why a reputable company as Siemens would send its valued employees on such el cheapo flights.
For the simple reason that there are certain times that when you want to get from C to D without going via A and B, Ryanair are the fastest option - price doesn't always come into it.
Siemens supported the Hitler regime
A remarkably rapid descent of this thread into invoking Godwin's law, we're normally extremely good at avoiding this one here!
Seimens has an explicit term relating to risk management
Well you'd have thought they'd actually get a calculator out and do the maths. Ryanair have distinctly
not got OO status - billions of miles, no kills. One hulls loss, bird strike, beyond control of airline - in fact, with both engines disabled, was that not a great credit to pilots and their training to save all passengers and crew?
flying is STILL safer than the trip to the airport
Well if I take the local service to BHX, that will be using Siemens trains. I'm sure they'd jump up and down with anger if people suggested their trains (rather than the contracts to build them) were dodgy, especially if claims were based on other incidents on the UK rail industry that occur from time to time, but which don't involve their stock.
I can see why someone might want to take a cheap shot at the one aspect of Ryanair management that you can't really fault them on, but given that Siemens make all kinds of highly sophisticated equipment, I'm not sure I'd want to be spreading ill-advised safety claims against a company which is highly likely to retaliate.
In the late '60s and early '70s RR [jet engines] didn't allow two senior bods travel on the same flight
Is that not still policy in various companies, based on various incidents in which there have been no survivors? The 2010 Polish crash being a case in point?