News and notes from around the interweb:
- American has introduced a polished aluminum 737-800 to their retro livery fleet. They could have, you know, just not painted this one.
- 19 year old contract worker at Portland airport snuck onto JetBlue flight because he believed he had earned a free ride
- Woman denied entry to Qantas lounge for wearing Uggs
Qantas Domestic Lounge Melbourne - Qualifying miles earned via partners and via credit cards will no longer count for status on Qantas above the Platinum level (exception: Qantas codeshares on other airline metal)
- The world’s happiest airports are mostly not in the U.S.
- Air travel cronyism falls short in the Senate
“The issue,” [Leff] adds, “isn’t free markets versus subsidies but ‘subsidies for me but not for thee’ while lobbying the federal government to pick the pockets of American consumers despite U.S. airlines earning nearly half the world’s commercial aviation profits.”
- American rethinks procedures after confused Airbus A330 evacuation
Someone at Qantas must really hate the shit out of Uggs. Can’t say I blame them.
The way others are dressed affects literally no part of the lounge experience. Attire doesn’t take up seats. Attire doesn’t make noise or emit odor. Attire doesn’t consume food or leave behind dirty dishes. Attire doesn’t take up bandwidth on the wifi. Attire doesn’t make the restroom or shower queues less crowded.
Enforcing a dress code can make the lounge look nice. But anybody who would support such an initiative would also support an initiative on enforcing a ban on ugly people, if such a ban were socially acceptable to enforce. Thus, anybody who supports enforcement of a lounge dress code is a mean-spirited superficially judgmental person.
About time the lounges started to push back on Ugg-ly attire 😉
I was shown the door at Ponderosa when I wore my Uggs.
@ Jason somehow equates the Qantas ban on Uggs with a ban on all unattractive people in lounges. No, but a ban on stupid people could get some support.
Amusing that Uggs started in Australia yet Qantas doesn’t like ’em!
Uggs may have started in Australia but they are now made in China, just like everything else in this world. But they are still too e pensive for my blood.
In the day, it was understood that the AA unpainted airplanes required a different kind of aluminum skin. Given modern chem-milling etc. I wonder if their new process required an STC. Or if no one thought to ask Boeing.
Dress codes in general are sexist, and the Uggs ban is especially so. They’re perfectly fine footwear for wearing outside, even if you have some preconceived notions about the women who wear them, that’s your fault.
Good thing! Now can they stop those body stockings women wear that show EVERYTHING. And the small shirts that 250 lb men wear. I really do NOT need to see your cut hang out or your belly button.
Dress codes are not sexist when they apply to a type of shoe. Uggs are caual shoes worn outside! Not to a business lunch or in the office. They are NOT proper office attire!
@JASON if I really wanted to sit around with people in sweat pants, flip flops, short shorts, jean cutoffs or Uggs I would NOT pay for Lounge access but sit at the Walmart Gates.
Taking Sully’s comment one step further: Where did the manufacturer get the name “UGGS?” Because they’re ugg-ly?! But I would NOT classify them as “sleepwear!”
Gotta love the snowflake complaining about not being able to wear her uggs into the lounge. How about following the rules and paying attention to the signs next time? I don’t really care if she think it is absurd. They have a dress code, it was made clear to her and yet she chooses to complain when they enforce the dress code that is clearly posted. It seems like a silly restriction but so what. The rules were made clear upfront.
@chancer how generous of you to volunteer a ban of your own kind
@TomRI again how does it matter how others are dressed? Why do you allow such an inconsequential thing to affect your enjoyment of travel?
@Bill please indicate what part of the “clear upfront” rules mention the word Uggs at all. Uggs are a rather unique style that does not neatly fit into any of those categories on the poster. It’s laughable to say Uggs are sleepwear.
Good to see one airline enforcing some decorum. Personally I don’t have an issue with Uggs other than being mystified why people want to wear them as they look so silly when worn without a zebra onesy and you have to be concerned that their wearers are about to break their ankles. What really gets me is that airlines generally won’t enforce their own rules or is it that their staff are too ‘politically correct’ or too lazy to do so. Maybe cabin crew are mainly socialists?
I try to fly in first and business to be less crowded in and to be able to work in peace and to be able to access fairly clean bathrooms and for these ‘privileges’ I have to pay good money which the airlines take with glee. I am constantly irritated that they break their side of the contract by the fact that their flight attendants do nothing to prevent ‘cabin hopping’ to the extent for example that there are people constantly walking through business from economy to use the bathrooms and flight attendants just ignore it even allowing queues to build up going right through the cabin. This is not what I am paying for but it seems anything goes. The worst offenders in my experience are British Airways and American domestic and Finnair. One also wonders what goes through peoples minds of the people who do this; after all aren’t those drawn curtains (when they do get drawn) just a little hint? I wouldn’t even think about walking into another cabin that I hadn’t paid for and even more so if I had bare feet and shredded clothing, but nobody seems to have any shame these days. So Qantas Good For You having rules and enforcing them!!!
Gary, DFW is #4 on the happiest airport list.
@Jason, I think that is what sets us apart. I come from a generation that would never do things that many GenX and Millenials find 100% acceptable. Like Uggs, thongs, shredded clothing, vulgar t shirts.
If I want to look at the ME ME ME in their in appropriate dress I can go to Walmart. But I am at a lounge that has standards. Just like the no shoes no shirts, no service of many beach stores . This place requires a better class of foot ware.
One I interview potential employees I look at what they are wearing and how much decorations they have on their body. How they present themselves is very important .
This lady had a choice and she chose not to follow the rules. When she chose not to follow those rules she lost her right to use the lounge. No shoes, no shirt NO ACCESS.