Is Oneworld supposed to be consistent?
 

Out of interest, is the whole Oneworld interline concept supposed to be that the service on each airline within the alliance is similar? If so, my recent experiences on AY, IB and QF show great disparities. IB was dire, but what did I expect...but AY and QF were excellent, and the product onboard very different to the BA equivalent. Just wondering as the experiences mean I would not now choose BA to HEL in Y or BA to BKK in J or Y.

The simple answer in no.

For the pax an alliance generally means easier connections between the various carriers (through checked bags, all BPs issued at the first airport). And there are the lounge benefits as well.

QF in Y in just so much better than BA in every respect I think it's pretty clear why BA seem to be pulling out of Australia. The new A380 product will go that one step further with:
- Internet access at all seats
- Panasonic new generation VOD system with no floor boxes
- Self service bar areas
- New seats which use only two floor legs (instead of three) creating far more footspace as well as the new reclining seats with moving base.

And that's just Y. When the A380 comes online, QF will be substantially better than BA in every class.

I don't understand why Y in BA on those 11hr+ flights is so poor. For the BA crews on here, maybe they could enlighten us. My last QF flight in Y was to SIN and the service was indeed impressive for economy, and included hot towels, menus, ice creams, mid-flight snack kits, a choice of continental or full English breakfast before arrival etc. Maybe all this seems quite trivial, but after several long flights on BA, it seemed that longhaul Y was simply an endurance test! No, it's that BA chooses not to offer much more than the basics, not even menus. JAL are also very good in Y on their long sectors, and give 'mere' Y passengers a good service. Another good one is Singapore Airlines, who seem to be out in the cabin all the time.

Don't get me wrong, BA are a lot better than any American carrier, for example, and do well in Europe, but they do short change passengers on those ultra long flights, with the crews doing the minimum and the product being no more than a free drink and a hot meal. Would be interesting to see why.

Because it's what they can get away with, and all those extras cost money.

And that is not part of Mister Ten Percent's master plan.

BAH

Hmmmmm. Qantas is a fantastic airline. I've flown them and really enjoyed the service I received down the back (from BNE-LAX before I worked for BA). You're right, they do offer more. The problem, I think, is that BA have gone from being a (or THE) leader to a follower. We used to set the trends for new products, service standards etc. Now, sadly, we're cutting back as much as we can to save money.

That said, I don't think the company is adverse to change and I really do believe that with enough complaints from customers (god knows they don't listen to the crew) the company will improve the offering down the back.

Problem is, nobody complains (in writing). People will rant and rave but when it comes to putting pen to paper, it seldom happens (regarding the onboard service in terms of quantity and quality of food/drink provided).

I encourage my customers to do it. When I hand out the appalling afternoon meal down the back after a 10 hour LAX flight and see the customers' faces drop, I'll encourage them to write in. It's much harder for us crew to deliver a second full service, but we're in this job to serve the customer and ensure they get value for money.

SO I guess that, in answer to the question "why [is] Y on those 11+ hour flights so poor", I guess the answer can only be "because we can get away with it". But for how long?

Whilst I will largely agree with your statement above, QF have significantly cut the number of crew on their flights to the bare minimum so unfortunately it does mean that a meal can take 2+ hours when seated in Y which can be a real issue especially when you are looking to get some kip. Needless to say, this is a real bug bear to those of us who fly the airline on a regular basis.

The OneWorld Alliance is a marketing gimmick.

It consists of little more than sticking the logo on the members planes (and some of their boarding passes). It's very good at helping the members financially - cross alliance e-ticketing and codeshares etc., but when it comes to making any tangible improvement to the pax experience, forget it.

For example, from my recent experience, BA unable (or unwilling) to issue BP for an AA connection; BA staff at SYD refusing to assist with a BA codeshare ops by QF ("Go to the QF desk!).

Do BA have a desk in SYD? I thought QF did all their ground handling in Australia.

They do. In area A I recall. Although it is QF staff that mans it.

the ONLY airline that reflects the true spirit of the Oneworld Alliance is CX! I never once had issues regarding Oneworld Interlining, checkins, lounge access with them (yes I am CX DM, but even for all my colleagues that are QFFP or BAEC)

WT F does the staff still have the check the stupid card for access rights of an Emerald Oneworld pax (on BA!)

Surely a bit harsh ? Lounge access, earning miles and TPs on flights, priority check-in and all the other usual benefits.

Which makes it even more absurd, and bloody-minded. :rolleyes:

Well it is Australians afterall. :D

I think the T4 LHR QF/BA service is quite seamless which should be the case as per JSA.

Reciprocal lounge access is only relevant to those who would not get access with their class of travel. In any event, it is an adjunct to the FFPs of the member airlines. As the prevalence of non-alliance cooperation agreements demonstrate, allowing people to earn points/miles on other carriers is a lucrative money-spinner. Which means it falls into the category of things that advantage the members of the alliance financially, hence why it is offered. Any pax benefit is a spin-off which is cunningly marketed as if that was the main reason for doing it. It's not. It's an illusion.

When it comes to the crunch, will you be able to get the LAN ticket desk to reissue a BA e-ticket prior to a BA codeshare (ops by LA) departure from SCL? Of course not. No money in that for LA, so it doesn't do it.

When you come to measure the boasts of the OneWorld marketing boys and girls ("... or please see one of our OneWorld Alliance partners" :rolleyes:) against the actual delivery, you'll find it seriously wanting.