Now that i have your attention what i meant to write was "why should Ryanair pay for pilots that it doesn't employ that go sick?"
If I employ the services of a builder or plumber and he doesn't turn up I would not be expected to pay him for not being able to do what i contracted him to do.
Of course he/she is not driving my vehicle or wearing my uniform or not allowed to undertake plumbing or building work for another party, so in a nut shell there you have it, these people are by any reasonable argument employee's of Ryanair, if it is a genuine at arm's length relationship then the agency should be paying the sick pay, setting the roster, agreeing leave periods deciding on where you will be based and so on.
I know other companies have followed Ryanair down this path, but why, well to me it seems that without doing so they make themselves uncompetitive in terms of their cost base?
The only other profession that i can think of that works on ethos of no work no pay is prostitution, for that is what being a pilot is fast becoming, you get screwed at every turn and your in so deep with debts your only salvation is to put up with, but at least a tart (sorry sex industry operative) gets to pick her/his? days off and which street to work.
So if these pilots don't work for Ryanair, why is their
PR department even attempting to defend their sick policy?
Southwest marks out of 10? well i have flown with them and the are first class
Ryanair have to date been saved by the EGWPS on more than one occasion and to be fair they have an excellent training and know only to well that their first crash if down to them, would probably be their last.
The Spanish, Italians, Germans and now the Dutch it seems are on their case.