Why I am ditching QF F/J longhaul, despite loving it.

[juddles]

Hi all,

Just pondering some things. Which I am sharing as I value all perspectives.

I am a frequent flyer in that for personal reasons I travel continuously between Australia and South America at the moment. I am self-funded (for those that care about this), and I am overly tall, and thus always seeking to minimize the pain of travel.

I love Qantas, as a concept, and also due to many many good experiences over the years. But I am also not a fan boy who blindly follows and forgives them.

There is endless discussion in this forum about QF versus the rest of the airlines out there. I think I have a fairly balanced view, and thus I hear what some people value in other airlines. But I still have this thing about Qantas.

I feel that airlines in general suffer from being in an almost unique position where it is essentially sheer survival. I know I will be attacked for this, but I truly believe that Alan Joyce is very good at his job. He is keeping afloat an airline in an international market where all the basics would suggest that QF is meant to lose. It is a market where pax buy on price above all else, but he (QF) have some some similar cost bases, but in staff they are at a disadvantage. So he has to make it work despite this handicap.

What I most want to discuss and get opinions here is about that higher cost (not just dollars) that is staff. And also how Aussie traditions or realities make this harder.

Again I say, feel free to throw stones. I have an extremely thick skin, and at the end of the day I want to hear people’s points of view.

So to start this discussion I want to share my reality, as a frequent pax on QF. I have done the trans-pacific haul between Australia and Chile too many times to remember. This has been sometimes a bitter experience.

My take on the whole thing is that my enjoyment of these flights is hampered by staff. Not by the aircraft, the hard product. Not by the booking system or tech issues. But by the simple experiences of interaction with staff.

I can only express what I feel, my experiences. And what I, in my ignorance, feels to be the case. But I want to express those in a positive way, not to mindlessly attack Qantas, but rather to shed light on why one frequent pax is jaded.

I used to always fly J on this route. The hard product better than the competition. But for almost a year now I have only ever booked in PE. I started this for economy (saving money), but it broached a thing that I suspect is a much higher problem for QF. I have actually enjoyed my PE flights more than the J ones.

How on earth can this be?? I am flying in a much reduced hard-product, but I like the trips more??????

I am not against older staff. A good crew member who has years of experience is a wonderful thing. But what I have experienced (and not on a single trip) is that QF seem to have a huge body of staff that due to seniority get the favourable routes, and they really have lost that capacity to focus on the pax experience.

Essentially what I have found, in my experiences, is that the more junior crew who do PE have been better, again generally, than the crew I get in J. I understand this ( I think) in the sense that in QF, in Australia, that we protect senior staff. That we have unions etc that protect the interests of workers.

But I really am feeling that this is an area that keeps Qantas behind. I have had many interactions with staff that if I was the employer I would have sacked them on the spot due to the harm they were causing. But I have also discovered that if I drop down a notch, and fly PE, I get a much more reliable good service from staff.

How can Qantas be a first rate airline when the very essence of that, the requirement for pax to feel loved, is undermined by a system where staff are secure and do not have to provide this??

 

[Bilton]

If you are happier in PE, then fly PE, it’s as simple as that.

I’ve flown Sydney to Santiago and return several times in J and not had any issues s all with the cabin crews.

 

[RooFlyer]

Qantas are not alone in this. United used to be (?still are) notorious for having very senior (read 'older' - 60+) staff in their First cabins in Transpac - their coveted route. I experienced it once (well, twice - return flight) and it was almost surreal how they treated the pax with contempt by simply not giving a damn about anything much. Fortunately I've never experienced anything like it in QF premium cabins. I flew Air Canada a lot in the early 2010s and saw the same thing and I think BA is much the same in respects of the phenomena.

Going to the other extreme, on the rare occasions i have flown Jetstar domestic (shudder), I've very much liked the attitude of the cabin crew.

And in the spirit of your fearless post, let me opine that I don't think Qantas is a 'first rate airline'. Its very good, but I wouldn't instinctively call it 'first rate', in part because of the issue you identified but also the others. We know their undoubted strengths, but to me these become diluted by the issues passengers are 'hands on' with.

But this comes down to a preference between soft and hard product. For me on long haul its hard product every time. I would be so uncomfortable in PE or Y for a 10+ hour flight that the crew could be absolute saints and it wouldn't make much difference to me. I've given up on SQ where i can reasonably avoid them when they 'enhanced' their J beds into the 'Z' sleeping form.

 

[serfty]

My general experience aligns with yours on QF, even to economy.

I have grown to dislike the constant theme, especially on west bound transpacific in Business of being encouraged to go to sleep as soon as possible (subtly and no so subtly). For goodness sake, it 4pm in SYD!

Down the back it's different.

 

[GoldCanyon340]

I don't usually buy in to the argument that 'senior' (love that term) cabin crew are complacent and provide minimal customer service across the board. Juddles I'm not saying this is your attitude, more so the general perception. There's certainly a factor though of the carrier involved and usually where it's a legacy airline.

With above reference to BA many of its older crew have recently taken voluntary redundancy. I've flown BA much more on the Kangaroo Route in the last 24 months and you do notice the lower average age of the crew. Even though I've not experienced it there is an alarming number of reports on FT of the hopelessly out of their depth junior cabin crew in First. And this is the other side of the coin: if there was a choice would someone want an indifferent cabin crew member in First or one who asks you if Semillon is red or white wine?

With regards to QF I fly to a certain Asian port regularly and often see the same CSM working in J. He is the exemplar of customer service (and pours very large glasses of wine). Then again there was the terrible attitude of a crew member on a HNL-SYD. A final note, I can't bear the term 'data point', in regards to seniority is that I flew QF MEL-AKL on Christmas Day six years ago. Obviously all mid to senior staff had chose to be at home and we had a cabin crew barely out of uni. They were fantastic and we had the best time, their attitude was fun and the flight zipped by.

 

[pauly7]

Interesting ponderings as always but I think this one will obviously come down to your personal experiences, which will have huge variation to others, so you will have a huge variation in responses on this one.

On QF premium in particular I have had outstanding service from both mature staff and from freshman straight out of their training. I’ve also encountered average service from both cohorts, thankfully this is rare - but with no correlation with age or experience. I fly the same route as you to Santiago frequently.

I recall when DJ (in Virgin Blue age and as they transitioned to VA ‘light full service’ age) at the time had shouty, jokey, first name yelling staff, with very little experience - that really didn’t work and after being fined/sued for their hiring practices their range of experienced crew is now much much broader and better for it in my opinion.

Other premium carriers are a mixed bag as well, I’ve flown a lot with United (not by choice) and yes I’ve encountered the more mature and experienced ‘my way or the highway’ FA’s but also ones I’ve had brilliant chats with, and one in particular when I was destroyed after big business meetings just doted on me all the way home!

I’ve also experienced a lot of BA in premium recently and with a less experienced team they are hitting 10/10 for effort and attitude but just needed more training and support from an operational perspective for BA to compete at a premium level.

So these are my thoughts, no correlation for me - it’s all down to the individual experience on the day.

 

[Pushka]

My general experience aligns with yours on QF, even to economy.

I have grown to dislike the constant theme, especially on west bound transpacific in Business of being encouraged to go to sleep as soon as possible (subtly and no so subtly). For goodness sake, it 4pm in SYD!

Down the back it's different.

We experienced similar coming back from Dubai. Flight was 9am our time. And within a couple of hours the cabin was dark. And quiet and crew disappeared.

 

[drron]

Well juddles just a little tongue in cheek-you are still flying QF PREMIUM economy.
As most know by now we only fly QFi if there is no other choice.I really don't like their consistent inconsistency.

We have been flying BA F out of Sydney and only one bad experience with an FA-she was young.The problem was I could not understand her very West Indian accent and I think she thought i was just being rude.Another young male though was one of the best FAs I have experienced.

Certainly in the premium cabins of the Asian airlines I have not experienced robotic service.On ANA and JAL in particular but maybe because having been to japan so many times we have a lot we can talk about.I still remember on JAL getting tucked into my bed when I had got the blanket in knots.On ANA I thanked the purser for the great service.her answer-it is always a pleasure to have such a nice person as you onboard drron.

We used to fly a lot in F or J on AA transpac.Certainly our share of older FAs.None I can remember being the accepted stereotype.In fact on one flight the FAs who knew us told mrsdrron to watch out for the Purser as she was a b****.However mrsdrron was knitting and after the meal service the purser came to mrsdrron and asked if she could teach her knitting.The 2 got on famously.Maybe it is because we are old that we get on with older staff.

But as pauly7 said it is all about our personal experiences and our interpretation.no wonder we get such a diverse range of opinions.

So finally juddles it is I who has really ditched QFi Premium.

 

[33kft]

Everyone's different. I am going to be honest here and say that interaction with staff almost doesn't mean a thing for me.

After living in Singapore for 7 years and almost exclusively flying either CX or SQ, I get what people say about their experiences with the personable service, but I never really cared either way personally and it has not made it difficult to move most of my flying to QF on return.

In my first week back in Australia, I saw a QF staff member (who should have stayed home that day) yelling at a tour group in SYD for not being able to operate the bag drop off machine. I cringed. It is such a poor introduction to Australia, but it just isn't terminal in my books.

More than anything I think I would rate the loyalty scheme (and by extension, the airline's network and the alliance network) as the most important thing to me. I am not sure why, entirely, I suppose a lot of it is pandering to human nature. That said, if I can focus working with one alliance, I get a lot of perks and benefits which make flying with anyone else a worse experience.

The way to ensure I don't fly with an airline again is for the airline to lie to me. TK and MH have both done so, and I won't fly with them. So my decisions in order of importance would be: Airline's trustworthiness, loyalty scheme, network, alliance, pleasant crew.

 

[JohnK]

I find the senior staff are the ones that go out of their way to assist. I guess with seniority comes maturity.

Most of the time my interaction with staff is very minimal.

 

[Cruiser Elite]

Most of the time my interaction with staff is very minimal.

Your choice or their’s Johnny?

 

[juddles]

I don't usually buy in to the argument that 'senior' (love that term) cabin crew are complacent and provide minimal customer service across the board. ........ hopelessly out of their depth junior cabin crew in First. And this is the other side of the coin: if there was a choice would someone want an indifferent cabin crew member in First or one who asks you if Semillon is red or white wine?.....

I think this is my issue. Experienced staff should be a very positive thing, and in many cases with "senior" QF staff this is the case. My favorite staff within QF are very "senior". But I think my view is that it seems that in Qantas "our" industrial relations or whatever this is called makes it much harder to weed out those that are detrimental to the product. IE if a staff member gets jaded over time and loses enthusiasm, they are far too safe. So they get away with things.

It would be so easy to put a "secret flyer" on board aircraft and actualy identify who lets the team down, but I suspect even when they know who it is, they cannot do much about it.

 

[Happy Trails]

It's entirely appropriate that QF has these more senior staff working predominantly transpacific and UK as It keeps them off my Asian routes.

 

[nickykim]

Anyone who is in a customer facing role (airline or elsewhere) (young or old) will potentially become burnt out if they are repeatedly exposed to difficult customers and don't have the opportunity to de-stress and recover. Customer Service is really hard "emotional labour" and often isn't highly valued by management. So it this age related, or is it to do with increasingly intense systems of work due to reduced staffing levels (for cost saving reasons), those more recently employed have been less exposed to the "emotional labour" etc.

I have supervised a customer service team and could not do what these people do day-in, day-out ever.

 

[juddles]

Anyone who is in a customer facing role (airline or elsewhere) (young or old) will potentially become burnt out if they are repeatedly exposed to difficult customers and don't have the opportunity to de-stress and recover. Customer Service is really hard "emotional labour" and often isn't highly valued by management. So it this age related, or is it to do with increasingly intense systems of work due to reduced staffing levels (for cost saving reasons), those more recently employed have been less exposed to the "emotional labour" etc.

I have supervised a customer service team and could not do what these people do day-in, day-out ever.

That is an interesting angle on this. I am sure in most workplaces there have been ever increasing demands, and often reductions in staff. So adding this to the extremely hard work that airborne customer service entails, this will almost certainly wear many down.

But the end result is that the customer service experience for the pax will suffer.

Without naming a certain popular travel agency omnipresent in Australia, I perceive them as grabbing fresh staff and burning them out, then replacing them with new fresh and enthusiastic people. Not great for the staff involved. Qantas appears to look after their longest serving staff very well (not saying it is out of the kindness of a corporate heart - most likely due to labour laws, etc). But Qantas has to compete in a global arena where other airlines are not hampered by this.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I think this is my issue. Experienced staff should be a very positive thing, and in many cases with "senior" QF staff this is the case. My favorite staff within QF are very "senior". But I think my view is that it seems that in Qantas "our" industrial relations or whatever this is called makes it much harder to weed out those that are detrimental to the product. IE if a staff member gets jaded over time and loses enthusiasm, they are far too safe. So they get away with things.

It would be so easy to put a "secret flyer" on board aircraft and actualy identify who lets the team down, but I suspect even when they know who it is, they cannot do much about it.

Just about all workplace agreements have a mechanism to deal with poor performance, but many companies shy away from actually using this. This is union endorsed, so there's no barrier there (it's all about identifying the problem and agreeing to a plan to rectify the problem). But as you say, if CSMs are equally as jaded or cynical, how does the company effectively implement a management plan to rectify the behaviour.

I guess also passeners probably don't complain enough to establish a pattern. Cabin crew can be called in over a very minor complaint at some airlines (think our neighbours to the north!). I doubt anything much would come from a complaint about poor service against a member of QF crew... half of us here on AFF are willing to overlook or otherwise excuse poor behaviour, is management any different?

 

[jase05]

Just about all workplace agreements have a mechanism to deal with poor performance, but many companies shy away from actually using this. This is union endorsed, so there's no barrier there (it's all about identifying the problem and agreeing to a plan to rectify the problem). But as you say, if CSMs are equally as jaded or cynical, how does the company effectively implement a management plan to rectify the behaviour.

I guess also passeners probably don't complain enough to establish a pattern. Cabin crew can be called in over a very minor complaint at some airlines (think our neighbours to the north!). I doubt anything much would come from a complaint about poor service against a member of QF crew... half of us here on AFF are willing to overlook or otherwise excuse poor behaviour, is management any different?

One thing we always try to do is jot down the staff names during a flight no matter what airline it is. We always give feedback to the airline positive and negative on staff via email and yes they probably take no notice of it most of the time but we have occasionally received replies thanking us for feedback. I figure if no one says anything how can the airline fix it?
Hopefully it also aids the staff who are doing the right thing and provide excellent service.

 

[JohnK]

Your choice or their’s Johnny?

Obviously my choice.

 

[Matt_01]

who asks you if Semillon is red or white wine?

And there was me thinking it was a rosé, guess I will not get a gig as F cabin staff any time soon.

 

[GoldCanyon340]

And there was me thinking it was a rosé, guess I will not get a gig as F cabin staff any time soon.

Maybe add a dash of Cabernet?