QF introducing "Parental Pause" & increasing transfer limits

[Pushka]

My personal rants? I am just responding to your rants about how you are excluded. I actually offered you a known method to get a status comp. but complaining here will get you nowhere. I was also pointing out that qualifying on CX is much harder than on QF.. but if they are now your favourite airline then it won't matter now.

Your comments yesterday were directed at me and were later amended. They were personal.

And today you are making a deal out of a throwaway line. Twice. Call it as I see it.

 

[nlagalle]

Your comments yesterday were directed at me and were later amended. They were personal.

And today you are making a deal out of a throwaway line. Twice. Call it as I see it.

yes my comment was directed (and still was) directed at you.. If you call QF and state your case you'll go far further than ranting here.. As for the Parental pause. get over the fact it doesn't cover you. it won't suit everyone (myself included now), but good on them for offering it.

And I was pointing out that the grass ain't always greener elsewhere.. but if this new scheme is enough to make you jump ship, go for it.

 

[love_the_life]

Nigalle, IMO Pushka's comments were not complaints about being excluded and seriously intending to move to CX and I thought your replies were off the mark.

And added - not ranting here about losing status, not intending to jump ship, a comment made in jest, like the bit about her 'sense of entitlement' - didn't that make it obvious?

 

[Katie]

This is *exactly* what I've been waiting for since 2007 to add another child to our family. Best send Mr Katie an email to schedule in kidlet #2!!

 

[medhead]

Your "good for the country" argument really only makes sense if there are breeders out there whose decision to breed or not rests on having lounge access. If that's really the case, I'd say the "big picture" is that these probably aren't the type of people the country needs more of.

No, the argument doesn't since I'm not suggesting lounge access is the sole reason to breed. I'm just suggesting it's another factor to consider that has broader ramifications for all of society

 

[nlagalle]

While the new CX scheme allows anyone to apply, if you do fly you have no access to any of the perks during that time: http://www.ausbt.com.au/cathay-pacific-debuts-status-holiday-for-frequent-flyers

 

[love_the_life]

While the new CX scheme allows anyone to apply, if you do fly you have no access to any of the perks during that time: Cathay Pacific Marco Polo Club status membership holiday - Australian Business Traveller

I am interested to see how it is implemented. I do think it is fair that if a person puts their membership status on hold they do not have access to the perks of that membership but I know others disagree on this. Think that the lounge angels would need to check every boarding pass carefully to see if a passenger has access.

 

[Pushka]

With any membership that is put on hold (eg gym membership), there is no access to membership rights. Makes sense and logic to me.

 

[love_the_life]

With any membership that is put on hold (eg gym membership), there is no access to membership rights. Makes sense and logic to me.

But the QFF one allows all access and membership benefits. From the website:

Can I still access the Qantas Lounge whilst I’m on Status Hold?

Gold and Platinum members can continue to enjoy all Status benefits including lounge access. See Status benefits for more information.

As I said before it seems to be more a Parental Extension than Parental Pause. I suppose that would be correct as it is referred to as Status Hold on their website no mention of pause which seems to only turn up in the media release linked to Post 1.

 

[DavidFlynn]

Pushka: that's quite true, although your analogy is flawed – gym membership involves an ongoing payment whereas frequent flyer status is obtained through prior activity.

Paid Qantas Club membership would be equivalent to gym membership, in that any suspension of membership sees use of facilities also suspended.

Personally I think there's much top be said for both the QF/VA and CX approaches.

I love the flexibility of the CX 'membership holiday' – it makes perfect sense, especially for people who simply are not going to be flying for whatever reason. And I appreciate the generosity of the QF/VA approach in allowing one to continue to enjoy status benefits while on that 'parental leave' pause.

 

[love_the_life]

Interestingly the T&Cs state to access the Parental Status Hold you need to take at least 6 months off from paid employment. What happens to those who aren't in paid employment as such and still fly enough to achieve status?

 

[Awesom Andy]

still fly enough to achieve status?

You wouldn't have anything to worry about then, would you?

 

[DavidFlynn]

Interestingly the T&Cs state to access the Parental Status Hold you need to take at least 6 months off from paid employment. What happens to those who aren't in paid employment as such and still fly enough to achieve status?

Qantas would be best placed to answer that, but I suspect it's not too much of a stretch to suggest that if somebody's not in paid employment they won't qualify for the Parental Status Hold – because, you know, that's what the T&Cs indicate.

 

[love_the_life]

Why I mentioned it (and it has nothing to do with me, I have retired so well past babies) is that I know of some young people with their own companies who do consulting for example. Depending on the way the company has been set up technically they may not be employees. A letter from the employer is required to show they are on parental leave so this obviously could not be provided. It was just an interesting thought as to where they would stand.

 

[DavidFlynn]

Interesting question, then – if they do consulting they are more likely to be self-employed, I'd have thought, running their own company and invoicing the clients from that - which would indicate they need a letter from themselves

 

[Pushka]

Pushka: that's quite true, although your analogy is flawed – gym membership involves an ongoing payment whereas frequent flyer status is obtained through prior activity.

Paid Qantas Club membership would be equivalent to gym membership, in that any suspension of membership sees use of facilities also suspended.

Personally I think there's much top be said for both the QF/VA and CX approaches.

I love the flexibility of the CX 'membership holiday' – it makes perfect sense, especially for people who simply are not going to be flying for whatever reason. And I appreciate the generosity of the QF/VA approach in allowing one to continue to enjoy status benefits while on that 'parental leave' pause.

Yep, that makes sense re the paid membership. Although if you had paid for QP membership, can that be put on hold? That is probably the more relevant comparison.

 

[Mattg]

Just had a proper look at Virgin's policy. The membership pause is only for 6 months, but you then get 12 months after that at your existing status level. You still get your status benefits the whole time, and you don't have to prove that you've taken any time off work.

So, doesn't this mean that Virgin's policy is actually the same/more generous? Am I missing something?

 

[Flying mermaid]

Interestingly the T&Cs state to access the Parental Status Hold you need to take at least 6 months off from paid employment. What happens to those who aren't in paid employment as such and still fly enough to achieve status?

I suspect Qantas would look at case by case scenarios and make some ad hoc decisions.

 

[love_the_life]

I suspect Qantas would look at case by case scenarios and make some ad hoc decisions.

And be consistently inconsistent? :shock:

 

[Princess Fiona]

I suspect Qantas would look at case by case scenarios and make some ad hoc decisions.

And be consistently inconsistent? :shock:

I think they would do what they have always done as has been pointed out several times in previous posts ie. grant comps at their discretion after individual requests.