has been said before - if people take a risk with a low cost airline, they have to accept the conditions. The whole reason the seats are cheap is because there aren't extra services.

Because we buy cheap airfares from LCCs we really should not expect any service what so ever and if the LCC actually gets us to our destination then we should be grateful....

 

[simongr]

No - the LCC has an obligation to get you to your destination - you shouldn't be grateful for that - it is the minimum expected standard.

If you want more than that then pay for it. It's not rocket science - you get what you pay for. Nothing more.

I am getting sick of the "Oh no my LCC didnt give me full service and doesnt have high luggage allowances, and you have to pay for food" news reports.

This is a beat up by an anti-qantas press on a slow news day. The more cynical part of me wonders whether the new companies have a BFOD policy ...

 

[JohnK]

No - the LCC has an obligation to get you to your destination - you shouldn't be grateful for that - it is the minimum expected standard.

Which is the minimum the 300 odd travellers expected but clearly did not receive on Thursday night.

Yes I know weather is not JQs fault but it is not mine either. I understand JQ could have paid money to take-off after the curfew but chose to leave the loyal JQ travellers stranded instead. I can see their decision makes a lot of business sense.

Airlines have way too many get out clauses all in their favour. Our only get out clause is cancelling the ticket and losing the money in the process.

 

[pauly7]

Because we buy cheap airfares from LCCs we really should not expect any service what so ever and if the LCC actually gets us to our destination then we should be grateful....

Yep thats right! I'm pretty sure its even written into JQ & DJ's customer 'service' charter

 

[dajop]

It is really difficult to get a handle on what actually happened here, as one can never believe exactly what they read or hear in the media. Flying on a LCC, I would not expect accommodation etc, but some basic customer service, including advice on how/where to find accommodation (or even actually finding it for them) - and making it clear that it is at passengers own expense - could go a long way to helping out in these situations.

Alternatively they could go the Ryanair way and suggest people find their own way to Newcastle to catch a flight from there .(from what I've read on airlinequality.com this is not uncommon) .....

 

[opusman]

I look at LCC's as if they are buses; if the last bus of the day was cancelled you wouldn't expect the bus company to put you up in a hotel until the next one, so why would a LCC be any different?

 

[straitman]

The spokesman from SACL stated that they did not have any request to keep the airport open and if they had then they would have done so.

My comment was purely on what was said and has nothing to do with my opinion.

I look at LCC's as if they are buses; if the last bus of the day was cancelled you wouldn't expect the bus company to put you up in a hotel until the next one, so why would a LCC be any different?

Unfortunately the uneducated, in aviation matters, masses don't understand this view, though it is pretty spot on.

 

[moa999]

I look at LCC's as if they are buses; if the last bus of the day was cancelled you wouldn't expect the bus company to put you up in a hotel until the next one, so why would a LCC be any different?

Although one might expect them to keep the lights on in the bus terminal rather than kick the passengers out into the street to wait for the morning bus.

Though if you operate from a Macquarie Bank owned shared use bus terminal ...

 

[straitman]

Although one might expect them to keep the lights on in the bus terminal rather than kick the passengers out into the street to wait for the morning bus.

Though if you operate from a Macquarie Bank owned shared use bus terminal ...

I actually got a phone survey about Macquarie Bank not so long ago.

I'm sure they got my message :!:

 

[simongr]

Which is the minimum the 300 odd travellers expected but clearly did not receive on Thursday night.

I believe that they were flown the next day.

 

[rhjames]

I look at LCC's as if they are buses; if the last bus of the day was cancelled you wouldn't expect the bus company to put you up in a hotel until the next one, so why would a LCC be any different?

Sounds like a reasonable comparison. On the other hand, if I was in a taxi and it broke down, or the driver had a personal emergency, I'd expect the driver to get on the radio and organise a replacement immediately, and not expect me to pay, or at least offer some compensation.

 

[straitman]

Sounds like a reasonable comparison. On the other hand, if I was in a taxi and it broke down, or the driver had a personal emergency, I'd expect the driver to get on the radio and organise a replacement immediately, and not expect me to pay, or at least offer some compensation.

Isn't running an airline just a little more complex than running a cab :?:

Just a few more rules and restrictions such as curfews etc

 

[rhjames]

Isn't running an airline just a little more complex than running a cab :?:

Just a few more rules and restrictions such as curfews etc

Yes, but my point is that a bus is the lowest cost public transport, and I agree that we wouldn't expect an overnight hotel to be provided, or even a replacement if the last bus was cancelled. If I'm paying for taxi service, I expect a higher level of consideration. Back to the point - you get what you pay for.

 

[straitman]

Yes, but my point is that a bus is the lowest cost public transport, and I agree that we wouldn't expect an overnight hotel to be provided, or even a replacement if the last bus was cancelled. If I'm paying for taxi service, I expect a higher level of consideration. Back to the point - you get what you pay for.

Absolutely :!:

 

[Yada Yada]

Back to the point - you get what you pay for.

I agree with this in principle, but compare JQ and QF fares. There's not always that much difference between them!

I don't think it actually has anything to do with the fare level. It is more about how each company chooses to operate. Jetstar has been set up to exclude many of the "frills" offered by it's parent. The problem is that much of the travelling public don't know this. Not many people bother to read detailed T's & C's.

I guess it is a case of buyer beware but that's not going to stop Jetstar getting bad publicity.

As for SACL, any bad press they receive is generally deserved (IMhO).

 

[nlagalle]

Sounds like a reasonable comparison. On the other hand, if I was in a taxi and it broke down, or the driver had a personal emergency, I'd expect the driver to get on the radio and organise a replacement immediately, and not expect me to pay, or at least offer some compensation.

The taxi driver would expect you to pay up to the point where the cab broke down. Taxi is pay as you go.