Ryanair's view on fatigue (merged)

[RYANSCARED]

Well they have hit a new low.
A capt who has given the ryans many years of reliable service, was asked to do extra flights after completing his rostered duty day, at the end of a long weeks flying.
He considered himself fatigued and using his professional judgement considered it unsafe to continue, so declined to do the flights.......what did ryanair do.
DEMOTED for 6 months!!!!!!
end of story.
what an airline!!!
AND THIS IS EUROPES NEW FAVORITE AIRLINE.

[ecj]

Do the Irish have a CHIRPS scheme ?

If not, why not !!??
:mad:

[One Step Beyond]

Do the Irish have a CHIRPS scheme ?

No, because, despite the persistent lobbying of IALPA, the IAA have decreed that the airlines internal reporting systems are sufficient. :yuk:
But silly me, I forgot, the evil incarnate IALPA would merely use a CHIRPS as a nefarious vehicle to cause unnecessary trouble...

[brownstar]

I find that a bit hard to beleive. There must have been more to it than that, otherwise I recon the IAA would be interested.
Have you got more info.

[One Step Beyond]

Have you got more info

Couldn't find the last IALPA Safety and Technical News letter that had the details, but the gist of it was, as I posted earlier, the IAA consider the airlines internal systems of reporting to be sufficient. The IAA themselves sent a letter in FI to that effect recently also.
You can't predict the actions of the IAA based on what you might know of the CAA. Think more the proverbial 3 monkeys.

[RYANSCARED]

Yes unfortunetly this is completely accurate information ,no ifs nor buts ,the captain in question completed his long rostered week and when asked if he would carry out two extra sectors taking him into his day off he declined on the grounds of fatigue.Very respected Captain with excellent record and nearly ten years of service!!!!!! A new low in aviation!

[captplaystation]

Brownstar,there is more to it than that, it is but the latest example of RYR's absolute compulsive obsession to prove that THEY are in charge, whether it is right or wrong,even if it costs millions in legal fees,they have to feel in control.Simple as that;we are in charge,forget it at your peril!The IAA are interested in what RYR tells them to be interested in, I thought everyone understood that.

[bentover]

The

[sky9]

I would suggest that the pilot concerned writes to the IAA and informs them of the facts (He might also like to send a copy to the UK CHIRP). IF the law in Ireland is similar to the UK a pilot will not fly when he considers that he might be fatigued and a company will not require him to fly. In my opinion a possible breach of the Law. Any Authority worth its salt would be considering a withdrawal of the AOC.

[Farmer 1]

Any Authority worth its salt would be considering a withdrawal of the AOC. Should we be holding our collective breath?

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Sounds pretty depressing.
Question Are you fatigued after a weeks long flying or plain old tired?.
Sky 9 its very very difficult for the individual to write to the Authority now, he was purely hoping that when he shouted "fatigue" his Company would act in a safety driven way rather than the disgusting way it did.
The Authority would sit on the fence.....
:\

[EI-CFC]

Yes unfortunetly this is completely accurate information...

I wish I could take this at face value, but something just niggles....

[chikenscanfly]

It Niggles because in Ryanair, the truth always seems stranger than fiction...

News on the street has it that the IAA is now investigating...

[captplaystation]

Not before bloody time!

[bacardi walla]

Are RYR a JAR OPS operator ????? Do they not have an approved ops manual covering such items as "the avoidance of fatigue in aircrew" ????

To the Captain in question. Get another job mate. At a company who WILL appreciate you and your reasons for refusing to fly extra sectors !

[Low-Pass]

If this is true.....

So why doesn't EVERY Captain refuse to fly on the grounds that they are fatigued? Show the rest of the aviation world that you have some 'nads and stand up for yourselves. You'll have our respect and maybe some from yourselves.

LP

[Wing Commander Fowler]

"Owners of Nads unite!":ok: ............. err can I come an stay with you when they repo my house? No, thought not. I'll leave me nads in the fridge for now then :{

[Irish Steve]

The majority of money that the IAA make comes from Ryanair.

Sorry, while I have no sympathy for FR in this case, in relation to this specific point ONLY, the above allegation is WRONG, very WRONG.

In passing, it's one of the reasons why IAA don't do anything like as much supervision of the airlines as would be useful and helpful, they don't have the manpower or the resources to do it.

The last time they published the figures, the 2004 annual report, 79% of the income of the IAA came from overflights, and the control of them.

The same report states that 6.5% of income came from oversight and safety regulation of airlines and operations.

In the scale of things, as far as ANY of the airlines in Ireland are concerned, it's VERY small fry indeed compared to the money they get from ATC operation.

There's the root of the problem, there are very few people, and very little real experience on the ground in dealing with regulatory issues, made worse by some of the IAA being ex Air corps, with little or no real commercial operating experience.

It's not likely to change in a hurry, given the complete mess that is JAA/EASA at the moment.

[A330driver]

Why the surprise?

The IAA is staffed by:

Career Cvil Servants ( a la Yes Minister),

Ex Aer Lingus Management Pilots

Ex Ryanair Management Pilots



So where is there the ability or desire within to be objective?


Just get used to it - they are the downtown office of their greatest financial supporters.

[sky9]

Could I offer a suggestion to people finding themselves in the same position.
Either fax or preferably email the person who asks you to do the flight saying that you are likely to be fatigued as defined in the Ops Manual quoting paragraph however will do it against you better judgement if ordered to by them.

I can guarantee that you won't do the flight (or be demoted).

[worldwidewolly]

The way to handle this is for the union to write to the IAA and get there view of it in writing. The IAA either respect the ops. manual and a crewmembers right to decide if they are fatigued or not.

Its a yes or no.
If they respect it then they should take appropriate action against Ryanair or if they don't then let them go public on it and let them take responsibility for an incident where fatigue is a factor.

It wouldn't happen with the CAA. Only in crooked little, back slapping, brown envelope Ireland.

I don't know the legal JAR ops situation but way back when all this talk of JAR ops was going on I understood that jar ops member states would cross check each other.
If other member states sit back and allow another progressive?? member state, sit on the fence then they are as compliant in bringing on an incident.

We have had to many close incidents that could be put down to fatigue/stress. What are we waiting for??

[brownstar]

Bacardi walla
getting another job is not the solution, fighting the case is the best way, and this sets a precident.
Ryanair have, if i have all the facts correct, said that if you decide not to fly because in your opinion that you are too tired, we can demote you. This means that we are now putting undue pressure on you which will compromise safety.
I would think that the pilot in question would have a very sound case to take to the courts.
I would also say that if the company had an effective union this would definately have led to a stoppage.
The management have got to start appreciating that the safety record of the company could be compromised by such intimidation.
If someone in management is reading this then take the time to listen to your pilots.

[CIPO]

Forget the IAA, they'll only agree with FR management.
I think the CAA should be involved, after all i'm sure the flight in question would have flown in their airspace.

Then perhaps, FR management would think twice about messing with peoples lives............

The mark has now been overstepped......................

[Faire d'income]

The way to handle this is for the union to write to the IAA and get there view of it in writing.

The issue of a union at Fr is a whole catalogue of court cases yet to be heard.

While one can understand the constant references to the IAA here you have to remember in Ireland the IAA are just the doormen. They collect your money on your way in but what goes on inside is some one else's problem.

[RAT 5]

Question. Which is the most common a/c registration seen on foreign based a/c? Why, EI of course. But what is odd, is that the Italian ones operate to Italian FCL's under the IT CAA; OK it is a pasta airline, but the UK based ones operate to Irish FTL's under the IAA. How come they can have it both ways? But there must surely be something going on if everyone who wants an easy reg' can get an Irish one.

About this case; 2 points.

Surely there is a case for the labour courts. An unfair short-term demotion is similar to a temporary 'unfair dismissal' from rank. Where is the guarantee that he will be reinstated? No doubt 6 months of company minded behaviour will be assessed. Then there is the command check to pass. Ah! There-in lies the RYR bullet. Fail that and you can be dismissed completely. What would have happened if the F/O had refused; demoted to purser?

However; about the call for a letter to the IAA. Does Eire have an ANO? If so the FTL's are incorportaed in that. The ANO is parlimentary law. Thus a letter to the PM, copied to IAA, stating that RYR have violated the OPs manual under a section covered by the ANO, and thus national law, etc. etc........ Sure to hit the newspapers at least. But then what's new.

[Low-Pass]

Wing Commander Fowler, I thought had more "pluck" than that. But I am being too harsh. I understand the fear that you must have for both yourself and your family.

The question is, which way do you and your fellow employees want your relationship with FR to go? Do you want to be respected more or less by the company? Do you want to feel the pressure to operate in questionable circumstances or do you want the company to respect your judgement? What sort of company do you want to be working for in 5 years time (assuming you don't bail out)?

It seems to me that it is the employees' fear that the FR management revels in. Like any bully, they won't stop until they are given a bloody nose. Once that's done, a bully generally tries to become your best friend.

You folks can't even maintain your present conditions (let alone improve them) as individuals. That can only be done together. It's your call.

Good luck,

LP

[captplaystation]

Wingco is a bit tired to answer now,he had a long day. . he he. . We are trying believe me,but I challenge you to find a more disparate, culturally diversified bunch than RYR.That,among many factors, is one of the things inhibiting us sorting this whole mess out;however, current events in Dublin would suggest we might be finally making a bit of progress;don't think this demotion hasn't galvanised opinion at least a little.

[worldwidewolly]

Getting back to my earlier point.

My personel view would be that IALPA could do worse than take a leaf out of the RYR book and drag the IAA through the courts on a charge of not having safety as a matter of importance.
For failure to implement due dilligence in seeing the ops. manual was adhered to.

If nothing else you would generate such adverse publicity for the IAA that it would become political.

Ryanair operate crewvans in Dublin airport that would have you arrested if you took them onto the open road in any civilised state. Un roadworthy and unsafe.

Where am I going with this??
Only in this banana republic (Geldof was right) would this be allowed to happen.

Occosionally, the IAA want to be seen to do something to RYR and will tell them that flight plan envelopes must be a certain size or something stupid.

Lets remind ourselves of what happened here.

A capt. is feeling fatigued and is not prepared to do extra sectors on a point of safety. Exactly as the Ryanair produced, IAA approved Ops. manual states he has a duty to do.
He gets demoted by RYR and the IAA scratch their arses.

My contempt is for the IAA. Not so much Ryanair, I expect nothing else from them.
The IAA are the guilty ones here.

Shame on them.

[PhoenixRising]

I really never thought I would see Ryanair sink this low. My contempt of this company can not be expressed adequately by words. They are truly despicable.

As for the IAA, if they take no action on this case, they need to be publicly shamed in the media. I take it that this has been formally reported to the IAA by somebody, or is IALPA expected to take the lead?

[PAXboy]

Low-Pass The question is, which way do you and your fellow employees want your relationship with FR to go? Do you want to be respected more or less by the company? Do you want to feel the pressure to operate in questionable circumstances or do you want the company to respect your judgement? I am an outsider, just a traveller and observer but I think I can tell you that there is NO POSSIBLE WAY that they can get the company to respect them. There is NO ACTION that they can take. The company will NEVER respect them. It is a one-way street. I say this because of what I have read over the years but it is illustrated very neatly in MoLs own words.

From The Independent Traveller supplement [UK newspaper] 5th November 2005. The article explains why Ryan Air will remain a domestic European carrier. MoL says: "All cabin crew and pilots want to fly transatlantic routes so they can ar$e around in New York all weekend instead of spending 25 minutes in Luton."

So, rather than the crew managing to get the legal minimum of rest, MoL thinks they are going to be making money and only HE should be making money. "It's much more efficient to be a bus service around Europe than a kind of charter holiday operation for flight crew so they can be on the doss in the Caribbean or New York."

Does that say it clearly enough?

[RVR800]

MoL will go the same way as Gerald Ratner if he doesnt watch his step. Brain mouth put his needs before motion - rearrange

[hapzim]

Yep great to visit all these overseas destinations, but it does wear thin on your umptienth visit living out of a suitcase spending most of your time down route and days off at home trying to restore the fatigue levels to a norm.

Wish it was like going on holiday every time. Not like MoL jetting off for a bit of R & R in some 5 star hotel travelling 1st class with ones chosen friends.

Still prefer the lifestyle to short haul multi sector days though, as tend to get more days off at home with less roster changes and daily disruption.
:ok:

[EI-CFC]

MoL will go the same way as Gerald Ratner if he doesnt watch his step

I think there is a big difference between the two. MOL knows *exactly* what he's saying, and why he's saying it.

[PAXboy]

Indeed. MoL criticises his staff. not the product. Some would say the two are aligned but thepublic might not.

[RAT 5]

Where is the response from the shaggy 4 legged beast of burden? He's been quiet of late, but them perhaps over occupied tipping forelock to too many judges.

The question has not been asked as to why Leo chose a pseudonym which is an anagram of M. O'L's full name. Curious. Split persoanality or devotion beyond the call......

[worldwidewolly]

And whats wrong with arseing around N.Y. all weekend. Would he like the crews to take envelopes with them to lick and do some work.

Whats his point?

[EI-CFC]

And whats wrong with arseing around N.Y. all weekend

I'm guessing he is banging on about getting value for money. Paying for a crew doing a stop (hotels, allowances) etc all gets factored into the cost of operating the flights - now, as we know, FR (and MOL) like to keep operating costs to the minimum - hence, tight turnarounds and getting crews back to base if at all possible. You can't really do that on long-haul.

[blue top]

Capt was reported by ops due to the fact that he would not contact operations in Dub. He sent message back to Dub via Lgw ops that he would not do another two sectors. When he landed in Dub he was met by an ops guy and he told him that the other flight that had just landed was doing the flights. When the ops guy got over to the other aircraft he asked the crew if they knew about the flights which they did not but said they would go out and do them.
The main problem was the way the Capt carried on. He showed no respect for operations or anybody else. The sectors were being taken off another crew due to the fact they were running late so of course ops were going to ask the first lander to do the extra sectors instead of keeping another crew out there running so late. Im sure if it had been him running so late he would have expected ops to do the same and another crew go out and do his sectors.

[Seabiscuit]

Bluetop....big difference between would not and COULD not. In ryanair once you leave the dublin area their is no way to contact them, no hf on aircraft, no company mobile phone on the aircraft. They were told to contact dublin ops as the dispatcher gave them the load sheet and were about to close. At some point between push back and airborne the sent a message via serviceair at gatwick to say the COULD not do extra sectors, because in his professional opinion he was fatigued and it could compromise air safety.

[blue top]

He could have rang from his own mobile or went into the office to call. Operations could have had any kind of message for him but he knew what they wanted him for. The crew could have called into operations before they landed but they didnt.
Im not saying what happened to him was right but he should have called in

[atse]

Blue top - your facts are WRONG. As in definitely wrong. Unless you can state that you have spoken directly to one of the people DIRECTLY involved you should stop this nonsense, especially speculation about telephone calls.

If you have spoken to one of those directly involved, please indicate if it was a flight crew member or groundstaff since that would raise other issues.

Before you pontificate about Captains giving respect to Operations, you would do well to reflect upon (a) the legal responsibilities of all flight crew and (b) the possibility that you have been sucked into in a campaign of misinformation.

[Say again s l o w l y]

What utter cr*p Blue top.

Why should a crew member use their own personal mobile for company business whilst abroad. If Mobiles were provided, then fine they should ring in, but don't bleat about us not ringing Ops if we aren't given the means to do so. Would you reimburse them for the call? Don't think so. Who says they had mobiles anyway? Some people don't like them for this exact reason.

The Ops dept. should have tried to contact the crew earlier, not just before they closed the doors. Not a good thing to put on a flight log- reason for delay: crew had to ring Operations.
Do me a favour!

The Capt. in this case did nothing wrong, he tried to contact the company through the handling agents en-route. A good idea, the only problem from your point of view is that he wouldn't comply with the request. As he was entitled to do.

[blue top]

I am not wrong and yes i did talk to the crew and also the girl who was on in ops that night. if you would like to PM me please do but i am 100% correct in what i have said.

[the grim repa]

should respect op's.
should call on his own mobile.
should have flown the additional sectors.
was demoted.

why?

this is not about could,woulda,shoulda.
it is plainly and simply about the subjugation of the pilot body by a tyrannical operation.

[atse]

blue top you are wrong. If you spoke to the crew and got that information from them, then I'm a little green woman.

You have got a particular version - which relies on incorrect deductions and suppositions made on the day, but not the actual facts. The information you provide identifies your source and I suggest that, for that reason alone, this exchange should now stop.

[worldwidewolly]

Blue top

You are wrong.
Give me 1 good reason why any crew member should call ops abroad on a mobile at their own expence.

In a reasonable world none of us would mind doing such a thing, but not with a company that hates its staff.

Give me 1 reason why MOL has earned that respect from staff.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

The day Ryanair have respect for the human beings that work for them then something might come back in return.

Give me 1 reason why any pilot, especially a Dublin pilot should do anything, anything, to help out this lot??

Explain yourself??

[blue top]

Im sorry but i am right, i was there that night and i know what went on. Im not saying what happened was right but im just telling the facts. Dublin guys are very well looked after by most people in crewing and by most in ops when they are looking for days off, swops or anything else they need. Not that it comes from the company but the people who work there have a very good relationship with the crews and so they look after there friends. If you were working in Dub you would know that.
I am NOT taking the company line just telling it the way it happened. Y ou can keep jumping on me for what im saying but it is the truth

[Seabiscuit]

No need to apologise blue top, but nthe fact remains that you are wrong!, what did you want the skipper to do, put a dreaded delay on the flight and get into trouble for that, then say he could'nt do the flight, not would not. You can claim all you want, hell even claim your the almighty messiah, the fact remains, capt to fatigued to fly, got demoted. end of story. FACT

[atse]

Capt was reported by ops due to the fact that he would not contact operations in Dub You are making a serious accusation - can you prove it? Did the captain refuse to contact operations in Dublin? How sure are you about any reply you can give to that question?

You have claimed you spoke to the crew, but clearly you did not get the information from them. What is clear is who gave you the information. Ponder on that.

By the way, what is the role of ops in "reporting" captains on such matters? Perhaps you could clarify that for us.

[GGV]

The main problem was the way the Capt carried on. He showed no respect for operations or anybody else. I think we may have a clue as to what might have gone wrong from this sentence from blue top's post. Maybe the management types got fed some funny information about what happened and did their "Ryanair thing" without checking out the facts. By all accounts the Captain concerned is a most unlikely candidate for such an accusation. It looks like we have a case of an error of understanding by someone in ops. that got out of control. Hence the need for asserting a version of events that blackens the captain. Perhaps blue top should stop and think.

[Algy]

No idea what happened, and no strong feelings either.

But, low-cost, 737/A320 airlines with ACARS or VDL or even satcom include: Southwest, Easyjet, Niki, Westjet at least.

[maxalt]

All American companies mate - this is Ireland, the arse end of it too.

[Wing Commander Fowler]

Easyjet........ American........ hmmmm.......

[Say again s l o w l y]

blue top,
I can't see how you are "right", about what? Was the Capt. entitled to refuse the duty? If so, then ops have no right to try and force the matter. Who are you to say he wasn't fatigued?
If he'd flown those extra sectors after being 'co-erced' into it and something had happened, what do you think the accident report would have stated? Pilot Error. If you are fatigued, you shouldn't fly. Simple, that's it, go home try and get some sleep and come back another day.

'Attitude' doesn't come into it. At the end of a long day we are all tired and if you are then expected to do something without first being consulted, then I'm not surprised if there was a bit of annoyance.
Remember, whilst we all have the same goals as part of the same team, crews are human and can't be expected to drag the company out of the sh*te every time, the same with Ops and Crewing, there are limits on what we all can do. If there isn't anyone on standby to cover because of a sortage of crew. It's Ops, crewing and flight deck who suffer because of this, so we need to work together to try and resolve long term issue like this, rather than 'reporting' someone because they felt fatigued.

You talk about crewing and Ops having a good rapport with crews, well after issues like this, you can kiss that goodbye in a heart beat.

[PAXboy]

The main problem was the way the Capt carried on. He showed no respect for operations or anybody else. Uumm, interestingly blinkered assertion. Actually, he showed respect for himself, his family, all of his fellow crew members and ... Oh Yes, almost forget, those strange things down the back end. What are we called again? You know, the ones who buy their ticket in the presumption that the airline and it's staff is going to do all in it's power to complete their side of the contract in a manner that will result in them arriving safely at their destination.

Since he refused to operate whilst fatigured it also means that he showed respect for his company and employer, by saving them the risk of something going horribly wrong. This man showed respect all around and I can only hope that when I have to take an FR flight in January (much against my wishes) that this man (or his best friend) will be on the flight deck.

[Low-Pass]

PAXboy,

I understand where you're coming from but if you aren't prepared to stand up for yourself, stop whinging!

blue top (or anyone else),

Please explain again to me how the REQUEST to do further sectors was passed to the captain. How could the same method not be an acceptable method to reply?

If the information above is correct, the captain has made an effort to reply to Ops but it has been ASSUMED that he would take the extra flights. That is pressure from the company on a crew to operate in a potential dangerous condition.

But all this is largely irrelevant. The important question is, What are the other captains going to do?

LP

[blue top]

I was by no mean having a go at the capt or sticking up for the company. I do agree with his right not to fly anymore sectors for what ever reason he or the crew had.

I was however just trying to put the facts across as i saw them and for what i had seen and heard on the night in question.
I do have more to say but i will keep it to myself. I have been posting via PMs with ATSE and it is better for everybody to let this lie.

enjoy

[Wing Commander Fowler]

Talking to yourself..... hmmm, can't knock it. Best way to hang on to friends in my experience hehe! :ok:

[atse]

I have had a very courteous exchange with blue top via PMs. He is well informed, as am I. I fully accept his statement about his intentions in his comment: I was by no mean having a go at the capt or sticking up for the company. I admit to originally believing that he might have been trying to undermine the captain's position. I agree with him that an argument here in public over the nuances of our differences is not the best way to go forward. I, like blue top, will now bow out of this debate.

However, I will conclude by observing that I believe that Ryanair has managed to score another "own goal" and that we probably have not heard the end of this.

[PAXboy]

Low-PassI understand where you're coming from but if you aren't prepared to stand up for yourself, stop whinging! Could you let me know what you are referring to? If you mean about my travelling FR against my wishes, then that is because someone else is paying for the ticket and I am their guest. This will be only the third sector that I have travelled with FR and do not expect to do so again. If I have missed your point, do say what it is.

[captplaystation]

What we have to realise here ladies and gentlemen,is that in the SOP's of RYR management it is very clear that anyone(and I mean anyone!)with a comment or complaint against a pilot will be assumed to be right,even if the pilot can prove otherwise. A nice simple rule for "nice?" simple people.And I jest not.

[Low-Pass]

Hi PAXboy,

I wasn't having a go at you, nor did I mean to infer that you were the one whinging so sorry if it caused offence. I should have written:

I understand where you're coming from but if one isn't prepared to stand up for oneself, stop whinging!

What I simply meant was that individuals either need to do something about their situation or bight their lip. Raising problems is great if it leads to action. Raising problems and doing nothing, perhaps hoping someone else will fix it, is worse than not raising the problem in the first place.

Cheers,

LP

[PAXboy]

Sure, no problem.

I have just read the new thread from Charlie Murdoch at Em****** and it is not a nice story. But giving up a job and moving the family is not to be taken lightly.

[charterguy]

The captain in question should address his concerns to the IAA. If they fail to deal with this in the appropriate manner, he should report this to the FAA, the UK CAA and other European aviation authorities.

If there is any evidence that FR (and/or other Irish carriers) are not receiving adequate regulatory oversight from the IAA, Ireland should be added to the list of countries whose aircraft are banned from entering EU and US airspace !! Ireland would then join the likes of Equatorial Guinea, the Gambia, Liberia, Sierra Leone and Cameroon.

FR has long outgrown Ireland (and it's tiny IAA). It is time that MOL registers FR in the UK, as STN is the airline's de facto base of operations.

I for one would love to see the UKCAA get their teeth in to MOL's @rse :-)

CG

[captplaystation]

Think Latvia might figure on his list of replacements in the unlikely event of the IAA growing teeth/balls, slightly ahead of good old Blighty.

[sky9]

blue top, a simple question: Why didn't Ops use the Standby Crew to operate these 2 sectors? ( I suspect that I know the answer but it still needs to be asked as it will identify the cause of the problem).

[delwy]

Let me guess sky9, would it be something like:

"As our pilots never get sick or fatigued and our flights never run late we don't need reserves - because in those exceptional circumstances such happy pilots have we that they will rush to volunteer for any extra flights that might be needed" ?

[sky9]

delwy,
So the cause of the problem goes straight back to management - or the lack of it. Are they running an airline or a circus? On the basis of your reply the later.

[ark]

'FR has long outgrown Ireland (and it's tiny IAA). It is time that MOL registers FR in the UK, as STN is the airline's de facto base of operations.

I for one would love to see the UKCAA get their teeth in to MOL's @rse :-)'

I luv these "we still have an empire" comment's and that the great U.K./c.a.a are just the greatest!!!!!

The fact is that a non U.K. company is making a fortune out of the U.K. and it really p****s you off .

I' ve worked in the U.K. for ten years now and what i've seen in the industry that home based airline's can get away with would frighten you,and it's no different anywhere else!!!!!!!

move on charterguy!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Shaka Zulu]

ark agree with you on that point. sometimes rather shocking indeed.

de facto though: remains fact in CAA JAR rules that you cant just start your 900hrs total clock to 0 again on the 1st of April.

Spoke to a guy the other day from RYR and he had done 990 hrs from November to November. This is something they couldnt get away with on UK registered aircraft!

[Leo Hairy-Camel]

Well said, Ark. So many quibbling ninnies still seeking to punch beyond their weight class. Sad, were it not so pathetic. Any JAR-OPS 1 AOC holder can set themselves up any EU member state. Peculiar, don't you think, that the chattering dopes never seem inclined to turn their gaze toward the unsafe failing airlines? Only the safe successful, and dare I say it, Irish registered ones.

As for the case at hand, you'd all do well to acquaint yourselves with the facts before queuing up to hurl guano in the direction of Dublin. Could it be that this particular captain was a belligerent individual who has, for quite some time, held the view that he'd work only when it suited him? Any clue how many "duvet days" he's had when it was all a bit much to climb out of bed on a beastly cold morning? Refusing to have a mobile switched on, rendering him effectively uncontactable when on duty? De-facto work to rule campaigns aren't on, are they. Well, not for those of us compelled to work for a living, anyway.

If he has a problem with his demotion, though, there's always that 16.2% Icelandic owned company, Easyjet. They're looking for some people now that BALPA has completely and utterly destroyed their once workable roster system and they’re haemorrhaging pilots quicker than Delta dumps its pension obligations. 5 on, 3 off at Ryanair doesn't look too bad from a distance, does it, and with 5/4, maybe even 5/5 and part time work just around the corner too, and its hard to imagine there will be 737 pilots working for anyone else, soon. Except perhaps for our first officer who has odd ideas about his command 'availability'. Strange attitude, but I've always thought £8000 per month is enough to keep my phone switched on during turn arounds.

[EI-CFC]

Never let truth get in the way of a good story

Could be a motto round these parts.. ;)

[cornerstone]

correct me if i'm wrong leo, but i thought guys from dublin were heading north. and south and east for that matter. no?
and do fill us in on who gets £8000, not me.

[PAXboy]

Leo Hairy-CamelPeculiar, don't you think, that the chattering dopes never seem inclined to turn their gaze toward the unsafe failing airlines? Only the safe successful... Perhaps the reason that they are so 'successful' is that they they are stretching the rules to, or beyond, breaking point? Perhaps the ones that are 'failing' are following the rules? May I suggest that you separate the the categories, thus:

"unsafe failing airlines" becomes either an unsafe airline or one that is failing.
"the safe successful" becomes either a safe airline or a successful one. Of course, the two MAY align in the way that you have suggested but they might align as:
"Safe failing" and "unsafe successful"? Just a thought.

... and dare I say it, Irish registered ones. I cannot say if Irish ones get specific attention, I reckon that BA, VS and BD are trashed in here every day.

[unwiseowl]

Phone on, do 25min turn-around, phone off, fly, phone on,etc. etc is that normal Ryanair practice? Sounds like a normal airline NOT!

[atse]

Could it be that this particular captain was a belligerent individual... Errrr.... no Leo, not so. Do the facts really support such a claim?De-facto work to rule campaigns aren't on, are they. Well, what a serious accusation. Certainly it seems to have been the deduction on which the hapless "management" team were sent forth to conduct their "investigation".

So Leo tell us, is yours the real "Ryanair view of fatigue" - namely that it is a mark of wimps and lazy nere-do-wells?

[RAT 5]

Leo,

Has RYR finally entered the 21st century and issued their captains with mobile phones? (It is not SOP that pilots have to have a personal mobile and be contactable while at work; at least not in any airline I have worked for.)

[Flyingsand]

Nor do I believe that they issue individuals with PC's or pay for net access, but all their documents are only available on CD and online. :rolleyes:

[RogerIrrelevant69]

Based on LHC's usual grip on reality, this recent diatribe from the man may lead one to assume that the former captain in question is in fact a most cooperative, flexible, company focussed individual who would most likely bend over backwards to assist the company in all of it's ventures.

One might assume otherwise, but LHC's credibility on this forum has, shall we say, been challenged occassionally.

[ShortfinalFred]

Leo! Others have pointed out the scary anagram of Michael O' Leary that your name represents, and by goodness you follow his take on life slavishly.

In your world anyone who is not totally compliant to every request gets his character traduced and motives impugned. It could'nt be, could it, that the guy actually was fatigued?

Hell no, he was a "born troublemaker" by all accounts, and one of the many workshy pilots out there who, as Michael charmingly points out from his estate in Dublin, just want to lie around a pool all day, given half a chance.

You imply that you hold a management position in Ryanair's flight ops department. Dont you think that the time has come to take your job a bit more seriously?

You have an aircraft that nearly goes off the end of the runway having landed in the wrong configuration and at very high speed with a pilot who had an otherwise clear record saying he was totally stressed-out by work arrangments at Ryan. You have a catalogue of postings here about the way you treat your people. Do you see a trend? Are they all just workshy skivvers who wont get off their butt and hoe the roe for a days pay? I rather doubt it.

Spare us the "smoke and mirrors" tactic of saying we're unable to cope with Rayn's success and any criticism is motivated by jealousy, because it aint. You guys do your thing and we'll do ours and thats that on that front.

I'd look to your onions a bit more and do something about staff morale at your company before you wish you had done so long ago.

[Low-Pass]

So what are you boys and girls going to do?

1. Keep posting on PPRUNE how unfair it is.

2. Complain to IAA/CAA.

3. Organise yourselves and take action in support of your college who's position you may be one day.

Given the above choices, note which half of the paragraph below the choice fits into.

... Raising problems is great if it leads to action. Raising problems and doing nothing, perhaps hoping someone else will fix it, is worse than not raising the problem in the first place.

Please feel free to add other choices but remember to note which half of the above paragraph it falls into. I look forward to seeing the results.

Cheers,

LP

[Aloue]

Just for the record, there is a blatant accusation contained in Leo Hairy Camel's post about a particular captain. I just want to add my bit, which is that I don't know this person at all well but my inquiries tell me that certain figures in Ryanair management want to portray him in a particular light. Funnily enough that light is generally as outlined by our friend "Line pilot Leo". The captain certainly does not have the same profile with his colleagues as described by Leo, whose “line pilot” antennae seem to have let him down.

Leo, while some people seem to have elevated their notions to the point that they are fact (such as you have done), it would appear that once again this is more about "Ryanair facts" than real facts. It is not a matter of the Ryanair management team being persuaded that something is a fact that is important - it is whether or not it is true.

Yours is the one true voice of management here and may I remind you that earlier this year you and the rest of us observed the inability of Ryanair management to sustain the serious but bogus and contrived accusations against Captain Goss. The accusations made against him were so alien to the man we all know that their dishonesty was obvious to all. Ryanair, may I remind you, paid all the costs of that case (notwithstanding many attempts to portray the facts to be otherwise).

You clearly have sources for your accusations – but Leo, the real issue is: are they right? Or is this another case of “sacrificing one pilot to sort the others out is a good deal? All of this is typically rationalised by Ryanair along the lines of “nothing personal, just business”. Kinda like what you would say to somebody in The Godfather just prior to their execution?

[RogerIrrelevant69]

Aloue,

Why am I not in the least surprised there appears to be another version of events + character not aligned with those of LHC?

Once again LHC's credibility is open to question.

If LHC replies, no doubt he will rattle off the stunning victory won against Capt.Goss, IALPA and the devil himself. It was not a victory. For those unfamiliar with that saga, the key point about that case was Capt.Goss was accused by Ryanair of intimidation of other pilots which lead to his suspension. Not a shred of evidence of this intimidation was ever produced. Capt.Goss was subsequently re-instated. The case was not about paying for the 800 type rating or IALPA union recognition. No matter how often LHC repeats that claim, that was not what the case was about. Repetition does not make it true.

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

Leo Hairy-Camel wrote: Peculiar, don't you think, that the chattering dopes never seem inclined to turn their gaze toward the unsafe failing airlines? Only the safe successful, and dare I say it, Irish registered ones.
I agree with you. Ryanair is highly successful. Economically.
But the management show no sign of moral, nor ethics because it is all based on ultra capitalistic principles which seclude fair treatment of employees. As long as they see their employees as the enemy, and keep spreading paranoia around the bases, criticism will reach the public. We have only seen the tip of the iceberg so far. What surprises me alot is your username...all the letters in MOL's name, still you're not him. It seems quite unlikely that anyone actually regard Ryanair as perfect as you try to express, unless they have an economically charged motivation, that is.

[BBT]

Leo, not that it will make much difference to you, but for somebody who functions as a line pilot in Ryanair I have to say that you have a remarkably complacent view of safety. This is not a normal airline and not all of the normal protections are in place - maybe in your eyes and those of the IAA they are - but for those who see the reality on a daily basis it is very obvious that something about Ryanair is (undesireably) different. To my mind it takes either a superiour level of confidence, or blindness, not to see this.

[Wing Commander Fowler]

So you won't be going to work anytime soon BBT........ If it's not safe you surely won't be endangering yourself or any of your passengers will you??? :rolleyes:

[Flap 5]

This is truly a shocking incident. Maybe the answer is to go sick. After all if you are too fatigued to fly you are, in effect, sick. That is a logic that MOL himself would understand.

Unfortunately in this world today if you are honest and just say that you consider yourself to be too tired that is a subjective statement. You then leave yourself open to this kind of response from your employer.

In air law you are not allowed to fly an aircraft if you consider yourself to be too tired. But to Ryanair the law is just an inconvenience, unless they can use it to their advantage. :rolleyes:

[blue top]

Sky 9
stand-by finishes at 18.30z in most bases and Dublin is one of them. Early stand-by starts 04.00z to 13.00z and most late start 09.30z till 18.30z there abouts

[snaga]

I came across the following on the IALPA website (posted by the President of IALPA):It would be improper for me to comment on the status of any issues which affect one particular member of this association.

But let's be clear, IALPA stands ready to provide the necessary resources (legal and industrial) to support any individual licence holder who exercises the statutory obligations to stand down from their assigned duties for reasons of safety such as pilot fatigue. Somehow I don't think that this matter is over!

[bacardi walla]

It's high time someone wiped the smile off MOL's face. The Capt recently demoted should consider making contact with the IAA (if he hasn't already) and be ready to face MOL with the true facts behind the legislation.

[JamesT73J]

"De-facto work to rule campaigns aren't on, are they."

Entertaining reading, and possibly credible, up to this point. People are obligated to work as per their contract, and the law, end of story. If a company insists otherwise, it is breaking that contract. No ifs, buts, aspersions on character or any other rubbish - the issue is black and white.

[RYANSCARED]

Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.Another amazing statistic from Leo.£8000 a month.Id love to know any ordinary line captain in Dublin who takes home 8000 euro a month never mind 8000 sterling.More verbal scutter from Leo.
Well Ladies and Gentleman a few more FACTS for you!
Captain in question not only had his mobile phone on during the turnaround,he also made several attempts to contact operations.
Some employees in Ryanair may be accustomed to "duvets"days but its certainely not the pilots and this individual not only does the same amount of work as every other pilot,but has dug the company out of many a hole in the past.Once again the Ryanair facts vary greatly from the truth.

[CamelhAir]

Leo's comments are following the usual pattern. First, an FR incident is reported with what usually turns out to be the correct version of events. Leo then wades in with the management version, which is then subsequently ridiculed by the actual facts. He then makes no further comment on said thread, thus proving what we all knew anyway as to what really happened.
All laughable really. Leo, if you dropped the "ordinary line pilot" rubbish, you might gain a modicum of respect. Although probably not.

[Nick NOTOC]

Dear hairy and scary Camel:

Quote: I've always thought £8000 per month is enough to keep my phone switched on during turn arounds.


Again you have proven the point that you will use anything at your disposal to reach your goal.
Doesn't it come to mind that if you fail to have your pilots switching their phones on during turn-arounds, it might be that you have failed as a "manager" to get your message accros?

Now you take a safety issue, sqeeze the life out of it and you make a statement: SAFETY IS NO EXCUSE, IN RYANAIR.......

Good job Camel beast.
I honestly hope that your pilots have enough interlect not to go for this BS. It would be all too sad to see your style of management reach its destiny, which will be an accident.


To all pilots at Ryanair.
Don't give up, and don't let The Camel-guy push you over like has happened to your fellow pilots. Only a few more years to go and you will be reliefed from the beast!

[bjoe_1]

Guys,

I have been following this thread with interestbecause I think its not so different from what they are experiencing down in Mauritius. Same story, different faces! Someone, somehow, feels entitled to rewrite aviaition and at least you guys are doing something about it.

Please could you show some support and some of your so well thought out logic and strategy to the Mauritius colleagues who desperately need your help and experience right now. Log on to their thread (Airt Mauritius defies IFALPA), make your comments universal, together, north and south, you can, we can, be stronger, and stop this creeping rot changing our lives! Please remember, "Never was so much owed to so few by so many" ...

[EI-CFC]

Leo then wades in with the management version, which is then subsequently ridiculed by the actual facts

I hate to be a bubble burster, but how do you know either version is the "actual facts" - both are just text posted on a website. As bad as FR may or may not be, an poster named "RYANSCARED" probably isn't the source of impartial information we might be lead to believe, no more than someone posting from FR management might be.

I can't help but wonder if some people allow themselves to be a bit blinkered by an automatic aversion to FR.

[CamelhAir]

I hate to be a bubble burster, but how do you know either version is the "actual facts

If you examined other Ryanair disputes that have reached an indepently judged conclusion, you will note which side tends to be the losing one. I see no reason why this should be different.
You will also notice that Leo tends to go rather quiet on a given subject when said independent facts emerge.
And rest assured, you've not burst my bubble; I don't live in one ,as reality as long since intruded. The only bubbles in FR are inhabited by Leo and his ilk.

[BBT]

The situation in Air Mauritius and Ryanair – each with its own thread here on PPRuNe - have a number of important parallels with similar, and less well publicised, events involving pilot fatigue. We have reached the point where inappropriate management intervention has apparently become relatively normal. Only a few pilots seem to appreciate how significant these developments have become.

To my mind the key things to note are:

(a) the responsibility for behaving in the correct way lies exclusively with the pilot,
(b) the power to make the pilot’s life difficult (at a minimum) lies with the employer,
(c) the willingness of employers to directly interfere on issues of duty time has increased markedly, especially at the low cost end of the spectrum,
(d) those intervening are often management pilots who are also postholders with legal obligations, and,
(e) Aviation Authorities are remarkably slow (cautious if you are feeling charitable) to respond to claims that malpractice or inappropriate behaviour occurs in this area.

The overall effect is to ensure that those pilots who think it appropriate to “keep a low profile” will do as their employer bids. This is not what is expected from the safety perspective, nor what is required from a legal perspective.

The behaviour of management at both Ryanair and Air Mauritius gives rise to concern not least because they both seem to feel that they have a right to behave as they do and, if challenged, to agressively go after individuals. At the same time, stories attacking the integrity and motivation of individual pilots begin to appear. These techniques are now becoming relatively common.

There seems to be little ability or willingness on the part of Aviation Authorities or ICAO to recognise the gradual erosion of a long established safety barrier. It is equally worth noting that fatigue is not a much used reason for failing to report for duty.

We will not have heard the end of this particular problem until some action is taken. Clearly the imbalance is between the responsibility carried by each individual licence holder and his or her power to act on that responsibility without suffering direct or indirect consequences. Some attention to the willingness of management pilots to look to their responsibilities might also be appropriate. So we might be waiting for a little while for any real action …

[Aloue]

Word is gradually creeping out about the background to this matter. Here's one really interesting if mindboggling bit. Apparently the charge is that the pilot concerned was accused of failing to complete a "mandatory retrospective roster change". This was one (the only?) charge at his disciplinary hearing. This is so preposterous that it would initially strike you as "pub talk". However, it is not "pub talk". It is true. The section(s) of the working agreement which permits such "mandatory" and "retrospective" roster changes have been pointed out to several pilots.

This is a brilliant scam for an airline is it not? Quite how this was connected to the fatigue report was not explained to me.

[Trip Switch]

Mandatory whatsama who??

What on earth is that supposed to mean? And how does this fit in with the IAA equivalent of CAP 371? I'm sure there's a bit that deals with significant changes of rostered duty period, to say nothing of the over-riding fatigue issue. And when does it stop becoming 'mandatory retrospective'? :confused:

I have no particular gripe with RYR (as I don't fly for them), but have been following this thread with some interest. This, I just don't get. Can someone please elaborate.

Trippy

[Judge Whyte]

IAA has given Fr the right to roster crews more than 900 hours in ANY 12 cosecutive months by use of the calendar year method.

Jesuitical or what?

[Aloue]

Trip Switch, the reason it is so hard to get your head around this is because it a bit like Alice in Wonderland where "normality" becomes the abnormal. What it means is that the airline can introduce a roster change when you are in flight and announce it to you on arrival. Such a change is designated mandatory based on a phrase in the pilot's working agreement which has been so interpreted by Ryanair. Thus it becomes a disciplinary offence not to accept a new duty (typically, two extra sectors on top of the previously flown four sectors).

As for your question:how does this fit in with the IAA equivalent of CAP 371 The short answer is that there is no IAA equivalent. There are FTLs and broad "guidelines". Each operator submits to the IAA a scheme for approval. However, no mechanism for querying differences between the guidelines and actual practices exists. This makes for a sea of uncertainty in which Ryanair can swim with its customary finesse.

The whole philosphy of a proper FTL is that a roster is produced in a timely fashion in order to allow a pilot to plan their life so as to manage their rest periods, etc. Obviously when a roster can be retrospectively changed in an environment where pilots fly up to 100 hours per month, this is all a bit academic.

This is really about Ryanair doing what it wants to do simply because it wants to do it - and also because it will strenuously resist anyone who sees the world differently. So far their strategy has worked.

[captplaystation]

Heard a "rumour" that the Capt concerned was moving a bit further"East" in the not too distant future.Sounds like a little bit of sour grapes from the "harpies"?(in addition to the previously stated absolute need for absolute control,that we all know & love).

[bacardi walla]

Well we all know that RYR management will claim black is white until the argument conclusion falls to them in their favour. I've experienced it too, in the end, you just laugh at them and walk away. As for an aircraft incident, nobody in management should walk away from it.

The famous RYR carpet must be bulging by now :confused:

[PAXboy]

This is really about Ryanair doing what it wants to do simply because it wants to do it If I may make so bold ...
This is really about Ryanair doing what it wants to do simply because it wants to make more money but (almost as important) they want to show the Brits that a bunch of Paddys (MoL always uses that term) can beat them. It really is that simple.

[A330driver]

THE IAA!!

They do as FR tells them.

They change flight time/duty limits at an operators whim.

Not called the downtowm office for nothing.


They are to aviation as Panama is to shipping - a flag of convenience. Nothing more. nothing less.

Not surprising really.

[captplaystation]

Appeal against RYR's demotion failed.Interesting times ahead.Batten down the hatches.

[the grim repa]

http://www.iaa.ie/corp_fin/about.asp

interesting mission statement.
let's see how the iaa and the lunatic in charge of ryanair work this one out.maybe lillian cassin can post another letter to flight international,to explain.

[threegreenlights]

Having read with interest and some trepidation - the catalogue of problems facing RYR flight crews. Two things seem clear.

1) There are a lot of demotivated and unhappy pilots working for this airline.

2) The MD appears to have a very clear idea about where his flight crews and a/c fit into the overall operation of making a profit.

Therefore it is vitally important that the IAA/IALPA determine the actual state of affairs at RYR - and sort this problem out quickly and satisfactorily.

Rest assured that if they don't, there are likely to be investigative journalists who will!

[Leo Hairy-Camel]

1) There are a lot of demotivated and unhappy pilots working for this airline. Uninformed, misguided point number one. Ignoring the customary aphorism that pilots, like sailors, are never really happy unless they're complaining about something, the numbers of card carrying members off the seriously pissed-off club number around 3% of our pilot corps, currently around the 1000 mark. Hardly an avalanche of discontent, is it.
The MD appears to have a very clear idea about where his flight crews and a/c fit into the overall operation of making a profit. Ya think?

And now for the really funny stuff. The giggle fest that is, and I thank you, the highlight of a dreary Sunday.
Therefore it is vitally important that the IAA/IALPA determine the actual state of affairs at RYR - and sort this problem out quickly and satisfactorily.
My dear chap, or chapette, there are a few things you're clearly and, one presumes, happily oblivious of. First of all, the IAA are a world class regulator and operate independently of political or commercial influence to the same JAR-OPS standards as are held all contracting states. The IAA regularly examine the Ryanair operation, in Dublin, Stansted, and in fact, all of Ryanair's 15 European bases. Anyone who actually works for Ryanair as I do will know well just how constant they are in their attentions and influence, as even a cursory review of FCI's and Memoranda over recent years will reveal. There is, regrettably, a certain vocal, unsavoury and devious element (hello Evan) which is beside itself in seeking to create a nexus between the entirely unrelated fact of Ryanair's colossal success (€100 million profit per month) and presumed inadequate regulatory oversight.
The IAA are well satisfied with the nature of Ryanair's operation, as are the vast majority of those of us who work here.

Now then, lets wet our beaks in the lower and far more jolly level of your tiny inferno, with apologies to Dante Aligieri. You presume, I deduce, that IALPA is an organisation inclined toward an independent and even handed analysis of an airline company with a view to highlighting unfair work practices and pressing for change to the general benefit and tree-hugging bonhomie for all concerned? IALPA is a turgid, morally corrupt organisation. An entity choking on the sulphur of its own irrelevance. In seeking to reverse this inevitable decline in the face of a dynamic, mature and developed market environment, there is no depth to which they will not sink in attempting to cast Ryanair in a light of malfeasance. Recent months has seen them nearly bankrupt a decent man after their 'strategy' (and I use the word in its loosest sense) proved fruitless. Then they seemed to favour the idea of convincing a group of our longest serving employees to fork out €15000 each for their own type ratings, even though the company offered to pay, and in recent weeks, evidently unhappy with the progress of their muck-spreading in other areas, have twisted themselves in half trying to cast aspersions on our standards of maintenance and even our engineering prowess, both of which, I can assure you, are among the highest on earth.

[cornerstone]

one question leo, no one seems to be able to tell us why it is that only the IAA will recognise this half arsed 200 to 800 course FR seem to be happy to charge a wedge of cash for.

the rest of your thesaurus trawl deserves no retort.

[atse]

Oh poor Leo. Just love the "morally corrupt" bit. Pot & Black are the words that would come to mind were I not aware that you only answer to a higher, market driven, morality.

But (and I know I am taking the bait) exacly who is the "nearly bankrupt" individual to whom you refer? This guy is new on me ... ahh.... do I sense some misinformation and "spin" en route?

Your typically cynical and utter dishonest rendition of the decision taken by the Dublin-based 200 pilots sums up the Ryanair approach to a tee.

BTW, I have met a LOT of very unhappy Ryanair pilots. You have not. Interesting difference in perspective, huh?

[bacardi walla]

To quote our friend Leo
The IAA regularly examine the Ryanair operation, in Dublin, Stansted, and in fact, all of Ryanair's 15 European bases

Many will remember the period when FR aircraft were flying with severely out of date Jepps. What did the IAA do about that ??

[minuteman]

Leo it is quite something to see that when the actual topic at hand does not suit your skewed view of the "real" world, your lineaments that we are well used to at this stage come to the fore. Rather than address the issue of fatigue and how it has been dealt with in this operator you decide to go and attack IALPA and IALPA's president. How does this help the debate except if only to demonstrate that you are a one-trick pony, unable to coherently comment on anything else save that which quite obviously gets on your nerves?

Anyway back to the subject. The IAA audit all the carriers, that is true. The IAA has no equivalent of CAP371, as has been stated previously, each operator submits a scheme suited to their type of operation ( :hmm: ) and this is approved by the operator.

The fatigue case in question poses an interesting issue. Say another pilot in the same position elects to operate the extra sector, and an incident/accident occurs. The report eventually cites that fatigue may have been / was a factor.

Who gets hung out to dry? The pilot, as it is their own responsibility to not operate while fatigued! The operator gets off scott free saying the pilot did not have to accept the duty if he thought he would be fatigued!

Here is the nub of the issue: the IAA have no real intent to regulate the operators, just the individual licence holders. And in the meantime, the FR management are allowed to send out a message to their pilots about how they view fatigue.

Remember Leo, as you fly the line, phone at the ready to run and save the operation, you will always end up responsible.

[Leo Hairy-Camel]

Remember Leo, as you fly the line, phone at the ready to run and save the operation, you will always end up responsible.
Yes, and unlike your boy, its a responsibility I fully accept. There are no rights without responsibilities, are there, but as in so much else of your fatuous waffle, Minute Man, you window dress the facts in an attempt to create the illusion of evil where none exists. Your boy had already resigned, off to sunnier and sandier climes, and quite simply, couldn't be bothered flying another two sectors coz it clashed with his social plans. Fatigue my arse!

Tell the truth, ya devious old curmudgeon!

[Shaka Zulu]

And is that the reason why you accept FR's reaction to this guy's decision?!
Nice.........

So without any fatigue studies at all you endorse the IAA's view of allowing guys to fly more than 900hrs/12 months and starting from scratch april onwards every year?

[Faire d'income]

Leo the more of your posts I read the more I am reminded of Colonel Nicholson in The Bridge on the river Kwai.

An able obsessive man, his determination to look for a victory in the most unlikely scenario led to his complete loss of perspective and ultimately his own madness.

I sincerely hope you don't find yourself saying " What have I done? " as he did.

[RogerIrrelevant69]

"fatuous waffle" and the words: pot, kettle and black once again automatically spring to mind. Irony indeed.

Perhaps LHC should look 'irony' up in the thesaurus he has clearly swallowed before regurgitating his earlier contribution.

It had the usual affect of making me fall asleep half way through. Interesting tactic though as, like listening to one of Tony Blair's desperate cohorts, you have to reach for the off button before you can take anymore of the spin/lies/invention/utter crap.

[xetroV]

Some people just choose to ignore the WHOOP WHOOP, PULL UP's. Sometimes they get away with it.

[RAT 5]

LHC.

A simple question/s. I know you have refused to answer other direct simple questions in the past. No harm in trying again, though, and with a different slant.

I do not want to drag this into a RYR bash. That is unnecessary to those of us who have read these threads, or have insider knowledge; we know the truth; and like most politicians, the more they deny something the more guaranteed it is to be true. Think about that when you want to waffle on some more.

?

There is no such thing as a perfect job. Everything can be improved in some way. It could be T's & C's, operational standards etc......

Where do see see room for improvement in Ryaniar, and what would you like to see changed?

[CamelhAir]

Nice try Rat 5, but I wouldn't be holding my breath. Isn't is strange that a so-called line pilot refuses to answer any question that may have the potential to expose even the tiniest chink in the armour of his self-professed utopia? Surely a regular line-pilot would have the ability to keep an open mind and at least discuss the issues? That's called CRM and MCC, skills in which LHC would not appear to be practiced. Of course, LHC is no more a regular line-pilot than Ali G is, so it's all rhetorical.

[Trip Switch]

Yes, and unlike your boy, its a responsibility I fully accept.

Leo, sir...

I do not know you or have any fight with you, but I was just wondering how it is that, should a chap decide he is fatigued and therefore unsafe to fly (and that is his call alone, for whatever reason), it is somehow shirking his responsibility? Surely, and as a line pilot you must agree, he took the only responsible course of action.

Commercially inconvenient? Yes. Irresponsible? No.

God forbid, but should the nightmare scenario occur and let's say the skipper survives, the court hearing should make for some very interesting debate - how it was that he faced two choices:-

1) Take the aircraft, with all those passengers and crew aboard, knowing he was fatigued and therefore unsafe to fly.

2) Make the call to Ops, remove himself from a potentially dangerous situation and be demoted (precendent now set).

I'm not a lawyer but seems like a no brainer to me. The European Courts (the passengers/crews families would make sure they were involved) would certainly have something to say about a company putting someone in that position.

Or am I missing something?

[atse]

Leo, as I recall from various encounters with you somehow we never get clear answers. Just in case you may have reformed in recent times I'll try again. Can you just confirm for your eager fans that you are still unable to provide answers to straight questions, and, in particular that:

(a) you will never answer a question that would in any way prove to be critical of Ryanair's behaviour,

(b) you willl always refuse to condemn Ryanair written intimidation of pilots, and will ignore direct evidence even if it is posted here on PPRuNe,

(c) you will be associated with comments which reflect poorly or adversely on the name of pilots who have incurred the wrath of Ryanair management,

(d) you will disappear when there is a court case in session and the news is not so good for Ryanair,

(e) you will continue to appear after the court case to announce that it was really a Ryanair victory,

(f) you will promote and prepetuate stories remarkably similar to those of senior Ryanair management,

(g) you will continue ignore any comment or question that might demonstrate how shallow your grasp and logic might be,

(h) you will continue to make personal attacks on the President of IALPA,

(i) you will continue to construe any adverse comments on a certain Mr. Michael O'Leary (the Guru of Gigginstown) as an attack on all that is good, worthwhile and civilised in the world,

(j) you will continue to take the "happy propaganda" pills provided by your mentor, "Great Leader MOL" - he who is saviour of the universive and eternal font of all wisdom.

Now Leo the Lamentable, have I got that right?

[ShortfinalFred]

Answer the questions Leo, why dontcha?

I'll answer for you. You are corrupted by the management "ethos" of an airline that puts greed at the heart of everything it does, and you ARE a manager in that organisation, for sure, and as such greed most likely benefits you directly you simply perpetuate it.

Greed that demands payments off wheelchair passengers for a basic act of common humanity, (provide them with a chair to reach the plane), greed that pushes its pilots so hard that a decent operator nearly goes off the end of a runway with a planeload of YOUR passengers, greed that pushes your SAFETY CRITICAL EMPLOYEES so hard that a man who gets off a flight he is all but forced to take after several sectors already is demoted to send the fear of God into the remainder of the pilot body should they think of going crew fatigue, greed that makes those self same SAFETY CRITICAL EMPLOYEES pay for safety critical evolutions like simulator training, greed that has trainee pilots living off a pittance, greed that has your chief exec living like a king whilst preaching to pilots about how "workshy" they all are. And on and on and Ariston (see numerous previous threads).

And do you know what, Leo? Like any gluttony, it is quite sickening. You are a manager, of that there is no doubt. Take responsibility before the cumulative effect of "the Ryanair way" has consequences you may live to regret.

Take a stand for the good of YOUR pilots and YOUR company and YOUR passengers and THE GOOD of the profession and industry as a whole. Introduce a FTL scheme based on science, not the convenient ways of the IAA, stop having multiple bases and contracts with the simple aim of endlessly playing one group off against another and have one definitive Ryanair pay scale and contract, stop denying your pilots any meaningful representation and negotiate representation with a trade union of the pilots choosing. What have you got to fear from such obvious best practise? By your own admission the company is making money hand over fist. These straightforward acts of decency and safety derived sense would render you perhaps invulnerable as a company in a way that you are not now. Now you are exposed to the serious risk of an incident becoming an accident and there are legions of posters on the Ryanair threads who can elaborate why and how this is so, AND YOU KNOW IT.

Is this why your only response is to trash the character or reputation of any perceived critic and never deal in honest answers? You have a Taliban-esque faith in your invincibility that defies logic and, of itself, speaks of a blinkered and wilfully defiant refusal to even consider that you are running significant risks in managing your operation in the way that you do.

And you Journalists! Get out there and do your job! Research pilot fatigue and its links to air safety, question Ryanair and EVERYBODY else in Europe about it to establish what best practise is, compare the results to Ryan and other operators. Name and shame the recalcitrant.

Leo you are dragging the whole industry into a mire from which the consequences will be the continual erosion of the boundaries that have made air travel the safest form of mass transport. As you "slash cost" by the techniques outlined above, ignoring the real risks that that provokes, the whole industry has to follow suit in a spiral to the lowest common denominator, which is your company's current practices.

You are a professional pilot, you say. Act like one. Make these changes now.

[RAT 5]

Perhaps Leo is on loan: chief pilot/ops director for Zimbawae/Mugabe airlines. Should he need a future, there awaits one; likely to be very short though if the union under the guise of MDC gets its way. Surely such a country, which suppresses any opposition is a perfect place for Leo to plie his trade. Take all his ill gotten gains and drift off into the bundu. Become king of the castle; big fish in a small pond with no worthy apponents. Sounds ideal for such a puny mind. It would rid the UK of a sour thinking one who, by his own utterances, must aspire to higher than a line pilot. UK airlines are awash with the dross of useless managers. Please do not add one more. Go, I say, Go. We wish you God speed.

Please. Oh please. do not let this deteriorate into Leo bashing; just as it should not be a RYR bashing thread. My comments were trying to keep the focus on the taregt, but I had tears in my eyes.

[The Real Slim Shady]

Well girls, I don't work for FR, but have just had 2 months off to get my annual hours back to JAR limits, and I'm not fatigued.

When I worked for a UK carrier I was always knackered but had very few flying, as opposed to duty, hours.

Flying hours vs duty hours are what count: if I have to do 190 duty hours a month, I would be quite happy to do 120 FLYING hours per month, if I'm not being messed about, if I have a stable roster, and by FLYING 120 per month, the company can plan, and have available standby crews.

What I dislike is the 190 duty hours, 35 flying hours month and being messed about, which is fatiguing: "rest must be planned" say the CAA.

Your opinions???????

[minuteman]

Slim, whilst there is a certain amount of logic in the whole duty hours vs. flying hours argument, it's not really the point.

900hrs in the 12 previous months is a LIMIT, not a TARGET.

100hrs in 28 consecutive days is a LIMIT, not a TARGET.

However, nobody has to work to the limits in order to feel fatigued; people can easily feel tired in the middle of the day; equally so in the middle of the night. Unfortunately for some, fatigue does not just fall into a neat series of boxes that can be ticked off.

The question is, regardless of how much/how little one flies, should you expose your crew and passengers to your fatigue if you feel it is at an unacceptable level? Trip Switch has quite nicely pointed out the most responsible thing to do is to take yourself off the flight.

Now Slim, is it acceptable to be demoted for making such a decision?

We can all expect Leo to come back and play to the gallery and deride all this "fatuous waffle," but we will all be waiting for the answers to atse's 10 points for a long time yet.

[The Real Slim Shady]

Minuteman asked,

Now Slim, is it acceptable to be demoted for making such a decision?

No. The regulations are quite clear.

Are there any issues which we aren't aware of which muddy the waters slightly?

Was the demotion a result of a more complex incident?

Was it a kneejerk reaction?

[Cloudscape]

I know this is being discussed somewhere on this site but I can't seem to find the thread.

The following memo was posted on the Ryanair pilot's internal website yesterday:

To: All Pilots

From: David O'Brien

Date: 28th November, 2005

As many of you may be aware one of our Dublin Captains was recently demoted to Senior First Officer for a six month period following the outcome of a disciplinary investigation. I am aware of much of the uninformed speculation, and false claims being passed off as fact on various anonymous websites, and I feel in the circumstances that you are all entitled to an explanation of the facts in this case which are as follows;

1. The pilot in question was asked to contact Ryanair Operations on a turnaround in Gatwick between his third and fourth sector. He failed/refused to do so.

2. Upon landing in Dublin at the end of his rostered fourth sector, he was asked to do another rotation from Dublin to Newcastle and back, which was well within his FfL's that day. He refused to accept this roster change and volunteered the next inbound crew to operate the flights instead of himself.

3. As a consequence another crew which arrived later into Dublin were asked to undertake this additional rotation and did so, giving rise to a further delay for the passengers travelling on the Dublin-Newcastle flight.

4. No mention was made by this Captain at any time during his duty of tiredness or fatigue or any other reason for his failure to accept this change.

5. It was only when the Captain was requested to fill in a special report after his duty that the issue of tiredness or fatigue was first raised by him.

6. This pilot was completing his fifth rostered day of late duties, which had been preceded by ten days annual leave. In each one of the five days of duty, his report time was after 1200hrs and he had suffered no inordinate or unusual delays.

7. The roster change he was requested to undertake that evening was within his daily, weekly and monthly FfL's.

8. During the previous three months this Captain experienced nine changes to his published roster. Three of these related to the cancellation of planned simulator flying, two related to his being called into fly from standby duty, and two roster changes involved the reduction of duties from six sector to four sector days. Not one of these nine mandatory changes involved an increase in duty time of more than 60 minutes.

In the circumstances, we considered that since the issue of tiredness or fatigue was not raised by the Captain during his duty, that there was in this specific case, no basis for the refusal to accept a schedule change that evening. Furthermore his refusal meant that another later crew had to shoulder the burden of minimising the delays for our customers on the Dublin-Newcastle route. It also seems clear in this case that the issue of tiredness and fatigue was only raised after completion of his duty.

The actions of this Captain could have led to the stranding of over 300 of our paying customers that evening. His refusal to accept a reasonable roster change which was within all of his FTL limits, and in circumstances where he had suffered no other request in the three previous months and where he had just returned from 10 days annual leave, were unreasonable and were grounds for gross misconduct.

We concluded however that whilst this was an error of judgement on his part, it would have been unreasonable to dismiss him from his post. Therefore we decided on the less severe punishment of a temporary demotion, as being preferable in this case to a dismissal.

We can only exist as an airline and a company if everyone of our people continues to place our passengers as our No.1 priority. We cannot operate the stable and advantageous rosters we do unless on those rare occasions when we need a crew to accept a roster change (that is within our rostering and FTL limits) in order to minimise disruption and inconvenience for our passengers, that we receive some co-operation. In this case where a pilot simply refuses a request to contact operations and subsequently refuses to accept a reasonable roster change, then this system of goodwill breaks down.

This will not of course alter our position that any pilot who feels he is genuinely tired or fatigued should of course always inform the company accordingly and absent himself from flying duties, and we will continue to fully support any such decision, as long as it is genuine and reasonable and not - as in this case - something that was raised after the event to retrospectively justify unreasonable behaviour.

Yours sincerely

/2~:--,, avid O'Brien

Director of Flight & Ground Operations

[neil armstrong]

could have led to the stranding of over 300 of our paying customers that evening
they normaly never care about that

Neil

[FlapsOne]

The actions of this Captain could have led to the stranding of over 300 of our paying customers that evening.
.............even though the airline management seems to this on a weekly basis!!:confused: :confused:

......sorry we crossed with the same thought.

[TSR2]

Quote:

"We can only exist as an airline and a company if everyone of our people continues to place our passengers as our No. 1 priority"


The 150 passengers left stranded at Murcia last week were certainly not Ryanair's No 1 priority.

[ecj]

No scheduling agreement then?

[dontdoit]

Neither do they seem to care a jot about this group of paying guests, also from last week:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4477580.stm

[The African Dude]

I have to say that, after some of the stuff written on this forum about FR, that was a measured and reasonable letter and it wasn't aggressively written either.

Of course, it only tells the company's side of events so,
having said that, it doesn't explain in any depth the Captain's desription of events (apart from tiredness/fatigue), nor does it give details of why he didn't contact Ops in Gatwick.

[Flap40]

We can only exist as an airline and a company if everyone of our people continues to place our passengers as our No.1 priority.

So The management are admitting that Safety is not their first priority?

[Avman]

Ouch! Very naughty Flap40 :E but I do think, as others above do, that David O'Brian has somewhat shot himself in the foot when one considers how often RYR management policy have left their "paying customers" stranded!

[Aloue]

Just for the record: by all accounts from Dublin pilots the description of events by Ryanair management in the DOB memo is strongly disputed. It is equally the case that this matter is clearly being handled with particular care by everybody except Ryanair.

This one has a slow burning fuse and if the stories from Dublin are to be believed we can expect developments "in due course".

[EI-CFC]

I do think, as others above do, that David O'Brian has somewhat shot himself in the foot when one considers how often RYR management policy have left their "paying customers" stranded!

It does seem a rather balanced piece from FR, all in all. While I've no doubt that the pilot's version differs from FR, I do wonder whether the developments we are led to believe will occur in due course might fizzle rather than bang.

As for comments regarding passengers being number 1, let's not confuse operational "nessecities" (for want of a better word, but I'm sure people will know what I mean!) with corporate desire to stand passengers on a daily basis for the sheer hell of it.

[737]

The Capt concerned flies a 200. Therefore how could he have stranded 300 pax 200s only hold 130 pax. Did they want him to do three sectors?

Usual Ryanair lies and spin.

[the grim repa]

all who care to know within ryanair about what happened.know that this is a load of horse **** and just an attempt to gloss over mols viciousness against pilots in general.
a sociopath cannot help himself and even when having committed the most heinous crime will always have the compulsion to justify his action or tell someone about it to check that i'm alright mate.

[Judge Whyte]

A position where there is a disconnect between responsibility and authority is not sustainable.

Yet this 'faitgue demotion' is designed to reinforce the disconnect in the minds of every Fr pilot including Leo.

[atse]

Even after the truth of this event is published ... Leo, you are just so predictable. When the "other version" of the truth eventually surfaces (the non-Ryanair one) where will you be - 'Missing in Action'? You usually are when the inconvenient facts appear.

Remember what you said about Captain John Goss. He went to court and it turned out that there was not a scintilla of truth in Ryanair's claims. You, a professed line captain, took every opportunity to do to him exactly what Ryanair had done, which was to perpetuate false stories in order to to denigrate his character. Afterwards you claimed a Ryanair "victory", which is what you always do.

You are now doing your master's bidding once again. This time you started with an attack on the latest Ryanair target - remember your remark about "duvet days" and comments to the effect that the captain concerned could not be bothered coming to work? You threw the mud. But eventually it turned out that the pilot concerned has not missed work for any reason in well over a year. Do you care about the inaccuracy? Of course not.

The truth is of no interest to you. In fact is the contrary not the case?

[CamelhAir]

Leo,
relentless vitriolic personal attacks on one individual does not make the issues that concern FR pilots disappear. You're "talents" with a keyboard would be better employed answering the pertinent questions put to you in previous posts.
Let's start with this question: If IALPA is as irrelevant as you suggest, why is it that any mention of it induces paroxysms of fury from yourself? Your reaction very much suggests that FR is running scared of IALPA. It's rage level is reminiscent of a cornered rat lashing out, which is a rather apt analogy.
If it isn't, your slanderous comments are wholly unnecessary and very irrelevant.
Also your personalised attacks suggest a certain inadequacy of the size of the camels hump.

[I LUV DUFF]

That memo from DOB is typical FR rubbish.
Just to refresh in your minds some of the actions of fr management in the past.
1. Senior FR Capt accused of making intimidating phone calls. Person to whom management alledged the phone calls were made to said he never received such calls yet FR management pressed ahead and ended up losing big in the High Court.
2. Former chief pilots daughter (f/o) correctly offloaded herself at an outstation due to a conflict with a Capt. FR management fired her. It ended up in the High Court.FR lost and ended up apologising to her in the Court!
3.Former head of the pilot body representing the DUB pilots was too much of a handful for MOL and his cronies. One issue that the company were refusing to budge on was having confirmed seats on FR flights for positioning crew on duty. Next time the guy turned up to position on duty, mols lackys fabricated a story about him refusing to position on a jumpseat, he was offloaded and later fired. At the Labour Court, FR couldnt produce any witness that heard him refuse to position on the jumpseat.

Is a pattern developing? Putting it mildly it is no great secret that difficulties exists between DUB based pilots and management over 800 conversions and continual breaches of the working agreement by management.It is obvious whats going on here. The guy in question was rumoured to be leaving, so FR saw their chance to once again try and send a message out to the rest of the pilots as to who is in charge and what will happen if you do not do as they tell you. If he is leaving why not do this to him anyway? As for the so called 'mandatory retrospective roster change' ask any FR pilot what this means (except the ones who made it up in this case to try and nail the guy )and they ll all say 'mandatory what'. It doesn't exist, if it did you ld have plenty of other crews in the doghouse as well.

Have flown with the guy in question many times, this is not his form and he s helped the company out on many occasions in the past. FR is a place where you are guilty until proven innocent(which doesn t matter in their eyes anyway).

Get with the programme.Why would they publish that crap on the company website, GRIM REPA you hit the nail on the head, more spin and propaganda!

Going for a DUFF.

[cornerstone]

i think the recent spate of DUB resignations speaks volumes.

[captplaystation]

The worrying thing about all of this is, if they think they can demote someone for refusing to undertake an additional,unforseen,unplanned,but of course/ha ha/ perfectly legal & reasonable (& RYR really understand legal & reasonable !?!) EXTRA DUTY (as opposed to a - sorry you're running late we assume of course you won't walk off into the sunset to make your pub/tennis/whorehouse appointment type of scenario -)and I stress again EXTRA duty,then why not demote me for inconveniencing 756 passengers by declining to operate 4 sectors if they manage(unlikely!) to get a hold of me on my day off & make me an offer I can't refuse;seems like a perfectly plausible future extension of their current mind-set? Never mind what you think you were doing WE have spoken & YOU will shut the f*** up & do what you are told, ain't that about it Leo old chap?

[the grim repa]

leo might be unaware that yesterday the dublin pilots will have traded their share options to the tune of more than 15,000 euros again negating ryanairs' bully boy tactics.

"right is might" baby "right is might" and all the money in the world will not buy these aholes the respect they crave.leo may the lord shine on your sad soul and then dispatch you in the down elevator with the other greedy bullies who have no respect for human rights and common decency.see you at the barbeque!

[CamelhAir]

I LUV DUFF, but surely you are aware that said court cases were actually stunning victories for Ryanair?? :E

[PAXboy]

the respect they crave With respect, I doubt that they crave the kind of respect that you would want. They want to win. They want to carry more pax per day than BA and they want to make more money than BA. End of story. When they have conistently won that, then they will gain the respect of the people that they want and, of course, that will not include flight and cabin crew.

[RAT 5]

A couple of humble questions.

It would seem that RYR are insulating themselves from retaliation by the individual with the fact that he has already resigned. Thus they expect him to keep mum and go quietly. Likewise, they expect his colleagues not have the energy to fight on his behalf; but boy, have they sent a message to anyone else contemplating the same.

1. Does anyone think RYR's response would have been the same if the individual had not been on his way out?

2. Any member of a crew can refuse a discretionary/madatory respective duty. What does anyone think RYR would have done to a lower ranked flight crew member?

[captplaystation]

RAT 5 1- Yes, 2 - Out the door. Cloudscape, I took it that way as well, but as you know there are a few raw nerves around in our midst (understandably so) & I think you touched one.I think working for a bunch of aggresive sh*ts sometimes rubs off on us don't you? WHAT DO YOU MEAN ,YOU DON'T KNOW, WHATS YOUR F****NG PROBLEM!!! see, it's got to me now. . . .

[I LUV DUFF]

CamelhAir ,you re dead right. I must have had a temporary bout of madness. Ha Ha , the old famous FR victory, after getting the ass whooping of a lifetime, the sight of DOB on the steps of the High Court telling news crews that the outcome of the case was a great victory for FR and how they looked forward to having the pilot in question flying the line on the 800 asap was just too much to keep the tears of laughter in.

In his memo DOB says that their latest victim exercised poor judgement by saying he couldnt do the extra flights. So I guess now they decide for you whether you re fit to fly or not regardless of what you say.I would have thought the individual would be the best judge of that. Anyone starting to get worried?

Looking back over the posts, Leo Hairy Hole was the person who said the demoted Capt had resigned. The guy is still working there and has not resigned.More FR FACTS. Ha Ha!

DOB admits in the memo that they rely on the goodwill of crews rather than have standby crews available. I ld say goodwill in FR is a rare commodity after this fiasco.Must be why yet another plane load of pax were left stranded during the week. Great way of running an airline guys!

ENJOYING A DUFF.

[stator vane]

when answering the phone, forget the "hello" bit---
start rather with, "i'm really knackered!"

and say it with conviction!

[Cloudscape]

Grimrepa - cashed my shares last week for €60k , I got in at the right time - the price has dipped since but my 60k pays for 4 conversions!!!

There's a full thread on the share options in Terms and Endearmeant.

[I LUV DUFF]

Cloudscape, at their peak of €7.50 the options are worth €60k GROSS before you have to deduct cost of options,brokers commission and tax,leaving you with €36k net.
Therefore its great to hear that you and your management colleagues have reduced the cost of the conversion on the 800 to €9k from a rediculous €15k.(Especially for you cloudscape 36 / 4 = 9)
For those that dont know ,MOL increased the bond from 10k/2years to 15k/5 years overnight. When asked why he said it was a nice round number. When asked for a breakdown of the costs they refused to provide them.Later the senior pilots were intimidated with the threat of redundancy if they didnt sign up to it.
I m really looking forward to my €6k rebate just in time for Christmas.Thanks Cloudscape.

ANOTHER DUFF

[the grim repa]

congrats cloudscape.but one of those 4 ratings will be for the taxman,unfortunately.

[I LUV DUFF]

Grim,

Is that the 'pay everything yourself,mac donalds salary,no sector pay for first six months and half sector pay for second 6 months leaving you with about 1000 quid a month in your hand' offer or the restricted line trainer offer where you do the same job as a line trainer except they pay you shag all for the privilage.?

Trying REALLY hard to decide which one to recommend!

LANDLORD,ONE MORE DUFF.

[Cloudscape]

At the peak of €7.50 my options were worth €190k giving me a profit of over €63k. Yes, I know the taxman still has to take his chunk but the 63k is net of the "cost of options"

[essexboy]

__________________________________________________
After not recieving a reply for some time I sent a fax (as per the instructions on the web site), I got an email in reply stating that ther was a problem with the Java script on my PC (no idea what that means, I'm not a techie).

Anyway it later transpired that I had been charged the £50 fee twice. When I enquired they said that the double charge was related to the Java script problem - I actually had applied twice.

They promptly refunded my second £50, and I have since recieved a date for an interview and sim assessment.

Posted by Cloudscape May 2002
______________________________________________

Remember the above posting Cloudscape. If you joined in 2002 you don't have any shares. Whats the crack

[the grim repa]

post the link essex boy.

cloudscape looks like you've been RUMBLED,please explain.

[essexboy]

As requested boss

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51248

[I LUV DUFF]

CLOUDSCAPE,

You display the typical trademark charachteristics of FR management:the' KEEP SAYING IT AND PEOPLE MIGHT BELIEVE YOU' propaganda approach.

That €63k is subject to 42% tax giving you a net total of €36k. ie 19% in value of your €190k worth of share options.Where did all that GREAT FR SHARE OPTION MONEY go? Dont even TRY and dispute that mate.

Nice one ESSEXBOY, their spin and bulls##t continues.

ANOTHER ROUND OF DUFF.

[Cloudscape]

Value of Easyjet Share Options: Pre tax = ZERO, After tax = ZERO


Value of Aer Lingus Share Options: Pre tax = ZERO, After tax = ZERO


Value of Ryanair Share Options: Pre tax = €63,000, After tax = €37,800

Value of ILUVDUFF's complaints = Worthless!!!

P.S. Occasional date changes preserve anonymity - very important on on both PPrune and REPA and I'm member of both!!! No more "duff stuff"

[I LUV DUFF]

Aaaah poor ol CLOUDSCAPE is getting narky.Typical response when the crap that comes out of their pie holes is shown up for what it is, PURE SCUTTER.
No complaints out of me,the only thing worthless is your guff CLOUDSCAPE. Take your head out of the clouds for a minute and take a reality check.
From those figures looks like you haven t paid all your taxes mate, unless of course you live in the UK,mmmm, the net tightens.

DUFFS THE STUFF.

[Wing Commander Fowler]

Just followed ya link there Essexboy and there's no-longer any posting there from Cloudscape??? Presumably deleted because there's something to hide?

P.S. Occasional date changes preserve anonymity - very important on on both PPrune and REPA and I'm member of both!!! No more "duff stuff"

Whassatallabout??? :confused:

[essexboy]

Lucky I copied his post first then Wing co.

I am not sure you should be flying with what ever you are taking Clown scrape I mean Cloudscape. It's really making you expell some sh1t.

[snaga]

I went alooking for this thread because I was interested in what happened in this interesting fatigue case. Am I to take it that the captain concerned was demoted and that the matter is over?

[the grim repa]

was demoted,far from over.