P1 Fail

[amaroo]

While the Platinum One team will follow up with the OP, I'd like clarify that the aircraft scheduled to operate QF11 SYD/LAX 25AUG was indeed changed from an A380 to a B747 due to a mechanical issue.

VH-OQF arrived in to SYD this morning after operating QF8 DFW/SYD 23AUG. An issue regarding a valve change and smell event required unscheduled maintenance, and subsequent change of aircraft.

Our teams did their best in contacting customers individually as soon as they were made aware of the change late last night. It seems the OP got in touch with our Reservations team before they had a chance to contact him.

As has been suggested, we did operate A380 aircraft as chartered flights over the past couple of days. The first was VH-OQJ departing 23AUG SYD/BNE/DXB/LHR, and the second VH-OQA departing 24AUG BNE/LAX.

The highlighted bit ^^^^ sums it up pretty well!

 

[serfty]

Qantas promote the following for their "top tier membership" being Platinum One: (www.qantas.com.au/fflyer/dyn/flying/tier-benefits#benefits-of-platinum-one)

Dedicated Platinum One Team
The dedicated Platinum One Team offers specialist support when you need urgent assistance or help beyond routine requests. They will personally manage any flight changes or re-routes and provide support to help minimise any inconvenience

On that basis, in relation top the OP's situation this is indeed a fail.

The OP contacting QF before the SST called makes little difference - this should not have been the case. Given the promotion of P1 as per the above, every P1 on the flight should have been contacted well before the OP contacted them.

 

[Flying mermaid]

You don't want to know about UA's horrible dispatch reliability for most of this year - most specially their 744's and 787's I

No american airline is on my short list.....

 

[JohnPhelan]

Given the promotion of P1 as per the above, every P1 on the flight should have been contacted well before the OP contacted them.

OK, but there has to be some order of priority of making the calls. They can't make 400 calls simultaneously. I'd suggest a P1 travelling in F should be the first one called. Then other pax in F. All these pax should get absolute priority because their class of service disappeared on the subbed aircraft.

Then a P1 in J. Then other pax in J (WP, then SG, then PS, then NB, then other).

Then a P1 in W. Then other pax in W.

Then a P1 in Y.

So the OP - travelling in Y - would have been a fair way down the priority list.

And that's only if you believe that every pax should be contacted, in a situation when the only thing that changed was the aircraft type - flight number, departure date and time, seat class, seat type all stayed the same.

 

[trippin_the_rift]

The highlighted bit ^^^^ sums it up pretty well!

TBO the OP shouldn't care about other passengers. QFF do a great job at marketing P1 as the cream of the cream and you're the #1 when anything goes wrong etc. It's reasonably expected any P1 will have expectations that QF will be pro-actively looking after P1s. I would hope that shifting pax to other flights is not a manual process - and if it is - this an area QF needs to invest cash into.

 

[wandering_fred]

Hopefully in the case of irrops, QF has a team dedicated to the flight. All of the passengers starting in F and working down to Y. The P1 team should be dedicated to the P1 members on the flight. If picky, then yes P1 in F, then P1 in J, then W then Y. This should be in progress asynchronously to the dedicated flight team. And if the P1 team isn't already handling multiple problems, they should working sooner than the flight team.

Now there will ALWAYS be some people who pro-actively arrange all their own travel/issues/clean ups. I suspect no customer support team will be able to react fast enough to keep up/get ahead of that type of person. But I'd still expect a call from the P1 team = just to ask - are you taken care of? Anything less demonstrates how little the P1's are valued.

I have not claimed I'm unbaised while wandering

Fred

 

[wandering_fred]

No american airline is on my short list.....

Maybe I'm extra cynical tonight, but I hope you never have to fly MIA-ORD-LAX and are looking for a non-American airline for the flight.

Some things come with the territory....

Especially the more you are wandering

Gtrf

 

[Flying mermaid]

Maybe I'm extra cynical tonight, but I hope you never have to fly MIA-ORD-LAX and are looking for a non-American airline for the flight.

Some things come with the territory....

Especially the more you are wandering

Gtrf

Being pedantic aren't you . No American airline is on my short list for flying out of Australia. I actually don't mind flying them in the USA

 

[Mrmaxwell]

This thread can (and will) go on for days with varied opinions but the fundamental fact here is that a top tier WP1 customer is unhappy with service received and QF should do whatever they can to rectify this.

I am sick to death of poor customer service in Australia. We are generally terrible at it, with the good old 'she'll be right mate' and 'suck it up princess' the general consensus....seeing it pop up in a WP1 thread should not surprise me.

 

[dfcatch]

Yes, and no...it's often a logistical "balancing act" between schedules and aircraft being available for supplementary services such as charters.

The mechanical issues with QF11 today were unforeseen, however charter flights are usually scheduled many months in advance.

By way of example, the charter operated by VH-OQJ was booked far enough ahead that QF1 SYD/LON wasn't scheduled for 23AUG. This avoided having customers reaccommodated at the last minute, and also assisted with operational factors such as crewing and catering.

Red Roo - as you know, I never suggested 25Aug/QF11 was directly replaced by a charter.

But Kevrosmith is correct.

QF over the last months have had a horrid time with A380 substitutions due to over-utilization of the fleet.

Great if you're the Exec Manager in charge of RM, you'll be getting your bonus. But not good for customer service.

Given that QF1/9/11/93 are the Flagship routes using the Flagship aircraft - seeing as there is no fat in the system to accommodate even a wet seat cushion, it seems to be to be high-folly to use 380 aircraft for charters. Certainly not 2 in as many days.

If there are spare 747 aircraft around (which clearly there are), I would be using these as charter aircraft.

But hey - I'm not the CEO or Ops Manager.

Just an observation.

This is the first time a direct downgrade has affected me personally (A380 fleet grounding was a fair excuse). But I have witnessed checkin at SYD and LAX several times this year with dozens if not hundreds of upset/angry/disappointed pax on multiple occasions now.

I can also say that every passenger whom I spoke with or overheard on QF11 yesterday were unhappy about the downgrade.

It happens all too often - and QF are/will be the losers when people go elsewhere.

---------------------

By way of update to my post - the SYD F checkin/hosts/lounge resolved the issue for me by placing me in PE (which helped QF accommodate another Y passenger as every seat was full in the end).

Definitely no thanks to the Premium Res nor P1 teams, all of whom:

- couldn't see any issue with a change in Y cabin from 380 to 747.

- were unwilling or unable or unauthorized to take action to resolve the issue (despite my willingness to connect via MEL or BNE or fly later on QF17, to assist QF by offloading from QF11... Which they clearly needed people to do).


As a further observation, other than a slightly increased recline/legroom, I'd rather have kept my 380 Upper Deck Y seat than the 747 PE seat that I had.

For me personally at least, it was good to try the PE product (and clearly better than 747 Y), but no, I'll keep my 380 seat next time please.

 

[dfcatch]

there is an A380 in Manila. no plane to swap out. The charters have not affected ops. As pointed out by Red Roo, there was no QF1 on 23 AUG and no A380 QF11 on 24 AU

Wrong!

If there is an A380 in Manila, then there should not have been two simultaneous charters, leaving the Flagship route to be sacrificed due to lack of contingency / reshuffling options.

You can certainly argue whether there should be a level of contingency (idle aircraft are a waste of money), but it is axiomatic that the charters have indeed affected ops.

Even if it was unplanned

 

[dfcatch]

OK, so looking at this as unemotionally as possible:

* flight date was unchanged
* flight departure time was unchanged
* flight number was unchanged
* class of travel (Y) was unchanged
* seat type (refurbed A380/B744 Y) was unchanged

..... is it reasonable that the OP should have been contacted at all? Is it reasonable because he is P1? What if he was only WP? Or SG or PS?

Should every pax on the flight be contacted to be told of an aircraft type change when all the other details remain the same?

John - an unemotively as possible.....

- it's a significant product downgrade.

It's not the same as 380 J to 747 J. (I'd be disappointed, but the product difference is minimal).

Changing my 380 upper deck bulkhead Y seat to 747 Y - that's not the same product. Not even close.

And if staff in Premium Service teams don't intuitively understand that - then they're in the wrong job.

Funny anecdote - when I cheerfully greeted Nestor in the Lounge (no hint of unhappiness on my part), you should have seen his face drop when he realized I was going to LA. I had to reassure him that I already knew about the downgrade.

Even the lounge doorman intuitively gets it.

To answer you question - refer the OP.... P1's job is to manage disruption.

It's a significant disruption.

Should a WP/SG be contacted if in Y.... Fair question.

 

[dfcatch]

As people who know me would know, a 747 is an upgrade from a 380 in my opinion.

Agree with the above, part of travelling. A 747 for a 380 is a storm in a tea cup with the above considered. A QF 380 for say a Garuda 380 is not on, but a QF aircraft for a another QF is not a biggie.

So what about P1, there is 350 other people to consider as well some of whom have paid more for this flight than the OP. I'd be interested to know if the OP paid for all his own flights to get to P1 or his employer paid. If he paid then maybe he has more reason to be peeved but otherwise just have to suck up such a terrible disasterious situation as economy on a 747 vs 380 and did I read a drink was not right or something oh dear.

While QF is far form perfect I'm not sure this is the crisis it is.

Matt

Matt - the minibar in the Four Points was poor - please understand humour. You seem to struggle.

Yes - my flights and my status are all self-funded mate.

So when I get screwed over - I take it personally when I spend my scarce dough on a product, get subbed an inferior product (you're the exception, not the rule. I didn't hear a single pax on my flight / nor crew that were pleased with being on a 747), and don't even get advised or given options - I'm more than a bit cross.

Like I've said (and other posters have said) the issue is a systemic one.

Just go and stand at SYD or LAX checkin on a day where there's a sub and you'll understand that it's a BIG problem for QF.

 

[eosphoros]

I should preface this by saying that I make no comment about the P1 benefits in general. I am only commenting on this specific instance. In that respect, I truly think that this is a case of DYKWIA syndrome.

I will give to you that this could have been handled better. I also think that any reasonable well-traveled person (no matter their status) should be able to give any airline a little latitude when things like this occur. Sure, one might be disappointed in the outcome. But the reaction in this thread is totally beyond mere disappointment; it is patently unreasonable.

I'm going to quote from earlier in the thread:

OK, so looking at this as unemotionally as possible:

* flight date was unchanged
* flight departure time was unchanged
* flight number was unchanged
* class of travel (Y) was unchanged
* seat type (refurbed A380/B744 Y) was unchanged

What more could you ask for?

Now I know what you're thinking.... P1 called earlier in the day to give a heads up and provide options!

I would question why this was necessary in the first place. As far as I can tell, the only thing that has occurred is an aircraft sub. This happens all the time. It is nowhere near the extreme end of 'irregular' on the scale of what constitutes irrops. Beyond the change of aircraft itself, there was no detriment to you.

If, as has been suggested by some, an aircraft substitution necessitates a call, where would it end? A 737 changes to an A330. Do all P1s get a call? If the answer is 'No', how do you distinguish the A380 --> 747 swap from the 737 --> A330 swap? You might view the 747 Y seat as a downgrade from the A380 Y seat but others might not. Equally, and this is not outside of the realm of possibility, one might view the A330 J suite as a downgrade from the 737 J seat: for example, if one is only travelling SYD-MEL and wished to sit next to their partner to talk.

Let me point out the official published benefit:

Dedicated Platinum One Team
The dedicated Platinum One Team offers specialist support when you need urgent assistance or help beyond routine requests. They will personally manage any flight changes or re-routes and provide support to help minimise any inconvenience.

In my view there has been no flight change or reroute. And I am sure that that is not a contentious view to hold.

And then you complain about this:

Quick check of EF shows a block next to me.
Find some horrible, barely alcoholic beverage in the minibar to console myself - and think about my Lifemiles balance.

Check EF an hour later - no more shadow block. Hmm.....

Check EF again.... They've found me a friend...

WTF..??

Since when are you entitled to a blocked seat next to you? Did you pay for it? No? Okay then.

By way of update to my post - the SYD F checkin/hosts/lounge resolved the issue for me by placing me in PE (which helped QF accommodate another Y passenger as every seat was full in the end).

...

As a further observation, other than a slightly increased recline/legroom, I'd rather have kept my 380 Upper Deck Y seat than the 747 PE seat that I had.

Anyway, in the end it seemed to have resolved very nicely for you with a free upgrade to PE. (And this is truly an upgrade, despite the fact that you would have preferred a lower class of service.)

 

[Aussie_flyer]

Agree with eosphoros... the fact that this has ended up in a multi page forum thread I find astonishing

 

[amaroo]

OK, but there has to be some order of priority of making the calls. They can't make 400 calls simultaneously. I'd suggest a P1 travelling in F should be the first one called. Then other pax in F. All these pax should get absolute priority because their class of service disappeared on the subbed aircraft.

Then a P1 in J. Then other pax in J (WP, then SG, then PS, then NB, then other).

Then a P1 in W. Then other pax in W.

Then a P1 in Y.

So the OP - travelling in Y - would have been a fair way down the priority list.

And that's only if you believe that every pax should be contacted, in a situation when the only thing that changed was the aircraft type - flight number, departure date and time, seat class, seat type all stayed the same.

Then you have CL++, CL+ and then plain vanilla CL in whatever class placed higher in priority than all others on the status call list.

As you say - what reason was there to call in the first place.

 

[dfcatch]

I should preface this by saying that I make no comment about the P1 benefits in general. I am only commenting on this specific instance. In that respect, I truly think that this is a case of DYKWIA syndrome.

I will give to you that this could have been handled better. I also think that any reasonable well-traveled person (no matter their status) should be able to give any airline a little latitude when things like this occur. Sure, one might be disappointed in the outcome. But the reaction in this thread is totally beyond mere disappointment; it is patently unreasonable.

I'm going to quote from earlier in the thread:



What more could you ask for?



I would question why this was necessary in the first place. As far as I can tell, the only thing that has occurred is an aircraft sub. This happens all the time. It is nowhere near the extreme end of 'irregular' on the scale of what constitutes irrops. Beyond the change of aircraft itself, there was no detriment to you.

If, as has been suggested by some, an aircraft substitution necessitates a call, where would it end? A 737 changes to an A330. Do all P1s get a call? If the answer is 'No', how do you distinguish the A380 --> 747 swap from the 737 --> A330 swap? You might view the 747 Y seat as a downgrade from the A380 Y seat but others might not. Equally, and this is not outside of the realm of possibility, one might view the A330 J suite as a downgrade from the 737 J seat: for example, if one is only travelling SYD-MEL and wished to sit next to their partner to talk.

Let me point out the official published benefit:



In my view there has been no flight change or reroute. And I am sure that that is not a contentious view to hold.

And then you complain about this:



Since when are you entitled to a blocked seat next to you? Did you pay for it? No? Okay then.



Anyway, in the end it seemed to have resolved very nicely for you with a free upgrade to PE. (And this is truly an upgrade, despite the fact that you would have preferred a lower class of service.)

I think you've missed the point.

I never asked for a block. P1 put it there, then it disappeared. Then P1 put it back (on their own volition). You have obviously missed the whole point of someone other than P1 overriding blocks - that's the point. It's a matter of general principle - not one specific to my situation. (I would never have expected a block to hold on an oversold flight).

Secondly - the A380 product is a specific product which many transpacific travelers specifically purchase. It is totally within a class of its own - and for those that care (you may not) it's a big deal.

As a P1 - P1s are promised proactive management of flight issues / disruptions. That you may not view it as a disruption doesn't make it not so.

There is also a major difference in the two example scenarios I'll provide:

1/ 380 - Y seat 55E
subbed to
747 - Y seat 55E

I would be the first to say there's no (barely any) product difference.

2/ 380 - Y upper deck aisle bulkhead (or 71D/80A/K etc)
vs
747 - Y

Major product difference.

To take your examples - 330 J suites are different configs across a fleet.

QF11/93/1/9 and their returns (oh and 7), are ADVERTISED as 380 services.

Therefore a substitution (for whatever reason) is a much bigger deal than whether or not you may get 330 J suites on routes that are NOT advertised as such.

If you can't grasp that basic difference then there is no hope for you (but good for you that you don't care).

Go back and re-read my OP.

I never complained about not getting an upgrade, I made a joke about the minibar, and I went out of my way to compliment the individual staff involved.

My issue is with the systemic failure of the SST to communicate with a P1 on an important (to the P1 - which is the only criteria) product downgrade.

 

[dfcatch]

OK, but there has to be some order of priority of making the calls. They can't make 400 calls simultaneously. I'd suggest a P1 travelling in F should be the first one called. Then other pax in F. All these pax should get absolute priority because their class of service disappeared on the subbed aircraft.

Then a P1 in J. Then other pax in J (WP, then SG, then PS, then NB, then other).

Then a P1 in W. Then other pax in W.

Then a P1 in Y.

So the OP - travelling in Y - would have been a fair way down the priority list.

And that's only if you believe that every pax should be contacted, in a situation when the only thing that changed was the aircraft type - flight number, departure date and time, seat class, seat type all stayed the same.

SORRY FOR MULTIPOSTING - hey admin - fix the app .

John - IMHO...

F pax are the first priority - they need to be moved to QF93 (or as many as possible). From what I could see, QF had started this process as early as lunchtime (6 hours prior to the Great Reshuffle).

Next would be high status in J to cover any newly-oversold situation (hence why QF15 and 17 were also pulled from sale).

Next would be P1s in COS order as you have previously suggested.

Next would be any other pax likely to be subject to an over-sell situation.

I think PrincessFiona summed it up in her early post quite well.

It may also come as a surprise to those who don't fly TPAC regularly, but.... The number of P1s on any given "average" flight is much lower than what you may think.

Regardless of cabin, on the flights I've been on - being a P1 is a big standout for the crew. Even more so in

 

[Anna]

How were they to know it was important to you?

 

[dfcatch]

How were they to know it was important to you?

A 15yo work experience kid looking at my profile would instantly realize it in one of his/her top 2 observations.

The other observation is that LOTFAP is my top destination.

He/she would surmise that sometime between waiting in the QF Mascot reception, and being shown where to find the toilet.

Additionally - P1 make a point of learning the preferences of P1s. If in doubt - they've been known to straight out ask.