The Problem with Qantas's Perth to London Route.

The Problem with Qantas’ London to Perth Route.

Many may consider the arrival of Ultra-Longhaul flights, the latest marvel of the aviation industry, especially with the beginning of the incredibly anticipated London to Perth route, which is the first ever direct flight from England to Australia. But whilst you may be enjoying the new 17 hour, non-stop flight to Australia, the cabin crew quite possibly are not, and here is why!

Qantas’ Inaugural flight,

Qantas’s new route has definitely made headlines…but it’s not all good news…

The airline has recently been bombarded by British Trade Union, UNITE, over allegations of fatigued cabin crew being overworked and receiving a recovery time of only 25 hours after the insane 17 hour flight they manage. Reports are also circulating that Qantas cabin crew are being told to stay silent over their working hours. This has been brought up, mainly because of the risks to a flight, tired and unaware flight crew can cause.

“While the future of flying is likely to centre on ultra-long haul operations, Qantas has a responsibility to ensure that the safety and wellbeing of its passengers and cabin crew continues to be of paramount importance.” Lindsey Oliver, Unite Regional Officer.

Will Qantas’ cabin crew still be smiling 17 hours later…?

And here is Qantas’ response…

“Safety is always our main priority and we’re committed to working through any concerns constructively” Qantas Spokesperson.

I can imagine we will only see a growth in Ultra Long-Haul flights, considering airplanes are becoming extremely advanced. So it really does beg the question: How far can we push flight times before the wellbeing of cabin crew/pilots are compromised? Can you imagine working for more than 17hours?

Unite the Union.

Book your flight from London to Perth here.

Watch this video by DJ Aviation for more information.

Has Qantas taken it too far?

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

None of the views expressed on this post are my opinion, I am just commentating on allegations that may or may not be true.

The discussion starts here:


I saw this in a recent DJs aviation video and if it’s true I’m very disappointed with Qantas. With a good safety record like there’s this could damage the company’s PR. Rest for flight crew doesn’t just make them nicer, it makes the plane safer! A tired crew don’t react as well in an incident. Especially with a 17 hour flight, non-stop they really deserve all the rest they can get. However I don’t believe this has been confirmed yet so I think we should wait and see before we judge the airline.
That’s just my opinion though.


I agree with this completely, it is certainly to early to know the full story.

1 Like

17 hours followed by a day off would be pretty good. Plus the cabin crew bids on routes just like the pilots. No one is forcing them to do the flight.I mean this would be just a normal 9-5 day job back to back then a day off. ON top of that the flight may be 17 hours but the cabin crew is not working the whole 17 hours. There are crew rest times that are already mandatory on long haul flights like that so the cabin crew is actually working closer to 10-12 hours. Certainly not overworking.


No one should be sleeping for 25 hours. I don’t think that it’s a problem. The FA could take turns doing certain duties or something. I just don’t see a problem with the turn over time. I’m not sure but I don’t think they get back on The same flight to go back to Perth.

1 Like

I don’t completely understand how much turn over time 25 Hours is for a 17 hour flight, mostly because I am not in the industry, but it has been expressed by the Trade Union that 25 hours is way too short, and the airline denies having a turnover a time of 25 hours, so I suppose it must be an unsociable turn over time.

1 Like

This is what Qantis wanted to connect Australia to the world with no lay-overs and they are starting to achieve that

1 Like

Video by DJ’s aviation:

Or you can find the link in my post lmao!

1 Like

Imagine being a full time firefighter, while it can vary by department most people work for 24 hours at a time. If the calls are frequent enough they sometimes get no sleep at all and very little time to rest. With overtime some departments allow up to 72 hours of continuous work or three days and while it may not be call after call it can still be very stressful. In addition they aren’t walking around to serve food and entertain people, they do strenuous and stressful labor.

1 Like

Then again it is veery eaay to overlol hyperlinks

This is not my opinion, I am just asking questions to kick off a discussion :)

At some post you have to say enough is enough. I don’t think people will really enjoy 20+ hour nonstop flights. Better yet I don’t think crews will be willing to do those either.

1 Like

You may have a point there. I flew from KIAH-KDEN and back and just that 2hrs were hard for me 😂 Right now, it’s incredibly hard to sleep on a plane, the seating is usually uncomfortable, the leg room is cramped and the people you’re sitting next to may not respect personal space. 20hrs of that would be difficult. Now, if airlines were to give every passenger a better seating option (not just 1st class) then people may be willing to fly for 20hrs straight. But let’s not forget that the route won’t stay open if no one is flying on it. Eventually, there will have to be a limit to how far a route can go.

About the crew fatigue, as long as the crew can willingly and efficiently do their job even after 25hrs of rest, I don’t see a problem. But, if they’re so tired that it affects their duties, I think they should have more rest time. We wouldn’t want another Air China 006 incident.


This is so true. This is why I always book premium economy or business class on any flight longer then 6 hours. I just cant imagine flying for 17 hours in economy, It would definitely damage my back! If it the fare is ridiculously expensive then I just won’t travel.

1 Like

Air fare pricing is jacked up for maximum profit. Which sucks because many can’t afforde to travel the way they want to.


Yes!! Older UAL 777s are so comfortable and their 787s are so bad.

Anyways. Why don’t you base a crew in Perth and one in London, so when the Perth one lands you have the London crew take over the one to Perth? Or, you can have shifts, like 1 crew works for _ hours and then they go to the rest area where another crew is resting and they change places?

Just my ideas. If they’re stupid, blame my brain.

1 Like

I also question the profitability of the route they have like 70 less seats then a typical 787-9. I can’t expect there would be much cargo as well.

1 Like

Qantas isn’t a budget airline that needs to get hundreds of people in the smallest amount of space to make a profit. Qantas is making a large amount of money and have recovered after they lost a lot of money from the A380.

These allegations have been denied by Qantas so no use continuing a fight that was started by a Union from a foreign country.
The only problem I can see if fuel prices in Australia being expensive, as in 160cents/L expensive

1 Like

Of course they have… I’m sure nobody expected them to just come out and say “Hey, we’re pushing our staff to the limits”.
Whether the statement originated from a union from a foreign country have little to no relevance in the matter…

What the employees feel about it though, that’s what’s relevant. Everything else just… nope.