> Gernot Hassenpflug wrote:

>> Mxsmanic gmail.com> writes:
>>

>>> Craig Welch writes:
>>>

>>>> But this takes the cake. The people in this article are absolutely
>>>> beneath contempt.

>>> Perhaps if they had been told why the counters were being closed, they might
>>> have had a better attitude.
>>>
>>> It sounds like Qantas has some serious staffing and HR problems. Not enough
>>> people to staff the counters, and many of them calling in sick, perhaps due to
>>> "stress."

>>
>> This kind of thing no doubt could occur in many places, depending on
>> the culturally-determined stresses that people react to. I would say
>> from my experience in Japan though, that public companies, even when
>> they are corrupt to the point of customers being justified in spitting
>> upon them, always give extremely good-feely type of announcements
>> immediately upon any delay whatsoever, no matter what the cause: the
>> reason given is often not true ("maintenance on signals" when actually
>> there has been a technical fault with rails links, for instance, such
>> as caused by vehicles in the no-go zone of crossings). However, the
>> reassurance value for the, believe me, *very* stressed customers in
>> *very* packed carriages is immeasurable. [similar in airlines here,
>> just I have less travel experience compared to rail] Quantas would do
>> well to try and emulate some of this in their own service.

>
> I don't think it would improve customer relations if Qantas were found
> to be systematically lying to its passengers.

> The article originally cited said
>
> "She said it was not particularly unusual for check-in staff to be
> booed or even spat on when they finished their shift and closed their
> counters during busy periods."
>
> Now, spitting is not to be condoned no matter what the provocation,
> but if staff are finishing their shifts during busy periods, such that
> there's no replacement and the counter has to be closed, then there's
> clearly a problem with scheduling.