Globaliser

Then are you equally mystified by VA's decision? Or by QF's decision not to serve pork on flights to CGK?

I simply can't understand this hysteria about the withdrawal of one type of meat which is not a compulsory food for non-Muslims, and which simply follows common airline practice on routes such as these.

This strongly suggests to me that there is something else at work here.

Dave Noble

Because, as u mention elsewhere, pork isn't a mandatory item. Seems obvious to meet the wants of potential customers rather than alienate them. Costs nothing to not serve pork

Also, it isn't just a Qantas flight, it is carrying an EK flight number

Qantas is , I posit, not the dominant party in the agreement. EK is an airline that doesn't serve pork and is Halal. EK may require that all flights carrying an EK number meet this criteria rather than having annoyed passengers who find themselves on a codesahre. Qantas wasn't being forced to enter this partnership


If lack of pork and being Halal is an issue, there are plenty of other airlines to choose from if heading to Europe

edy4eva

The whole issue is blown out of proportion and is a result of a media wanting shocking news with ethnic/racial/religious slur between the lines.

EK, EY, QR, BI, MH, GA (and GF when it operated down under) have flown to AU for ages, but we never heard anyone complain about having Halal meat and NOT having pork on their menus. Now suddenly because QF started a new route with no pork included, we have people calling QUANTAS (U for UnAustralian) and threatening to stop flying QF altogether. Utter ridiculous. What's even more ridiculous is how serious some are treating it.

For those who spoke about the issue with handling Pork. It's not the preparation/serving that counts (not disposal) whereby no cross contamination should occur.

And if someone has an issue with Halal meat, get this: most beef/lamb slaughterhouses in Australia are certified Halal. I don't have the exact figures handy but most export meat to the UAE at ridiculous rates that for some reason DFAT doesn't account for. Knew someone in their consular department dedicated to handling meat exports that prepared a study on just how much discrepancies there were. The point is chances are that piece of steak you're having for dinner is by default Halal.

kevinyhli

Did anyone consider that it is actually an operational requirement rather than commercial?

Any airlines operating into Dubai basically cannot have pork, as the catering centre have got restrictions so they don't have non-Halal ingredients operating in (complexity for having pork in the wash line which basically breaks their integrity for halal).

Similarly, with the token catering centre in Dubai being fully halal, how can people expect pork to be served from Dubai?

I sometimes wish people can apply some logic before blinding going with the flow and attack Qantas

DCF

The two daily flights from Dubai to London both depart around 1-2 am and arrive around 530-630 am. I don't think there is any reasonable argument about pork not being served in the middle of the night.

The flights from London Heathrow back to Dubai depart around 10 pm and arrive at 0720 or 0820. I think that it is a reasonable expectation that bacon or ham should be offered as breakfast options, given that the catering occurs in London and that this is clearly a breakfast flight, and that an English breakfast consists of bacon and/or pork sausages.

The flight from Dubai to Sydney leaves at 0920 and arrives at 0510. As such, it is clearly a "lunch and supper" flight, and again the lack of available pork catering at Dubai should not matter at all.

Sydney to Dubai departs at 1605 and arrives at 0035, and again can be a "dinner and supper" flight, with bacon not being missed at all.

So it strikes me that Qantas could very simply have avoided any bad publicity by simply having pork on the breakfast menu on the London-Dubai sectors and not the other three sectors.

Virgin's Abu Dhabi services are a bit of a furphy, because like Qantas' Australia-UAE-Australia services they don't actually operate at breakfast time in either direction. And let's be honest, any Pom or Aussie is not going to notice or rue the absence of pork from the menu. Except at breakfast.

Globaliser

What about kevinyhli's point. What if airlines are simply not allowed to carry pork on flights to DXB? Would that put and end to this fuss?On the contrary, I would have thought that a 1025 departure and an 0620 arrival could even arguably qualify as a double breakfast flight.

matthandy

No because in the case of CGK at least it's the final destination. DXB is for all intents a transit stop and it's even been marketed that way by QF themselves. I highly doubt that the majority of passengers will have DXB as their final destination when leaving LHR or SYD. Therefore, it's not the same as the CGK flights.

Quite possibly yes, but again, does anybody actually believe that the majority of passengers on these flights will originate from DXB? I still stand by my view the majority will be from LHR or SYD and therefore, QF is pandering to the minority, not the majority.

Top of climb

Does QF even serve two hot meals on LHR-DXB? I would have thought that the catering pattern would be hot meal after takeoff frm LHR and continental breakfast before landing in DXB. In which case unless people are in the habit of having bacon in their cereal bowl it becomes a non-issue.

Even if it is a double hot breakfast on the longer Australian segments could someone please explain to me what is the great bleeding fuss about not having a slice of bacon for breakfast? It's not like QF is blaring the call to player through the PA system or forcing everyone to eat traditional Middle Eastern food in the morning. You can still have your choice between your savoury spinach and egg quiche with potatoes and beef bacon or turkey sausage, or your sweet pancakes/crepes option with fruit compote.

Globaliser

You've already accepted that at least part of the problem must be to unconnected with the racial/religious profile of the passengers on board: 50% of these sectors could not be catered with pork products in any event.

So just what sort of "pandering" is going on here?

And what about the pax who are interlining between EK and QF at DXB? Are they part of the majority or the minority?

To follow that train of thought, what if QF flew one pair of aircraft SYD-DXB-SYD and MEL-DXB-MEL, and then based a different pair (or more) of aircraft to operate LHR-DXB-LHR (so that this could be operated more flexibly just as the EK feeders to Europe are)? Would this suddenly solve the problem, seeing how all of the flights are suddenly comparable to SYD-CGK-SYD?

thadocta

No idea. But I was just wondering whether if this had been done quietly, all of the fuss would have ensued. Would the tabloid press have even noticed it?

Dave

hyho61

On QF flights, passengers should be able to order a pork free breakfast, the airline should not penalize most of their customers. BA, LH, AF fly to DXB and offer breakfast with pork as an option.

The situation with PM Continental was different, that was the only choice they offered, no subtitutions or special order. So for those who do not eat beef or who eat only halal meat, they had no option but to forgo the meal.

thadocta

This is something I have rasied before, but nobody seems able to address, including those who engage in vitriolic criticism of QF for this (thereby keeping this on-topic for this thread). Are there problems at DXB with disposal of non-Halal meals which are not consumed? I presume they can be, but is there an additional cost to do so?

This might be a purely financial situation.

As for it being an EK code-share, all EK have to do is advise all passengers booking the code-share that the flight is operated by QF and that non-Halal meals need to be pre-ordered, so I don't think it is because it is a code-share flight.

Dave

DCF

But the sectors which are catered at Dubai don't require breakfast catering, so the absence of pork is not significant.

The only sector of the four which involves a full breakfast is the one out of London, which has its catering loaded in London. And to fail to offer the main ingredient of a full English breakfast on the only breakfast sector, which moreover actually departs from London, is the act which has provoked all the criticism.

It is a decision which at best is disrespectful to passengers originating at both the English and Australian ends of the flight, and which at worst lays the airline vulnerable to accusations of being a rather cowardly junior partner in this joint venture.

And it could have been avoided by giving passengers a bacon or ham breakfast option on the single sector LHR-DXB. It is the removal of choice which is the problem.

And if thadocta is right about food disposal at DXB, the food leftovers of passengers choosing bacon or ham on LHR-DXB could have been separated out after breakfast and kept on board at Dubai and disposed of on arrival in Australia. I can't imagine that they would have weighed as much as a single 6kg carry-on bag, indeed they probably would have weighed about the same as an extra bottle of undrunk wine.

BadgerBoi

"Penalize"? Seriously?

So Qantas aren't pandering to the British?... ("pandering" seems to be the fashionable word on these threads)

Lonely Flyer

Give the man fish!!!!!