A baggage handler who resented having to lift a bag tagged as heavy so much that he stopped to write a profane note to the customer has been disciplined.
The customer had checked a 68 pound bag with Qantas. That’s overweight for Southwest Airlines, but within the baggage allowance for a first class passenger or oneworld elite elite traveling on American Airlines. Even overweight bags are often acceptable for an additional fee.
“Clearly the Qantas baggage handler at Perth Airport wasn’t happy lifting my bag,” the man shared. “He left me a nice note to read on arrival.”
After being alerted to the incident Qantas condemned the act and took drastic measures to ensure it never happens again.
Since it’s Qantas, there should be no surprise that ground services were outsourced. And in this case to famously low cost provider Menzies.
However, since this is Australia, the most that Menzies has been able to do is assure that this individual won’t work on a Qantas contract again. Qantas well knows it’s nearly impossible to fire anyone in Australia.
- Virgin Australia was forced to reinstate a flight attendant they sacked for napping on the job; watching a movie inflight; showing up late to work and violating uniform standards; and taking food meant for passengers.
- When Qantas fired a flight attendant who stole alcohol from the flight, got drunk while on the job, and lied about it, the government took the position (1) that merely drinking on the job wouldn’t have been enough (even in safety role!) and (2) firing was disproportionate to the offense.
I won’t tell you exactly what the baggage handler wrote on the luggage, but it’s the same as a tourism slogan for Australia’s Northern Territory. You can see for yourself in the photos:
The same message was written on a bag in December with another airline. Baggage handlers seem to have a particular affinity for the word.
And of course this isn’t the first time that baggage handlers for Qantas have been in the news.
When you aren’t looking, baggage handlers have been known to ignore bags, throw bags for fun, toss them in the trash and steal from them too.
70 pounds was the bag limit even for coach passengers until the airlines monetized the baggage. I remember taking two bags that were just short of that limit on Northwest flights from LAX to BKK many times. I have also taken that weight on EVA when I determined that the two overweight fees together were less than an extra bag charge. The current baggage handlers are just feeling entitled.
Underwater photographers here. Our bags routinely weigh in the 68 pound category which is why we are either in FC/BC internationally.
I don’t like picking them up either (we usually do it together) but we manage to get them to, from and around places. And they are in hard sided cases so good luck picking it up and tossing it.
I had a bag on which either the TSA or the airline/contract baggage handlers wrote an angry expletive. The bag was within my included baggage allowance and it even had a “heavy” tag on it.
I should have complained to the TSA and the airline for the vandalism on the bag, but I just never got around to doing that.
Airline scum being airline scum? I’m shocked.
Well the joke goes:
What does QANTAS stand for?
Quick And Nasty Typical Australian Service
Just to clarify, it’s not the Australian Government who makes these sacking/retention decisions. It’s the Fair Work Commission that is a court that specifically decides in matters to do with workplace disputes. Australia abides by the separation of powers between the executive government, the legislature that makes the laws, and the courts who adjudicate on them.
@Stephen Schuetz – the Fair Work Commission was created by legislation in 2009 and is part of the portfolio of Australia’s Attorney-General, so yes it is an Australian government body.
68 pound bags are simply too heavy and can lead to long term chronic pain for workers.
50 pounds should be the maximum.
Allow passengers to buy extra luggage in the form of another suitcase in the rare instance when they need more than that
JRMW
My daughter and I have NO problem picking it up. Maybe they should use TWO people since it’s clearly marked HEAVY.
I’m not all about robots and how nifty they are, but in this case, for this job and these disgruntled workers, I suggest replacing them with robots.
This is why I 100% learned how to cram 3-5 days worth of gear into a 21″ carry on bag that fits in every overhead bin of every airline ( except regional flights on United who still use those CRJ jets that shpuld only be used in 3rd world countries to transport livestock and poultry).
Only exception is when I must bring work related medical devices and then my airline (Alaska) plasters “FRAGILE” and “PRIORITY” stickers all over them so that they arrive in perfect order.
Retired flight attendant here. The Virgin Australia and Qantas flight attendants in question should have been fired.
@ Gary Leff
“…the Fair Work Commission was created by legislation in 2009 and is part of the portfolio of Australia’s Attorney-General, so yes it is an Australian government body…”
So what. That doesn’t negate @ Stephen Schuetz’s comment. From the Commission’s own website:
The Commission is the INDEPENDENT national workplace relations TRIBUNAL.
You have no idea, mate.
@platy – I think we must be using the words “government” and “independent” differently.
Here in the U.S., the Federal Trade Commission enforces federal antitrust and consumer protection laws. It is an independent agency. It is still the government pursuing anti-trust and consumer protection, even if it has some measure of ‘independence’ from the executive.
I use the word ‘government’ not in reference to “party in power” but rather as “artifact of the state.” The Fair Work Commission was created by and exercises state power. It is not a voluntary body of any sort.
@ Gary Leff
“I think we must be using the words “government” and “independent” differently.”
Regardless of whether we have or not, the Commission has been imbued with certain legal powers (it’s a “tribunal”), which it wields independent of government. The subtleties may escape a US-centric writer / audience. What matters is the end result – certain minimum employment contractural terms and certain IR / workplace legal rights are afforded a level of protection for both worker and employer independent of the government of the day.
Thus, for example, on the one hand workers have to be paid a minimum rate for a given job role and cannot be sacked unfairly, on the other hand employers aren’t subjected to spurious strike actions by workers, etc. The rules are more relaxed for smaller sized employers.
Now, in the cases of a rude note (per the above), or a certain other recent highly publicised examples of strident demands for employees to be sacked by certain very vocal advocacy groups (probably best left unnamed to avoid another round of fake claims of anti semitism), the Commission has a potential role.
FWIW it’s not uncommon for employers to flout the legislation, e.g. underpayment of wages. There are additionally levels of legal recourse to the courts within the aegis of IR legislation, as QF found out when it was deemed to have illegally sacked nearly 1700 workers, potentially costing the airline AUD100 millions in compensation pay outs after the case bounced up to the High Court.
Remember, even the law courts are ultimately bounded by the legislation enacted by the various state / federal governments.
@platy – The tribunal was created by government and wields state power. It is a government entity. Its independence of political control makes it no less so.
It is the Australian government. Created by and backed by the power of. You are drawing distinctions that simply do not exist.
@ Gary Leff
The original comment in Stephen’s comment above “it’s not the Australian Government who makes these sacking/retention decisions” is correct.
All of your obfuscation and semantic drivel cannot change that. Be careful not conflate Parliament with Government.
Incidentally, the Parliament can also create law courts.
FWIW the Fair Work Commission was originally the Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration (per the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904).