Weighing all wheelie cases

Reply

Old Dec 5, 18, 12:42 pm
  #46  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Programs: ►QFWP/LTG►VA WP►HyattGlobalist►HiltonGold
Posts: 20,981
Originally Posted by Platy View Post
Except....impact was already reduced by lowering the weight of the allowable items (10kg to 7kg) previously in the "set up" for the cash grab to come (the latter confirmed by the opinion of my contacts if QF Group - it's about cash not safety, mate).
...
When did Qantas lower the domestic cabin bag allowance?


I have been a member of QFF since 1994 and in that time the domestic cabin bag allowance has always been based on 2 x 7kg + personal item.
serfty is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 12:52 pm
  #47  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Programs: ►QFWP/LTG►VA WP►HyattGlobalist►HiltonGold
Posts: 20,981
Originally Posted by Platy View Post
Funny you should mention that...was drinking with a QF Group First Officer on Tuesday night who was explaining how she managed to bypass (the now enforced) carry on weight limitations when on staff travel (non duty).
...
I know a Qantas pilot who advocates the banning of all rollabords as carry on.
serfty is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 2:29 pm
  #48  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cairns, Australia
Posts: 919
Originally Posted by serfty View Post
When did Qantas lower the domestic cabin bag allowance?


I have been a member of QFF since 1994 and in that time the domestic cabin bag allowance has always been based on 2 x 7kg + personal item.

Yes - you are right.

For clarity, (according the media sources located through a quick Google search) the reduction from 10kg to 7kg was instituted by Qantas Group airline Jetstar from 25 November 2014.

They previously started a program of spot checking the weight of carry ons from 13 October 2014.

The JQ paid extra carry on limit (from 7kg to 10kg) commenced from 4 September 2018.

At risk of repetition, my concern is that QF would copy this model.
Platy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 2:46 pm
  #49  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cairns, Australia
Posts: 919
Originally Posted by nancypants View Post



/rant on

as a QF wife I can firmly say

1) not all QF staff (mine definitely gets zero say over seats- middle/rear if that’s what’s available, nothing at all if nothing is available. Also worth noting that HR and office types bump basically all flight crew)

2) after accruing $100k+ of debt to train, their base pay is not that flash and staff travel is a cheap way for qantas to sweeten the deal. If they would like to get rid of staff travel entirely and give mr pants a significant pay increase I would be more than happy with that. But they won’t ever do that, because at the moment they can get away with supplying something that essentially has no cost associated with it (seats are standby/space available so if there wasn’t a staff’s posterior in it, would have gone out empty)

/rant off


/reality check from paying passenger on

I'm not referring to all QF staff and realise that travel is part of the EBA and there are certain systems in place supposedly to favour the actual paying passenger.

That said, in real life experiences I've had:
  • Staff (pilot) try to sit in my allocated business class front row seat and had to be asked (nicely) to piss off back to their own allocated seat which they have done with attitude and unapologetically
  • Staff (engineering management) (non duty) access business class seats on a flight for which I could not purchase the full business class fare
  • Watched staff be given seats / boarding passes at the airport a long time before the supposed cut off time for such
  • Staff be allocated seats which I can't access despite WP status
  • Travelled in first to LHR a couple of times where there have been more staff in the cabin than actual passengers
  • And listened to how one staff member (pilot) goes about outwitting the carry on allowances - including leaving their carry ons in the crew room when they go to check in so check in agents cannot see their carry ons and boarding at the last minute to minimise the opportunity for gate agents to enforce carry on rules
These staff-related situations are one of the three drivers for me to favour spending my money with the competition (the others being (1) the ability to select a seat of choice at the time booking without seats being blocked off and (2) cheaper business class fares).

Lost revenue to QF from one of the customers who pays for your partner's wage regardless of their undoubted skill, competency and professionalism in the cockpit.

FWIW I also agree that it would be far preferable for staff travel not to be part of the renumeration package.

/ reality check from paying passenger off
Platy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 3:23 pm
  #50  
Moderator: Asiana & Qantas Frequent Flyer
Aman Contributor Badge 2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: STR/SYD/SMF
Programs: QF SG, LH SEN, OZ D+, HH D, SPG P
Posts: 13,879
[mod hat] Reminder to stay on topic (weighing of carry on bags) and not drifting into staff travel territory. If you want to discuss this, open a separate thread please. [/mod hat]
DownUnderFlyer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 5:37 pm
  #51  
og
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 12,559
Claiming that reduced weight in the carry on bags equals more space in overhead lockers just doesn’t stack up (with me anyway). My carry on luggage is consistently about 10 kg. This fits my “approved size” carry on bag and I only need one such bag in the ovehead locker. Now I need the same carry on bag as well as a medium “approved size” backpack. Both will now go into the overhead locker if I can possibly manage it (like most everyone else tries to do). I’m happy to follow the rules, but IMO the rules have not been evaluated for decades and now they should. And as far as checked luggage is concerned, so long as my small sized wheelie bag and (now) backpack are concerned, I’ll only go there “kicking and screaming” - like everyone else.

Last edited by og; Dec 5, 18 at 5:59 pm
og is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 6:50 pm
  #52  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cairns, Australia
Posts: 919
Originally Posted by og View Post
My carry on luggage is consistently about 10 kg. This fits my “approved size” carry on bag and I only need one such bag in the ovehead locker
Exactly - there is a disconnect between the allowable bag size and the weight of that bag when reasonably filled
og likes this.
Platy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 7:39 pm
  #53  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 38,636
Originally Posted by Platy View Post
Exactly - there is a disconnect between the allowable bag size and the weight of that bag when reasonably filled
Reasonable depends on who is making the determination - I expect that it is like all things on FT - "What I do is what should be allowed and beyond that is wrong"

It doesn't matter what someone on FT thinks is reasonable when there is a atipulated allowance - go beyond it and may get away with it, but get stopped, then no grounds to complain ( c.f. the speeding analogy above )

If QF chooses to take JQ's model of allowing higher amount of weight on a piece for an extra fee, then maybe some people will be happy to pay it - others may be happier to keep their bag weight down
doug_westcott likes this.
Dave Noble is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 8:43 pm
  #54  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Newcastle, Australia.
Programs: VA Plat, QF LTG / OW Sapphire; NZ Gold, HH Diamond, Hyatt Povo.
Posts: 2,312
This is FANTASTIC news.

Proof that if you make enough customer "enhancements", you'll eventually get one right by accident.

Locker hogs BTFO.
ps107 likes this.
shillard is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 5, 18, 9:10 pm
  #55  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 38,636
Originally Posted by shillard View Post
This is FANTASTIC news.

Proof that if you make enough customer "enhancements", you'll eventually get one right by accident.

Locker hogs BTFO.
Unfortunately, there seems to be nothing to suggest that this was anything other than a one off case of an agent doing his or her job
wrp96 likes this.
Dave Noble is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 18, 1:00 am
  #56  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Newcastle, Australia.
Programs: VA Plat, QF LTG / OW Sapphire; NZ Gold, HH Diamond, Hyatt Povo.
Posts: 2,312
Originally Posted by Dave Noble View Post
Unfortunately, there seems to be nothing to suggest that this was anything other than a one off case of an agent doing his or her job

I just died a little inside.
nancypants likes this.
shillard is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 18, 2:02 am
  #57  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: SDF
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 13,018
The argument about the overheads being easier to close... does it make a difference if a passenger puts one bag at 14kg up there or two of 7kg? Same weight.

People say it's preferable to limit risk with only a bag of 7kg falling rather than 10? But what if two bags of 7 fall? At the same time?

People make out that it rains bags in the cabin. Other than a badly placed hat, coat, or other very light item placed loosely on top of something else in an overhead bin, I've never witnessed anything fall out of an overhead.
LHR/MEL/Europe FF is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 18, 3:47 am
  #58  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cairns, Australia
Posts: 919
Originally Posted by Dave Noble View Post
Reasonable depends on who is making the determination - I expect that it is like all things on FT - "What I do is what should be allowed and beyond that is wrong"

It doesn't matter what someone on FT thinks is reasonable when there is a atipulated allowance - go beyond it and may get away with it, but get stopped, then no grounds to complain ( c.f. the speeding analogy above )

If QF chooses to take JQ's model of allowing higher amount of weight on a piece for an extra fee, then maybe some people will be happy to pay it - others may be happier to keep their bag weight down
Well obviously QF is making the determination.

As is their legal requirement to make one (whatever it may be) to satisfy the regulatory requirements (per the government regulator CASA).

From what I can glean on a cursory Google search those requirements are left to the discretion of the airline - it is NOT set in stone by CASA (or other equivalent bodies).

So, the airline has a choice.

Therein the disconnect in this thread.

On one level QF has made a choice. Suck it up anyone stupid enough to accept the supplier's determination without question (I think - your position - respecting your record questioning the benefits of the QF FF program). Set yourself up for another "enhancement" and pillage yet more cash from the assumed gullible customer base.

On another level some might question:

1). Where QF sets the benchmark; and
2). How that benchmark should be enforced

To avoid pointless repetition - the various arguments within that framework have already well aired.

That said, the airline itself could determine a policy to meet the customer need and expectation if it could be bothered to conduct due market research (kinda basic stuff in product marketing by the way) - how much luggage does a business customer typically need and how can we meet that need to promote a product which is fit for purpose and cost effective. What is the average and standard distribution of the actual weight of a statistical valid sample size of allowable carry on luggage items of the allowable dimension. So elementary a secondary school science or maths project could cope with the question and answer. So basic stuff. Therein your definition of reasonable. Easy high school stuff.

In that circumstance your concerns about the definition of "reasonable" are readily dispensed - the airline can set a benchmark accommodating the customer based on actual research - not FT subjective position. The typical customer buys a roller carry on and needs 9kg (or 5kg, whatever) and wow, Boeing already anticipated that need (because it ain't rocket science and a common problem worldwide) in their pivot bin design an safety compliance criteria.

And our FT discussion would quickly subsume to a "well QF did appropriate research on customer needs and expectations and worked that into their business model" and "has QF used the latest overhead design to maximise carry on flexibility to promote customer satisfaction whilst minimising their safety risk".

Instead of superficial stuff about people following the rules without question (like that ever changed the world or was business savvy).

And if QF gouges yet more out of the customer (e.g. pay for 10kg even though your overall check in allowance is still within the limit - remembering that check in limit has itself been cut back by around 50% for folk like me), it will reach a tipping point of customer pushback (as it did today for me when the call wait time to speak to someone QF as a premium member was 53-75 minutes and the call back function didn't result in a call back so I went with a competitor - short term profit for folk to fawn over even though a decades loyal customer cannot even speak to someone at the airline).

Short term profit gain - long term disaster.

But, apparently logical (to some).

(and PS....the QF customer feedback system does not include a categorisation to encompass my feedback on the call centre issue - so that doesn't get reported and the arrogant twits in QF HQ continue in blissful ignorance of their own tragic incompetence - not a problem cos the share price went up - right?!?!).
og and nancypants like this.

Last edited by Platy; Dec 6, 18 at 4:19 am
Platy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 18, 2:20 pm
  #59  
Hyatt 10+ BadgeFour Seasons 5+ Badge 2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP (OWE), VA PLAT, EY GLD, SPG PLAT, Hyatt DIA, Hilton DIA, Hertz PC
Posts: 6,469
Is this for domestic or international?

International I travel HLO and my bag is around 10Kgs because of my laptop. EY and EK sometimes weight it at check in but once I say there's a laptop they have no issue.
m0hamed is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 6, 18, 2:39 pm
  #60  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
2019 FlyerTalk Awards
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Melbourne
Programs: ►QFWP/LTG►VA WP►HyattGlobalist►HiltonGold
Posts: 20,981
Originally Posted by m0hamed View Post
Is this for domestic or international?
...
Both.

Main difference is that in economy domestic 2 x 7Kg "105cm" are permitted, but only one (up to 115cm) International.

If you are not in economy, then 2 "105cm" bags are permitted.

https://www.qantas.com/au/en/travel-...n-baggage.html
serfty is online now  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread