Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner’s attack on the perking and rorting of frequent flyer points earned on government paid flights is cause for alarm among the politicians and bureaucrats who have gorged at this particular trough for nearly two decades.
It also flirts with the taboo topic of imposing the fringe benefits tax on redemptions of flights for personal use where the points have been earned flying for work purposes in public or private industry employment
Other countries, including the US and Germany, have cracked down on these abuses for almost as long as frequent flyer schemes have given points, while Australian governments and businesses have declared it all too hard.
But it is an abuse of privilege at the expense of the economy, and those who pay prices for goods or services inflated by the costs of offering points on Qantas or Virgin Blue as an inducement to buy.
The ATO and ACCC, whose senior bureaucrats fly a lot and can accumulate massive banks of points, have been helpless in preventing points being used to generate a tax free benefit that can amount to flights with market prices soaring into tens of thousands of dollars a year for high flying individuals.
The question is will Lindsay Tanner prosecute the obvious courses of action, or is this all empty rhetoric?
Qantas mightn’t care either way. It wants to sell as many points as it can to third party buyers for real money, rather than give them away for nothing to the more than five million members of a loyalty scheme in which membership is often included as part of a corporate travel contract with a department or business.
For the airlines, the sale of points to department stores or into schemes like Woolworths’ Everyday Rewards program (which joins Qantas points to the current discount-petrol-for-paying whatever-we-want-for groceries scheme) is as close to money for nothing as it gets.
Selling Qantas points to Woolies or Harvey Norman doesn’t involve financing aircraft, paying pilots or buying fuel; it is pure profit.
Lindsay Tanner is clearly not uttering throwaway lines when he mentioned the need to get politicians and bureaucrats to use more discount fares.
One of the biggest abuses of loyalty schemes by employees is to insist when making a company or departmental booking on taking the “most convenient flight” rather than the cheapest.
The most convenient flight is always the one that generates the most points or status credits, which are critical to keeping your gold or platinum card rating, each of which inflates the basic rate at which points are awarded for miles flown. In some instances, discount flights generate no points, but can save well into the thousands of dollars for longer range flights.
One of the popular rorts is to avoid non-stop flights in favour of a “convenient time” which involves two hours at an intermediate airport, and two separate flight numbers, which in aggregate will generate more status credits for the frequent flyer member, but cost the company or department a higher total fare and lost productivity.
In private industry there is a trend to enforceable travel policies that require executives to move their schedule to capture the cheapest fare.
There is also the clearest of signals that luxury business class bookings, primarily driven by business and government, are in free fall world wide, with trips in those cabins down between 25-30% in major markets.
Which may explain rumours that Qantas is seriously contemplating a big expansion of its premium economy product at the expense of business class seats that are no longer the automatic entitlement of many sky warriors.
The author is a Qantas Frequent Flyer who has perhaps fortuitously spent most of his points.
Such a hoo-ha over nothing. 1. If you fly as much as you need to to accumulate all these points then your life probably sucks so give them the points. and 2. Economic downturn will drive companies to re-enforce policies relating to flight cheapness, crappy times and a bigger sucking life so give them the points.
Public servants are not allowed to use frequent flyer points earned during work travel for anything but work travel. So maximising points has no personal benefit. Further, as John Passant noted, in many (most?) cases the department has an arrangement with Qantas whereby the points are forfeited for a cheaper fare.
Ben says:
‘The ATO and ACCC, whose senior bureaucrats fly a lot and can accumulate massive banks of points, have been helpless in preventing points being used to generate a tax free benefit that can amount to flights with market prices soaring into tens of thousands of dollars a year for high flying individuals.’
I was a senior officer in the ATO until last year and did a lot of travel I don’t ever remember receiving frequent flyer points for travel. My understanding was that Qantas and the ATO reached a deal to trade off frequent flyer points for cheaper flights.
I think this FF stuff is a furphy. Tanner’s real target is labour costs. That means less jobs.
Tanner will I think keep a higher ‘efficiency’ dividend in place and axe some programs and staff. The latter is the Government doing the hatchet job.
The beauty of the efficiency dividend is that it gets the agency heads to do the sackings on the Government’s behalf.
I also think Rudd labor will try some form of wage freeze on public servants.
Hasn’t the CPSU advertisment campaign been a real success, frightening the Rudd Labor Government into not attacking public servants’ jobs or conditions?
Tanner will take a meat axe to the public service in one way or another. And the CPSU leadership, in the process of affiliating to the ALP, will let him. Again.
Nelson, This is about time wasting, about buying $700 fares when there are $200 fares on sale for a flight 90 minutes later, and about petty theft frequently flown. It is news, and who knows, the pigs might be about to be separated from the trough.
The cheap flights are often the early ones. Say 6.15 am Canberra to Melbourne. That means getting up at 4 am to catch a taxi to the airport say at 5 to allow enough time to make it to the flight. The ATO does not pay travel time or take it into account even tough you are up at sparrow’s fart for the organisation. And then when you get in the Office at 8 am in Melbourne the meeting doesn’t start to 9.30 or ten anyway. And you are stuffed by lunch time. Hardly productive.
So why not catch a later more expensive flight? Of course if the travel time were recognised for work purposes then people would travel earlier. But that wouldn’t be cost effective for the organisation. So this cheaper flight rubbish is built on the back of ripping conditions out of public servants by not recognising travel time as work time.