Ryanair-10
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trav a la - What I tried to get through was that duty of care will be due whether cause is EC or not, so preparatory action will be paramount to reduce those costs. And instead of thinking hotel on the beach and overpriced airport food, the low fares basic service part of the industry needs to be thinking emergency hurricane shelter and soup kitchens. Which is what the state would provide in similar circumstances.
Trav a la - What I tried to get through was that duty of care will be due whether cause is EC or not, so preparatory action will be paramount to reduce those costs. And instead of thinking hotel on the beach and overpriced airport food, the low fares basic service part of the industry needs to be thinking emergency hurricane shelter and soup kitchens. Which is what the state would provide in similar circumstances.
Duty of care will also sit with the French ATC who called the strike.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mostly Harmless
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recruitment Email
Anyone else out there get an unsolicited recruitment email from Ryanair saying how great it would be to work for them? I've never applied. Bit creepy.
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boarding Passes
Ryanair have started to make changes to their boarding passes to make the implementing of 1 bag policy easier from 1st Nov.
Mobile boarding passes with priority will be in a different colour and state 2 bags permitted. Non-priority will clearly display only 1 small bag is permitted whilst their main cabin bag will be tagged for free of charge at the gate.
Similar features will be in place on paper passes and airport boarding passes.
It will also mention refusal to follow policy will result in travel denied and no refund given.
Mobile boarding passes with priority will be in a different colour and state 2 bags permitted. Non-priority will clearly display only 1 small bag is permitted whilst their main cabin bag will be tagged for free of charge at the gate.
Similar features will be in place on paper passes and airport boarding passes.
It will also mention refusal to follow policy will result in travel denied and no refund given.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully agree and I wish everybody the best of luck with getting their outlays back from French ATC, or even the unions. But I think we all know that when it comes to ATC, money is a one way street as long as an airline wishes to continue flying to and through their airspace. Best one can hope for is that they will sort out the current problems and reduce the amount of future closures/reductions. But there will always be new/different ones which require steps taken now.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to be pedantic again but there seems to be some misunderstanding about what a 'duty of care' is and who is liable to pay it. It's not the French ATC for a start.
In all instances of EC the airline owes the passenger a duty of care, this includes drinks, meals, limited phone calls, hotel accommodation plus transport to and from hotel. It is also onerous upon the airline to make the appropriate arrangements, however, they often don't, and thats where many problems and confusion arise. In some cases, such as BA computer failure, it would be impossible, due to the sheer scale of the problem.
This also stands for long delays and cancellations etc. with some qualifications.
Sorry for the thread drift but feel accuracy is important.
In all instances of EC the airline owes the passenger a duty of care, this includes drinks, meals, limited phone calls, hotel accommodation plus transport to and from hotel. It is also onerous upon the airline to make the appropriate arrangements, however, they often don't, and thats where many problems and confusion arise. In some cases, such as BA computer failure, it would be impossible, due to the sheer scale of the problem.
This also stands for long delays and cancellations etc. with some qualifications.
Sorry for the thread drift but feel accuracy is important.
Example would be a Union decides not to allow an Airline to be refuelled at an airport where they have total control of everything, Airline being refused ability to move planes because Union efefctively blockades them and Govt claims airline must continue to pay compensation would be the extreme end of it.
Racedo,
You obviously work for Ryanair in some sort of financial/management position judging by your posts.
Perhaps you could give us your view on your companies treatment of its staff, on which you appear to be silent.
You obviously work for Ryanair in some sort of financial/management position judging by your posts.
Perhaps you could give us your view on your companies treatment of its staff, on which you appear to be silent.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like with everything that hasn't been tested fully in a court ................. one day it will and Govts will not want to give Unions carte blanche a right to be able to strike with zero consequences.
Example would be a Union decides not to allow an Airline to be refuelled at an airport where they have total control of everything, Airline being refused ability to move planes because Union efefctively blockades them and Govt claims airline must continue to pay compensation would be the extreme end of it.
Example would be a Union decides not to allow an Airline to be refuelled at an airport where they have total control of everything, Airline being refused ability to move planes because Union efefctively blockades them and Govt claims airline must continue to pay compensation would be the extreme end of it.
EC261 will get tested when case is right, Govt cannot claim to hit airlines with EC261 while allowing their business to be damaged and Govts doing nothing.
If a Govt allows a strike and then claims Airlines must pay the cost while refusing to deal with strikers then Airlines will ultimately sue Govt.
If a Govt allows a strike and then claims Airlines must pay the cost while refusing to deal with strikers then Airlines will ultimately sue Govt.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Article 13 do open for the carrier to seek redress from a third party for any outlay it has had to compensation or care.
If we are into pedanticism; EC261 also says "right to care" for the passengers, not "duty of care" for the airline.
And although it first says accommodation is to be a hotel , in the next line it defines accommodation as "hotel or other". And no definition of a "hotel" is included. The only judgement I can see on the definition of accommodation is that it must be more organized than a bench in a public area of an airport, or an extra compensation of a 100 quid could be due.
Which brings me back to that even BA could have housed all its disrupted passengers needing overnighting, on sample; fold-out beds in a sportshall, if they had contingency plans for that sort of major event laid down beforehand.
If we are into pedanticism; EC261 also says "right to care" for the passengers, not "duty of care" for the airline.
And although it first says accommodation is to be a hotel , in the next line it defines accommodation as "hotel or other". And no definition of a "hotel" is included. The only judgement I can see on the definition of accommodation is that it must be more organized than a bench in a public area of an airport, or an extra compensation of a 100 quid could be due.
Which brings me back to that even BA could have housed all its disrupted passengers needing overnighting, on sample; fold-out beds in a sportshall, if they had contingency plans for that sort of major event laid down beforehand.
Last edited by vikingivesterled; 14th Oct 2017 at 19:19.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EC261 will get tested when case is right, Govt cannot claim to hit airlines with EC261 while allowing their business to be damaged and Govts doing nothing.
If a Govt allows a strike and then claims Airlines must pay the cost while refusing to deal with strikers then Airlines will ultimately sue Govt.
If a Govt allows a strike and then claims Airlines must pay the cost while refusing to deal with strikers then Airlines will ultimately sue Govt.
It is not against the law to strike.
Sue the government, yeh good luck with that.
Welcome to the real world!
I won't bother discussing your confused, unrealistic scenarios any further, life is too short!
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Article 13 do open for the carrier to seek redress from a third party for any outlay it has had to compensation or care.
If we are into pedanticism; EC261 also says "right to care" for the passengers, not "duty of care" for the airline.
And although it first says accommodation is to be a hotel , in the next line it defines accommodation as "hotel or other". And no definition of a "hotel" is included. The only judgement I can see on the definition of accommodation is that it must be more organized than a bench in a public area of an airport, or an extra compensation of a 100 quid could be due.
Which brings me back to that even BA could have housed all its disrupted passengers needing overnighting, on sample; fold-out beds in a sportshall, if they had contingency plans for that sort of major event laid down beforehand.
If we are into pedanticism; EC261 also says "right to care" for the passengers, not "duty of care" for the airline.
And although it first says accommodation is to be a hotel , in the next line it defines accommodation as "hotel or other". And no definition of a "hotel" is included. The only judgement I can see on the definition of accommodation is that it must be more organized than a bench in a public area of an airport, or an extra compensation of a 100 quid could be due.
Which brings me back to that even BA could have housed all its disrupted passengers needing overnighting, on sample; fold-out beds in a sportshall, if they had contingency plans for that sort of major event laid down beforehand.
Your ideas are right out of the RA good ideas book. Like paying for the loo, standing passengers etc etc.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lithuania
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still I think airport accommodation could be improved. Last time airline gave me a nice 4* star hotel I thought I would have been better off if I didn't bother and slept on a couch in departures. Getting directions, leaving terminal, passport control, finding hotel shuttle, waiting for it, going to hotel, waiting to checkin, going back, going through security etc - out of 8 hours or so I had only 4 hours for sleep left. Any airside shelter with quick access to bed, food and shower would have been many times better.
EC261 is a piece of European legislation, it is UK law. Passengers, Jo public and businesses all live with the law.
It is not against the law to strike.
Sue the government, yeh good luck with that.
Welcome to the real world!
I won't bother discussing your confused, unrealistic scenarios any further, life is too short!
It is not against the law to strike.
Sue the government, yeh good luck with that.
Welcome to the real world!
I won't bother discussing your confused, unrealistic scenarios any further, life is too short!
Who is being unrealistic now ?
EC261 is European law hence ECJ will be final arbitrator on it, course when Brexit happens then UK can just get rid of all those EU laws that it hates being imposed on it.
Strange those publications who push Brexit it love an EU law so much.
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OMG are people STILL moaning and whinning about this blip. Honestly people, it's a first world problem, people need to get a serious sense of life perspective in a world gone mad.
Jesus wept.
As regards comments about allegedly how an employer threats employees. Are employees that bloody weak they are either incapable or unwilling to take responsibility for their career choice decisions. You enter an employers operations eyes wide open and you take responsibility and accept the T&C of contracts. If you're unhappy with the T&C either put up or shut up or find employment at a shop where you're happier. Take control of your personal circumstances and take responsibility for your personal life choices but honestly, quit the weak moaning and whinning its not an employers problem
. I'm sick of hearing the moaning, if you ain't happy, move employer it's really that
logical. Are people that dumb they can't take basic life decision's on career choice and employers of personal choice. If you can't find what you want well then maybe it's time to rethink your choice of profession and reskill into another profession. Honestly, I don't know how some people survive from the moment they step outside their home into the wider world.
Jesus wept.
As regards comments about allegedly how an employer threats employees. Are employees that bloody weak they are either incapable or unwilling to take responsibility for their career choice decisions. You enter an employers operations eyes wide open and you take responsibility and accept the T&C of contracts. If you're unhappy with the T&C either put up or shut up or find employment at a shop where you're happier. Take control of your personal circumstances and take responsibility for your personal life choices but honestly, quit the weak moaning and whinning its not an employers problem
. I'm sick of hearing the moaning, if you ain't happy, move employer it's really that
logical. Are people that dumb they can't take basic life decision's on career choice and employers of personal choice. If you can't find what you want well then maybe it's time to rethink your choice of profession and reskill into another profession. Honestly, I don't know how some people survive from the moment they step outside their home into the wider world.
Last edited by mik3bravo; 15th Oct 2017 at 10:08.