Recently there have been queries regarding the access by OW Sapphire and Emerald members to OW lounges operated by third parties.

Recently there have been queries regarding the access by OW Sapphire and Emerald members to OW lounges operated by third parties. It would appear that OW has clarified this matter further. An extract of their website reads as follows:

"If your oneworld® frequent flyer tier status is Emerald or Sapphire, or you are traveling in a First or Business Class cabin on any oneworld member airline, you can access some 550 airport lounges throughout the world.

This means you can relax or catch up with work in comfort and style before departure, regardless of which oneworld member airline you choose to fly with.

To be eligible, you must be departing on a flight that is both marketed and operated by a oneworld member airline.

Some lounges may get busy at peak times, and access to them may be restricted as a result.

A non-affiliated third party may operate some lounges on behalf of the individual airline. Access to some lounges operated by third-parties on behalf of oneworld member airlines may be restricted at some times.

Arrivals lounges are excluded.

Spa and Pre-Flight Dining facilities are excluded.

British Airways Concorde lounges are excluded."

While this clarification is very much welcomed. I am somewhat concerned about the exclusions for Spa and Pre-Flight Dining facilities.

My understanding is that Spa restrictions are in place for BA lounges, being limited only to BA's own Gold Executive Club members and First & Club pax. I am unaware of any other OW carrier placing restriction on their Spa and Pre-Flight Dining facilities.

Can anyone shed some light on this please?

I can't shed much light on other carriers given most of my travel is done on BA (shudder...) and CX internationally. Notwithstanding this, I can confirm that spa restrictions are in place in all BA first class lounges; as for the likes of QF in Sydney etc I'm not too sure (a visit is still on the bucket list... sigh...!).

I believe, however, that there is some confusion over the term 'Pre-Flight Dining'. This, I would think, refers specifically to several BA-specific 'Pre-Flight Dining' facilities which aren't restaurants in F or J lounges per se but are rather dining rooms exclusively for Club and First pax who might want to dine before they board so that they can spend the entirety of a red-eye flight sleeping.

I got caught out on this last week at the BA F lounge in JFK when I was rather appalled by the fact that they were only serving finger sandwiches. They told me that there was 'Pre-Flight Dining' (the entrance to it was in the J lounge) but when I hopped on over they denied me access telling me it was only if I was flying in F or J - OW Emerald/Sapphire doesn't count and as I was only flying in Y, I wasn't eligible to access it.

Given most of the restrictions listed above seem to be BA-specific, I'd say that the restriction on 'Pre-Flight Dining' is only really relevant to BA lounges which have this specific facility. This is especially in light of the fact that they could hardly, say, restrict access to the a la carte restaurant in the LHR T5 galleries first lounge to an OW Emerald, let alone the issues in policing this.

Dear LHRBNE

Thank you for the detailed response. Very much appreciated.

I suppose it makes perfect sense to avail oneself of the Pre-Flight Dining. The only good thing about BA Club World are the seats/beds. It certainly is more pleasurable to sleep through a transatlantic flight than have to endure the mediocre service and surly faces of the BA cabin crew!

I had to endure it in Y last week... gentlemen holding sympathy cards go straight to the front of the line... (because apparently OW Emerald isn't enough these days!)

BA are hopeless with this.  I have a OW Emerald card (QF) and was flying Y on BA from Montreal - they wouldn't let me use the lounge at all.

The BA lounge at Montreal is a third party operated lounge. At least OW is clear now that lounge access at those locations is questionable.

I wonder though:

1) The circumstances to allow entry or is it a case of a blanket ban.

2) Does the 550 figure quoted on the website inclusive of third party operated lounges?

3) Are there any legal ramification with regards to misrepresentation on account of 1) & 2)?

My experience is not a oneworld restriction but maybe a QF First one? Last year while travelling through Sydney QF mucked up a connection with Jetstar and I was stuck out in the arrivals hall for 2 hours instead relaxing in the first lounge as planned and confirmed by QF before booking. The first check in staff in Sydney were faultless in their efforts to help but there really was nothing they could do. In the end they phoned through and booked my wife in for a spa treatment for when the jetstar counter eventually opened and we made it to the lounge, the relevant bit is that the first staffer at the time said to me that they don't normally allow or "find appointments" for people travelling on jetstar but because of the inconvenience they would this time. I was booked on QF267 but was given a JQ35 boarding pass. This suggests QF does restrict some of the lounge offerings? 

Love the QF first lounge experience. 

If I'm not mistaken that has more to do with the fact that you were flying JQ... JQ is neither an OW member nor affiliate of Qantas (only JetConnect and QantasLink are), hence you wouldn't ordinarily be entitled to access OW lounges (or in this case the QF F lounge) unless the onward connection was QF metal, that is if you're talking about OW status as per TheRealBabushka's question...

If you're on QF status then it's obviously a different matter - it's an entitlement and perhaps 'finding appointments' is somewhat wishy-washy language as I'm led to believe that it's rather difficult to get a substantial spa treatment in the F lounge because F passengers are usually called up in advance and pre-booked, so walk-up treatment availability is limited as is. Perhaps this is what they were referring to?

By all means correct me if I'm wrong...