Qantas Frequent Flyer - Slap and a sledge for QF (the sledge is really for BA...)

Guys, would like some thoughts before i send off a letter to Alan Joyce about treatment i received at the BA lounge in T4 on Friday May 29. I am a Qantas Club member (previously Platnium but now lowest of the low) and I wanted to take my wife, 2 1/2 year old son and 13 month year old son into the lounge prior to boarding to change nappies get some milk and generally organise ourselves for 23 1/2 hours of hell flying LHR-HGK-MEL. Was denied entry and told that i could take in an infant and one guest only - so i would need to choose between my wife and 2 1/2 year old as to who i could bring in... Now i know the terms and conditions will probably say i wasnt even allowed to bring in ONE guest let alone a guest and two little boys but I explained to the door policewoman our situation and we too-ed and fro-ed for about ten minutes before i took my family back out and came back in for round 2... Now here is where things got very nasty. I asked to speak with the Manager and after about another ten minutes, the QF rep Mahoorq came down (after probably being read the riot act by the BA lady!) and told me under no circumstances would i be allowed in with my family, they were simply following the rules and it was too bad. I asked for a bit of common sense to be shown and that was when a fellow passenger overheard my plight and suggested that he escort my wife in and i could take in the two boys. The BA reps then said they would not allow this to happen, the fellow passenger should mind his own business and i should accept their decision and leave.

When i asked them if they thought they were being 'unfair and unreasonable' the response was "yes - but life is unfair"!!!! I left because i was getting angrier and angrier and didnt want to cause a scene, but i later learnt that my fellow passenger then went and complained to someone more senior inside who expressed dismay by what had happened and promised to come into the terminal to 'look for me'. Needless to say, that never happened.

The upshot was i took my sons in alternatively and my wife missed out - although in the end she was probably happy that i ended up with two lots of nappy changes!!

So that's the sledge. As for the slap on the back, that goes to the cabin crew on the LHR-HKG leg who were the most responsive, kind and helpful i have seen on a qantas flight for sometime. Nothing was too much trouble and they really bent over backwards to make sure my kids were looked after and we had everything at our disposal to keep them quiet and peaceful. Interestingly they all seemed to have international accents - couldnt detect one aussie accent, so perhaps this is a fully international crewed flight?

Interested in thoughts on all of this.

The BA staff have not gained their nickname as "Lounge Dragons" for nothing.

I agree it sounds very unreasonable, but ultimately they were just strictly enforcing the rules.

The BA staff have not gained their nickname as "Lounge Dragons" for nothing.



Certainly not the lovely young lady who was on the desk at Malpensa Milan on 3 October 2008.

a fellow passenger overheard my plight and suggested that he escort my wife in and i could take in the two boys. The BA reps then said they would not allow this to happen, the fellow passenger should mind his own business

I find this to be totally out of order on the part of the dragon.

ps: having said that, there is no point complaining to QF about BA lounges enforcing entry rules. Unlike QF lounges, BA lounges are always quite strict on number of guests, including children.

I'm really sorry to hear about the way you were treated, however what part of the rules didn't you understand? (http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying/qantasClub/loungeAccess#jump2)

Obviously under QC Rules you are allowed to bring one guest in to a BA Terraces Lounge as long as the two of you are travelling together on QF or BA.

It's likely that if this had been an actual QC (with QF staff) they would have let your children in as well (I made a comment last week regards QC meaning "Qantas Creche" these days!) and this probably led to expectations.

I can also understand BA Staff refusing you guesting rights if the Lounge was too full - as is their right - but it doesn't sound as though that was the excuse given, nor would I expect it to be so for a mid-day departure. To be honest, I would word any letter of complaint not along the lines of whether or not they were right to refuse permission, but concentrate in the manner in which the refusal was issued.

I'd also have thought that whoever someone else chooses to guest is their decision and has nothing to do with the reception staff - particularly if those individuals are WPs and so have far lenient rules wrt the relationship between the two (they don't have to be travelling together, just both be travelling OW).

This must have been a very frustrating start to a tedious journey esp (I suspect) in Y. Yes, I too, have had exceptional service from LHR-based cabin crew between LHR and HKG, though IME the crew were Aussies living temporarily in London.

Regards,

BD

I'm really sorry to hear about the way you were treated, however what part of the rules didn't you understand? (http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying/qantasClub/loungeAccess#jump2)

never had children/infants counted as guests before in all the time i have travelled with youngsters, even in partner lounges.

Can you direct me to a reference to the definition of member's guest? ie A strict reading of the rules means my wife could have been escorted in to the lounge!

I'm really sorry to hear about the way you were treated, however what part of the rules didn't you understand? (http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying/qantasClub/loungeAccess#jump2)

Maybe this part:

In Qantas Club lounges, children are not counted as guests if aged three and under. Children are usually welcome in our partner lounges.

Yes, I know, only for QPs.

never had children/infants counted as guests before in all the time i have travelled with youngsters, even in partner lounges.

Can you direct me to a reference to the definition of member's guest? ie A strict reading of the rules means my wife could have been escorted in to the lounge!

The BA rules are clear and the lounge dragon was right to not allow you, your wife and your kids. Still, I wouldn't want something like this to happen to me and so far I always was lucky.

However, a OW Emerald can guest in anybody into the BA lounge. AFAIK there is no clear BA definition for "guest" so the other passenger could have guested your wife into the lounge. BA was not correct in refusing entry.

Way back in 1998, BA rules did not permit children as lounge guest at all.

I have always wondered, why should children be excluded from the guest count?

Way back in 1998, BA rules did not permit children as lounge guest at all.

Either this, or the definition of "child", has changed. From BA.com's T&Cs regarding Lounge Access:

8.2. Members must show their Card or Membership Number and either a boarding card or ticket before they can be admitted to a Lounge. Anyone under the age of 18 years must be accompanied by a responsible adult when using a Lounge. Local laws relating to the consumption of alcohol will apply.


BD

Child = Guest?

The BAEC Forum (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/930037-infant-additional-lounge-guest.html) seems to have had a similar discussion previously.

BD

Yes, it has changed. Also my statement was a bit too sweeping.

As a top level QFF Gold in 1998, myself, my wife, our 6 YO daughter and my M-I-L were permiited access to the T4 gate 10 Concorde room. My daughter was not permitted access to the T1 terraces two weeks earlier.

I have always wondered, why should children be excluded from the guest count?

There are many reasons why they should be excluded but unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your viewpoint) they are part of the guest count when older than 3 years on QF. Didn't we have this discussion here not too long ago?

Yes we did but it appears that some still think that there should be two sets of rules, one for parents with children who think they should be exempt from the guest rules and one set for those who don't understand why if they must abide by the rules others should get an exemption. Obviously I fall into the later set of those who don't understand why lounges seem to be full of children, especially around school holidays.

Yes we did but it appears that some still think that there should be two sets of rules, one for parents with children who think they should be exempt from the guest rules and one set for those who don't understand why if they must abide by the rules others should get an exemption. Obviously I fall into the later set of those who don't understand why lounges seem to be full of children, especially around school holidays.

if the children are well behaved and properly supervised why would you care? I cant stand obnoxious, argumentative or disruptive people anywhere - at work, in a qantas club or in the pub - doesnt matter what age or stage of their life they're at!

I cant stand obnoxious, argumentative or disruptive people anywhere - at work, in a qantas club or in the pub - doesnt matter what age or stage of their life they're at!

You attempted to gain entry to the lounge admitting “Now i know the terms and conditions will probably say i wasnt even allowed to bring in ONE guest let alone a guest and two little boys but ……”

You argued with the individual employed to man the desk and ensure the lounge access rules are adhered to for the comfort of all patrons. You requested that the manager be summoned, and then the QF rep and confronted both of them. In the case of the QF rep you imply that he is subservient and has probably been “read the riot act by the BA lady!”.

In relaying your incident you report that “ i took my family back out and came back in for round 2... Now here is where things got very nasty……I left because i was getting angrier and angrier”.

You conclude your report “Interested in thoughts on all of this“ A number of posters have responded sympathetically, 2 posters have responded making valid points but in both cases you have responded once again in a confrontational manner.

Bizarre

In relaying your incident you report that “ i took my family back out and came back in for round 2... Now here is where things got very nasty……I left because i was getting angrier and angrier”.

You conclude your report “Interested in thoughts on all of this“ A number of posters have responded sympathetically, 2 posters have responded making valid points but in both cases you have responded once again in a confrontational manner.

Bizarre

fair point - irony is difficult to relate in written form i guess!

I do not think there is any grounds for complaint. If you approached them the second time after their refusal, if they were indeed correct, would not have been looked upon favourably.

What is so important that you used the lounge? Could you not have done what you wanted to do elsewhere in the terminal, given that you already believed that you would not be able to take all your family in if the rules were to be enforced?

I do not think expecting other people to bend their rules to accommodate children is reasonable. Some parents want them counted as people or not when it suits them, and I do not believe this is how it should be. If QF/BA wanted to make children exempt from the rules, then they would say so in their rules.

Note: The post above assumes that the rules were applied correctly by the lounge dragons. If not, then do write and complain by all means.

I agree that there is no grounds for complaint. Not only is the rule that ONE guest is permitted, at the London lounges they actually have a sign on the desk to "remind" people of this rule before they decide to start trying it on

Maybe some lounges would have permitted the taking in of THREE guests , but there is no justification to be upset or angry if an exception to the rules is requested. Fine to just go and ask, but making a scene once declined is poor form

As far as someone else taking them in, BA does (iirc) have a valid rule that the guest must be travelling with the member, so the other person would not be entitled to take the person in as their guest

Rather than complaining, perhaps an apology to the staff who had to deal with this for 20 minutes is more appropriate. It is not the lounge agents that detail the lounge entitlement rules, they only have to enforce it

Dave

I agree that there is no grounds for complaint. Not only is the rule that ONE guest is permitted, at the London lounges they actually have a sign on the desk to "remind" people of this rule before they decide to start trying it on

Maybe some lounges would have permitted the taking in of THREE guests , but there is no justification to be upset or angry if an exception to the rules is requested. Fine to just go and ask, but making a scene once declined is poor form

As far as someone else taking them in, BA does (iirc) have a valid rule that the guest must be travelling with the member, so the other person would not be entitled to take the person in as their guest

Rather than complaining, perhaps an apology to the staff who had to deal with this for 20 minutes is more appropriate. It is not the lounge agents that detail the lounge entitlement rules, they only have to enforce it

Dave

Fully agree that an apology seems to be needed given the behaviour that the op has clearly stated he readily exhibited. This type of behaviour is uncalled for and highly inappropriate.

The fact is the op tried to take an extra guest into the lounge and was informed it wasn't possible. We won't count infants (ie under 2yrs) as guests, but over that they are. One of the worst parts of manning the lounge entry points is when people behave like the op. We are there to enforce the lounge policies and if it says one guest then that is what we go by. Being told that you are not allowed more than 1 guest does not give anyone the right to become abusive or start shouting at staff. The way the op has even worded the post here, speaks volume for his attitude at the lounge

if the children are well behaved and properly supervised why would you care? I cant stand obnoxious, argumentative or disruptive people anywhere - at work, in a qantas club or in the pub - doesnt matter what age or stage of their life they're at!

I don't have an issue with well behaved children what I have an issue with is that I cannot take 3 guests (or 2 guests) into a lounge, so why should there be two sets of rules because the extra guest is a child? I may be travelling with my company President and Senior Vice President who are also well behaved but I would never carry on in the manner described if the lounge staff say no or redirect me to use another lounge instead.

I had the pleasure or using the F Lounge at T5 back in Jan and the staff were excellent. Indeed out of all 4 of my BA flights long haul flights in Jan the staff were excellent.

In difficult times I have always found a smile and manners gets you much further than pulling your grumpy pants on and throwing your toys (or in this case your childrens toys) out of the cot.

Does T4 not have baby change facilities in the general terminal BTW?

Maybe this part:

In Qantas Club lounges, children are not counted as guests if aged three and under. Children are usually welcome in our partner lounges.




I find this creates the possibility of inconsistent service and contradicts the absolute assertion in the majority of the posts saying that the OP was incorrect in assuming they had access rights with kids.

The OP stated up front that their children were both under the age of 3, in which case they would not usually count and his wife would be the permitted guest.

It could be that BA are the exception and do not welcome children into their lounges - however according to their T&Cs they obviously do accept kids, its whether they are exempt from the count where there appears to inconsistency, according to the BAEC Forum (which I posted earlier).

IF BA stated categorically - as QF have - whether or not children under 3 are counted, there would be no issue.

BA Lounge Dragons (esp at LHR) are notorius for not knowing the access rules, there are numerous threads on this over on the BAEC Forum. This is due to BA not using dedicated staff to perform set roles - they believe in staff role rotation, which appears to lead to poor knowledge of specifics. If I was refused access when under the impression I had full rights, then I would certainly request that a supervisor be summoned.

There are, however, ways of being informed that my access request is denied and there are ways in which I can respectfully request that the denial is reviewed. If I act in a polite and respectful manner, I would expect the staff to also do so.

BD

I don't even understand this 'lounge obsession' so to speak, whereby people want to argue and argue to gain access.

Lounges are not that nice, especially the T4 lounge - in fact I'd rather check in as late as possible to minimise my time at T4 (including the lounge) - I find the place generally pretty dilapidated, and the lounge food at T4 leaves a lot to be desired (soggy noodles etc!) anyway.

I am an F pax who already deplores the fact that non F pax get access to this overcrowded lounge at T4 (and the small one in BKK as well). I and my partner found it difficult to get lounge seats last August while waiting to board BA9 and we had paid hard cash for F. It seems to me that BA do not even exercise the capacity restriction rule which gives them the right to refuse entry when the lounge is overcrowded. There used to be separate F and J BA lounges at T4, but now its all in, together with qualifying FF's at the relevant levels. There have been a string of complaints about this on web forums, so I am not alone in my view. Maybe BA is now strictly enforcing the rules, generous as they are IMO, because of these complaints about the combined lounge at T4.

Maybe the lounge was not crowded when you were there as you were boarding a day flight rather than one of the clutch of flights that leave for Aus in the evening. I am not trying to excuse the BA attitude you received but just suggesting why they refused entry.

I find this creates the possibility of inconsistent service and contradicts the absolute assertion in the majority of the posts saying that the OP was incorrect in assuming they had access rights with kids.

The OP stated up front that their children were both under the age of 3, in which case they would not usually count and his wife would be the permitted guest.

It could be that BA are the exception and do not welcome children into their lounges - however according to their T&Cs they obviously do accept kids, its whether they are exempt from the count where there appears to inconsistency, according to the BAEC Forum (which I posted earlier).

IF BA stated categorically - as QF have - whether or not children under 3 are counted, there would be no issue.

BA Lounge Dragons (esp at LHR) are notorius for not knowing the access rules, there are numerous threads on this over on the BAEC Forum. This is due to BA not using dedicated staff to perform set roles - they believe in staff role rotation, which appears to lead to poor knowledge of specifics. If I was refused access when under the impression I had full rights, then I would certainly request that a supervisor be summoned.

There are, however, ways of being informed that my access request is denied and there are ways in which I can respectfully request that the denial is reviewed. If I act in a polite and respectful manner, I would expect the staff to also do so.

BD

I have foiund that the lounge agents tend to be quite ok with the rules, especially in London. In this case I see no reason to see that the agent was incorrect. It is a BA lounge and not a QF lounge and I have seen nothing that would indicate that BA does not treat under 3s as guests.

Without a statement indicating the exception, then it should be expected that all guests count. With a max guest count of 1, then should not expect to gain entrance

Dave

I have foiund that the lounge agents tend to be quite ok with the rules, especially in London.

Hi Dave,

As stated, there are numerous threads on this on the BAEC Forum, including acknowledgement from BA Staff that there are issues with the consistency of service. Sunrisegirl in Post #9 in this thread highlights this issue:

Do lounge reception staff actually know the lounge entry rules (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/958520-do-lounge-reception-staff-actually-know-lounge-entry-rules.html)

And whilst I don't doubt that the majority of travellers have no issues gaining rightful access (yourself & myself included in the past) it seems there are also a sizeable number who hit problems from time to time. As you've already responded to this BAEC Topic, I presume you're across this fact.


It is a BA lounge and not a QF lounge and I have seen nothing that would indicate that BA does not treat under 3s as guests.

I acknowledged that it was a BA operated lounge in the suggestion that BA clarify their rules in the way that QF have and if you'd read the link that I'd posted at #13 above you'd have seen anecdotal evidence from BA regulars of BA accepting children outside of the guest count (and not - there's that inconsistency again!)


I am an F pax who already deplores the fact that non F pax get access to this overcrowded lounge at T4 (and the small one in BKK as well). I and my partner found it difficult to get lounge seats last August while waiting to board BA9 and we had paid hard cash for F. It seems to me that BA do not even exercise the capacity restriction rule which gives them the right to refuse entry when the lounge is overcrowded. There used to be separate F and J BA lounges at T4, but now its all in, together with qualifying FF's at the relevant levels. There have been a string of complaints about this on web forums, so I am not alone in my view. Maybe BA is now strictly enforcing the rules, generous as they are IMO, because of these complaints about the combined lounge at T4.

I, too crdaus, have questioned why anyone would pay good money (or points) to fly out of T4 since BA completely degraded the service offering there. Indeed, I now avoid the place like the plague preferring to fly MAN-HEL-HKG and connecting into QF there, which is fine if you're flying onto Melbourne and not flying First (and not just because of the BA ground experience at LHR which is bad enough, but issues I've had with BA at MAN). However, people still do - and that's their choice.

If you're unhappy with the service provided in the F lounge, have you considered - as the OP is - letting BA know of your displeasure?

Happy Landings, All!

BD

I acknowledged that it was a BA operated lounge in the suggestion that BA clarify their rules in the way that QF have and if you'd read the link that I'd posted at #13 above you'd have seen anecdotal evidence from BA regulars of BA accepting children outside of the guest count (and not - there's that inconsistency again!)



Conversely I would say that unless an exception is to be made there is no reason to say anything

By saying 1 guest there is no reason to assume it means anything other then 1

Dave

BD1959: that is all well and good but still doesn't answer the question as to why parents think that children should be excluded from the guest count and yet others should count.

BD1959: that is all well and good but still doesn't answer the question as to why parents think that children should be excluded from the guest count and yet others should count.

I assume that it is because they dont believe that kids will consume the same level of services that adults, or perhaps because under 2 years on certain carriers there is no charge for the kids (except for taxes) so if they aren't people for the purposes of charging for flights, why should they be people for the purposes of lounge access.

This actually makes me wonder about my lounge access later this year. I am QF WP travelling in J with mrssimongr and babygr (8 months). I wonder if he might be denied F lounge access and we will have to go to the J lounge - although as this is BA flying LHR-SIN-SYD as we will be in T4 most likely then there is only the mixed lounge.

Re the point about wondering the lounges were so full of kids during school holidays - I assume that the answer to that is fairly obvious?

I find this creates the possibility of inconsistent service and contradicts the absolute assertion in the majority of the posts saying that the OP was incorrect in assuming they had access rights with kids.

Yes, this QF rule creates a certain expectation. However it was a BA lounge after all so the people there had the right to turn the OP away.

BD1959: that is all well and good but still doesn't answer the question as to why parents think that children should be excluded from the guest count and yet others should count.

The expectation comes from many sources some practical, some philosophical. We as a society have made the decision to put measures in place which specifically protect and favour children over other parts of the society. This is often reflected in lounge access rules. QF is an example, but also AA, UA etc. who do not count traveling family members as guests. You can show up with your wife and 4 children, the nanny and the personal doctor and you will get access on one membership.
Also airlines do not count children as full adults for the purpose of fares, therefore again there is an expectation that they are also not treated as full adults for the purpose of lounge access.
The other issue is that when families travel together the benefit of lounge access are often very high but it is virtually impossible to only have part of the family in the lounge and the other part not.
This is different to traveling with adults where it is easy and practical to have some people visit a lounge while others don't.

I know, there is not right for children to get into lounges for free but there are quite a few arguments why allowing this is good for our societies. And yes, I know there are 100 reasons why the except opposite should be done and children should not be allowed in lounges at all. It depends on your circumstances I guess.

As far as someone else taking them in, BA does (iirc) have a valid rule that the guest must be travelling with the member, so the other person would not be entitled to take the person in as their guest

AFAIK BA doesn't have this rule because the oneworld rules are specifically designed for Emeralds to guest in people for business meetings etc. even when on different flights.

This actually makes me wonder about my lounge access later this year. I am QF WP travelling in J with mrssimongr and babygr (8 months). I wonder if he might be denied F lounge access and we will have to go to the J lounge - although as this is BA flying LHR-SIN-SYD as we will be in T4 most likely then there is only the mixed lounge.

Again, technically BA can deny you access to any lounge, not just F. QF in SIN or SYD however will let you in because it is in their rules (your kid doesn't count as a guest) and because they generally will let families in.

AFAIK BA doesn't have this rule because the oneworld rules are specifically designed for Emeralds to guest in people for business meetings etc. even when on different flights.

The rules are designed so that 2 people travelling can use the lounge. I have come across BA agents referring to the rule that the guest must be travelling with the member

Dave

Considering the crowded nature of most lounges these days children do consume the same resources from a seating perspective as an adult. It is this mad sense of entitlement that has me baffled that someone should not have to comply with the rules because they have children. It wasn't like you woke up one morning and said "stuff me, where did that come from?" Yes this means that for someone who would normally have lounge access, they will not, just as I would never leave my President and SVP out in the cold as I lord it up in the J or F lounge, likewise I wouldn't leave my wife and child out in the general terminal (but I would be fine if they wanted to leave me). Would it not be the same as when you get on the plane having booked and paid for Y for the wife and kids but J for yourself (probably paid for by the company) and then immediatly demanding a seat up the front because you are entitled to travel J and so therefore the wife and kid(s) should be as well?

You don't get a 2 for 1 movie pass and demand that the kids get in for free as well, do you?

The rules are designed so that 2 people travelling can use the lounge. I have come across BA agents referring to the rule that the guest must be travelling with the member

DaveBA strictly enforces this rule about being on the same flight when it suits them (e.g. lounge is nearing capacity). It is an actual rule documented in the T&C but contradicting the Oneworld rules. I had a long discussion with BA SS when they still existed about this. The lounge access is specifically not to allow for business meetings -- AA has that policy, not BA!!!!! AA even provide pseudo-boarding pass for non-flying guests to cross security to the AA lounge for business meetings (but there is a fee, you must rent a conference room for the meeting and not hold it in the lounge).

Qantas seem to have a similar "same flight" philosophy for lounge access but avoid contradicting oneworld agreements by applying it to QF WP's/SG's only, other oneworld emerald/sapphire travellers and guest do not need to be on the same flight.

http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying/qantasClub/loungeAccess#qfclub

Qantas seem to have a similar "same flight" philosophy but avoid contradicting oneworld agreements by applying it to QF WP's only, other oneworld emerald/sapphire travellers and guest do not need to be on the same flight.

http://www.qantas.com.au/info/flying/qantasClub/loungeAccess#qfclub

So if guesting in others to lounges is important for you, having a Oneworld membership different to QFF is advantageous.

Come on over to the Star Alliance Lounge in LHR T1! When I was there 2 weeks ago, a man came in and asked nicely if he could bring his wife and 2 kids (they were about 4 and 6 yrs old) in the lounge. The agent told him he couldn't by the rules, but she would ask her manager. Within seconds, the manager was there and told him that she'd make an exception for him. The two kids made straight for the kids' room and I didn't hear a peep out of them! ^ to Star Alliance!

Come on over to the Star Alliance Lounge in LHR T1! When I was there 2 weeks ago, a man came in and asked nicely if he could bring his wife and 2 kids (they were about 4 and 6 yrs old) in the lounge. The agent told him he couldn't by the rules, but she would ask her manager. Within seconds, the manager was there and told him that she'd make an exception for him. The two kids made straight for the kids' room and I didn't hear a peep out of them! ^ to Star Alliance!

To be fair to BA, there is a BIG difference between the BA T4 lounge and the Star Alliance lounge in T1. Firstly at peak times the T4 lounge is catering for a large number of people so I can completely understand why BA lounge dragons will breath fire as capacity constraints definitely exist. In fact this is why I recently posted a thread asking whether the Holideck was worth visiting instead despite it being a 'lesser' lounge. :)

...there is a BIG difference between the BA T4 lounge and the Star Alliance lounge in T1. Firstly at peak times the T4 lounge is catering for a large number of people so I can completely understand why BA lounge dragons will breath fire as capacity constraints definitely exist.

I think this is probably part of the explanation. The T4 lounge is now vastly under-sized for all the flights using it (awaiting relocation to other terminals). I was there last June and it was standing room only, and there are frequent references here to no guesting, and it being at full capacity most days.

Access must depend on many factors including local rules and lounge capacity. I was denied access to T4 lounge and sent to a smaller one a while back, if it is full, it is full! In Hong Kong this year Mrs explorer (partner gold) me (WP) was given access to the business lounge with 4...yes four children..ages 12 - 17, all travelling economy. The very nice lounge agent apologised and told me the first lounge was not big and was full.

.... In Hong Kong this year Mrs explorer (partner gold) me (WP) was given access to the business lounge with 4...yes four children..ages 12 - 17, all travelling economy. The very nice lounge agent apologised and told me the first lounge was not big and was full.I've always found HKG to be like that -- very pleasant and gracious service and a willlingness to bend the rules within reason. The QF F lounge there is substantially the same as the J lounge so you didn't miss anything by not getting into the F section. Even the food/wine is substantially the same.

I think this is probably part of the explanation. The T4 lounge is now vastly under-sized for all the flights using it (awaiting relocation to other terminals). I was there last June and it was standing room only, and there are frequent references here to no guesting, and it being at full capacity most days.I was there last June as well and it definitly was standing room only.

Back then it was regularly so bad that BA ended up reopening the G10 CCR and Flounges in early July. These closed again late last year when the next set of flights moved out leaving only the Kangaroo routes from T4.

So while the G1 lounge still gets crowded it is not as bad as it often was a year ago.

So while the G1 lounge still gets crowded it is not as bad as it often was a year ago.

Definitely a lot better than it often was a year ago, although it is still a rubbish lounge (and over-crowded) compared to T5 ones.

Definitely a lot better than it often was a year ago, although it is still a rubbish lounge (and over-crowded) compared to T5 ones.The "rubbish" being what all the LHR lounges were like prior to T5 opening; how quickly the bar can be raised. I do agree that BA did an excellent job with the T5 lounges, really stunning. And they seem to be working to roll it out to other cities. Was just recently in the new Toronto lounge, which is Galleries style (as opposed to Terraces) and not quite as good as T5 but within shouting distance and a huge improvement over what BA had in YYZ for so many years. Wonder if other NA cities will also get re-lounged.

This really makes the LAX TBIT re-lounging look sooooo bad.

BA Lounge Dragons (esp at LHR) are notorius for not knowing the access rules

Having lived in London and visited BA lounges many times as a WP, I am inclined to a more cynical view: ie, that the "computer says nooooo" syndrome is at work here....with a variation on the Judgment of Solomon as a perverse twist:
Was denied entry and told that i could take in an infant and one guest only - so i would need to choose between my wife and 2 1/2 year old as to who i could bring in....

Fully agree that an apology seems to be needed given the behaviour that the op has clearly stated he readily exhibited. This type of behaviour is uncalled for and highly inappropriate.



Oh, dear. So the OP hurt the lounge staff's feelings a little by possibly highlighting the absurd outcomes that can sometimes result from slavish adherence (or was it, given there is the suggestion that, strictly speaking, he was entitled to one guest only?) to the rules - ouch! In the UK, questioning authority, especially petty authority, is now almost automatically viewed by that same authority as threatening and/or abusive behavior. In the US, or course, you may even get tasered for your troubles (especially if you are female, short and old :eek:)

And if you are going to be an idiot about it, so you should be tasered. Now if I could just get it to work through the computer, all the better. :-)

This really makes the LAX TBIT re-lounging look sooooo bad.

I haven't tried the new Galleries admittedly, but I quite liked the new TBIT lounge - if only it had been twice the size, it would have been fine!

The "rubbish" being what all the LHR lounges were like prior to T5 opening;

I don't quite agree. T4 F lounge was better than the current offering at T4. I wouldn't have called T4 F particularly 'rubbish' although not particularly good either.

Speaking of lounges, what's happened to some of the nicer food at QF F lounges in MEL? They used to have more 'fancy' food...

I don't quite agree. T4 F lounge was better than the current offering at T4. I wouldn't have called T4 F particularly 'rubbish' although not particularly good either.

The biggest issue with the old T4 F lounge was simply capacity. Depending on the time of day you were in the lounge it was sometimes impossible (or near impossible) to find a seat. Even the tall stools at the bar were usually all taken.

Speaking of lounges, what's happened to some of the nicer food at QF F lounges in MEL? They used to have more 'fancy' food...[/QUOTE]

QF going into fortress SYD mode where they forget a certain city a few hundred miles south. Makes me wish the AN/SQ/NZ tie up happened guaranteeing those of us not so SYD focussed with a good level of service especially as MEL was AN's 'home base'.

Lets see:

The rules say 1 PERSON.( I checked) Your kids are PEOPLE. ( If not you wont mind us killing them for running around the aircraft and causing general mayhem.) You would be a better parent if you taught your children that rules are for everyone not just the childless.

There is a couple in Arkansas that has 18 kids....do they get to bring ALL of them into the lounge? If not exactly what do you suppose the limit is?

Lets see:

The rules say 1 PERSON.( I checked) Your kids are PEOPLE. ( If not you wont mind us killing them for running around the aircraft and causing general mayhem.) You would be a better parent if you taught your children that rules are for everyone not just the childless.

There is a couple in Arkansas that has 18 kids....do they get to bring ALL of them into the lounge? If not exactly what do you suppose the limit is? Any reason why you are dragging up a thread which has been done to death, with the last post over two months ago?

(Welcome to FT, by the way).

Dave

... Speaking of lounges, what's happened to some of the nicer food at QF F lounges in MEL? They used to have more 'fancy' food...Having employed both lounges in the afternoon/evenings half a dozen times in the last few months, I am here to say the basic menus are very similar if not identical. Maybe there are a few more "daily special" options in SYD.

The "snack" menu disappeared from both over a year ago.

I feel the cooking/service is better in MEL, probably due to the more intimate aspect of the lounge.

I feel the cooking/service is better in MEL, probably due to the more intimate aspect of the lounge.

Thats like saying that WHY meals are better than J meals because there are more people jammed into every cubic metre of cabin... :p

Thats like saying that WHY meals are better than J meals because there are more people jammed into every cubic metre of cabin... :p:confused: I have no Idea of what you are referring to.

The MEL restaurant has seating of about 40% that of SYD's. It's smaller and IMHO, service and food tend to be better. (Of course, I would happily visit either.)

The MEL restaurant has seating of about 40% that of SYD's. It's smaller and IMHO, service and food tend to be better. (Of course, I would happily visit either.)
Likewise! Sounds like time to do a TTARB (taste test and report back).

Case in point. My last meal in MEL lounge took 30 minutes for entree + main (perfect time for me) and they were ready with a top-up whenever the tide went out. In SYD it took 45 minutes for just entree, and no drink top-up whatsoever.