lounge in Melbourne not code-shared?
Oct 26, 2017 | 3:50 pm
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,538
Lounge access is only on routes where the qf/EK partnership applies... so you can't use the EK lounge in Australia before a QF flight to the USA for example. Their partnership doesn't extend to the usa... and I guess a code share is a good way of working that agreement out? Same with other flights around the world, just because EK has a lounge in a particular port it doesn't mean QF pax can automatically use it. .
Oct 26, 2017 | 4:15 pm
#32
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 46,140
Lounge access is only on routes where the qf/EK partnership applies... so you can't use the EK lounge in Australia before a QF flight to the USA for example. Their partnership doesn't extend to the usa... and I guess a code share is a good way of working that agreement out? Same with other flights around the world, just because EK has a lounge in a particular port it doesn't mean QF pax can automatically use it. .
Originally Posted by https://www.qantas.com/fflyer/dyn/flying/tier-benefits#benefits-of-gold
Lounge Access
Enjoy access for you and one guest to Emirates Lounges throughout Australia, Europe, Asia, North Africa and the Middle East, whenever you fly with Qantas or Emirates. In Dubai, you and a guest may enjoy the luxurious Emirates Business Lounge
Enjoy access for you and one guest to Emirates Lounges throughout Australia, Europe, Asia, North Africa and the Middle East, whenever you fly with Qantas or Emirates. In Dubai, you and a guest may enjoy the luxurious Emirates Business Lounge
Oct 26, 2017 | 6:43 pm
#33
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QFWP (LTSG), NZ (Jade), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,672
Either poor wording by Qantas or incorrect interpretation by the EK lounge staff but I have seen QF passengers denied access, AKL and SYD, with the reason being that the QF/EK partnership not including the flight (in the AKL case it was an FJ codeshare to NAN so I assume that was completely legitimate) SYD was to HND so similar to the reported cases in MEL.
Oct 26, 2017 | 7:34 pm
#34
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 46,140
Either poor wording by Qantas or incorrect interpretation by the EK lounge staff but I have seen QF passengers denied access, AKL and SYD, with the reason being that the QF/EK partnership not including the flight (in the AKL case it was an FJ codeshare to NAN so I assume that was completely legitimate) SYD was to HND so similar to the reported cases in MEL.
I have seen the agents using the codeshare rule , but I am fairly sure that the Qantas website is correct and that the lounge agents are incorrect
Oct 26, 2017 | 9:45 pm
#35
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD BXG
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,664
Oct 26, 2017 | 10:11 pm
#36
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 46,140
If the agents say that the rule is X, they are unlikely to change from it.
Oct 26, 2017 | 10:36 pm
#37
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD BXG
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,664
I don't know - I have never had that situation occur ; I have only had a case where I was surprised that such an item I had would be prohibited, but the security agent was able to obtain documentation that supported his position
If the agents say that the rule is X, they are unlikely to change from it.
If the agents say that the rule is X, they are unlikely to change from it.
Oct 27, 2017 | 12:24 am
#39
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD BXG
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,664
Rounded blades on scissors make them blunt objects and ineffective for achieving their implied purpose (ie cutting things). Notwithstanding, an argument would have only led to tears (mine) and a visit to a very ugly holding cell off the airport. The argument that SYD, LAX, DFW, NRT and HND security said they are "OK" failed to impress.
Oct 27, 2017 | 1:38 am
#40
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 46,140
The guys were quoting an English translation of the rules originally in Chinese.
Rounded blades on scissors make them blunt objects and ineffective for achieving their implied purpose (ie cutting things). Notwithstanding, an argument would have only led to tears (mine) and a visit to a very ugly holding cell off the airport. The argument that SYD, LAX, DFW, NRT and HND security said they are "OK" failed to impress.
Rounded blades on scissors make them blunt objects and ineffective for achieving their implied purpose (ie cutting things). Notwithstanding, an argument would have only led to tears (mine) and a visit to a very ugly holding cell off the airport. The argument that SYD, LAX, DFW, NRT and HND security said they are "OK" failed to impress.
That other airrports allowed them is irrelevant. different places have different rules. Taipei is none of Australia , USA or Japan so would not expect that to hold any weight. There are, for example, surgical items with rounded blades - and this is different to having rounded tips
Oct 27, 2017 | 2:04 am
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD BXG
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,664
And rounded blades are on items.
That other airrports allowed them is irrelevant. different places have different rules. Taipei is none of Australia , USA or Japan so would not expect that to hold any weight. There are, for example, surgical items with rounded blades - and this is different to having rounded tips
That other airrports allowed them is irrelevant. different places have different rules. Taipei is none of Australia , USA or Japan so would not expect that to hold any weight. There are, for example, surgical items with rounded blades - and this is different to having rounded tips