Dutch TV reports on 'Ryanair pilots denominated alarm over safety'

[1stspotter]

BOAC
-the practise of Ryanair flying with minimal fuel will eventually be fatal -rubbish

Why do you think this statement of Benno Baksteen is rubbish?
We all know crashes in aviation happen because all the layers of the Swiss cheese cakes are aligned in such way a single hole is created.
Lets assume the 26th of July went a bit different :

-FR pilot knows weather and ATC situation at MAD and wants to take over 300 kg of fuel.
-Few weeks ago same FR pilot was kindly requested to come over to DUB for an 'interview' to answer why he is in the red zone of the fuel league for the last months. If he continues to take more fuel than FR thinks is needed his contract might be ended or he might be transfered to a base far away.
-FR pilot has financial worries about mortgage for house and training/TR and stress in private life (sick child or sick father).
-FR crew is aware that diversions costs the airline lots of money. And also extra hours are not paid by FR.
-while approaching MAD in rushhour CB's are all around. Lots of delay. ATC does not mention estimated approach time. Iberia, Vueling flights are given priority by ATC to land. ATC is stressfull, talks Spanish to Spanish airlines. Weather is very stressfull to the crew.
-FR crew is in doubt weather to divert or hold longer. Needs to concentrate on flying.
-FR does an approach to MAD (Get-There-Itis/ pressure to land on time) but on final a go around is initiated due weather conditions. Decide to divert.
-aircraft is vectored around a CB adding to the flighttime needed to reach alternate field. Might not be taken into account in fuel planning.
-midway MAD and VLC FR calls mayday because low fuel. Got a lower flightlevel (lots of other diversions ex MAD on same route) or unexpected headwind on route to alternate.
-at VLC a Lan Chile calls mayday as well. Is in front of FR. At landing Lan Chile is unable to vacate runway in time for FR behind or worse, blocks the runway.
-FR which called mayday needs to go around with full power
-FR needs to find another airport to land with less than 30 minutes of remaining fuel.

Yes, it is a lot of 'if this and if that' happens. But that is the case with most crashes.
Some of what I described above actually happened. Some could happened.

Ryanair was lucky the FR aircraft that landed slightly below final fuel reserve did so 9 minutes in front of the LAN Chile (which lost one engine) and the LAN could evacuate the rwy.

How unlikely is a slighty different scenario with more bad luck seeing the many flights of FR operates on a single day?

[fireflybob]

I agree with BOAC.

In my five years with Ryanair I never felt any undue pressure re taking extra fuel above flight plan.

Whilst there are other issues the fuel one is not relevant.

There were extenuating circumstances at Madrid that night and Ryanair is not the only company that has had to declare fuel emergencies.

Whilst I do not agree the ethics of Ryanair the technical and operational side of the Company is second to none thanks to their training system and the skill and dedication of all their crews.

[Squawk-7600]

-FR crew is aware that diversions costs the airline lots of money. And also extra hours are not paid by FR.

How does this work? How are the crew paid then? If a flight is planned from point A to point B and diverts to C, are you suggesting they're not paid?

[SD.]

An example - A planned 4 sector day from STN to DUB and then Malaga.

On the first sector it diverts to Shannon and crew wait for the pax to be bussed over - lets say a 3 hour delay. You'll only be paid for the first 2 sectors and another crew cash in on the Malaga.

Equates to 8 hours (ish) work for 2 hours pay.

[Squawk-7600]

Ok that makes sense, thanks. It's simply a case of getting paid per flying hour right?

Let's say the crew diverted with pax to an alternate (C) and then flew back to their initial destination (B), they would get paid A->C->B right? However if I understand you correctly, it could mean they lose any subsequent flying they otherwise may have expected to fly as that would be then be handed off to another crew. On the other hand, if it happened to be the last sector for the day, they would get paid the additional diversion time to and from (C)?

[SD.]

It's been a while since I had a diversion, but if I remember you do get paid for any flight time yes. That's scheduled flight time, not actual.


It's a different story for cabin crew. They only get paid for actual time, so a 100 knot tailwind all the way home from the Canaries can dent their income. If after reading this thread you think flight deck have tough, the girls and boys in the back have it 10x harder.


Edit: after re-reading your post. Very rarely do you still push onto the original destination after a diversion. You either wait for the pax to be sent over by road, or the return flight is cancelled and you return to base empty. The latter is generally the case in my experience.

[Squawk-7600]

That's scheduled flight time, not actual.

Whoa! So if you are delayed, say in a hold, then you get paid zip for it? Edit: To elaborate, I mean you get paid no extra for any holding, and instead just the scheduled flight time.

Sorry for the thread diversion, it's just curious to read how other's contracts differ.

[BOAC]

We all know crashes in aviation happen because all the layers of the Swiss cheese cakes are aligned in such way a single hole is created. - a long-standing fact. HOWEVER, this focus on Ryanair is primarily driven because MOL and his team are severely denting the status, T&C and well-being of airline pilots and cabin crew (at least) and not directly, I feel, because of 'safety' per se. Let's look at Benno's position:

Reserve fuel is an emergency situation only - we all agree, and that is why a MAYDAY call is predicated. So, what is Benno's (?theVNV, BALPA, IFALPA??, etc etc) position on EUOPS and para 1.295 c.1 - are they all happy that this allows 'short-haul' (NB 6 hours is a 'long' flight) operators to expect crews effectively to plan to arrive with an emergency fuel state in certain situations? Are Benno and his team campaining against this - I have heard nothing?

Let's put this in perspective. IF regulations allow a certain minimum fuel state, at least one operator is likely to drive crew to use it. Does that not make the regs the correct target?

My personal view is that 1.295 c 1 should be withdrawn and a/c should always have alternate fuel on board at the point of take-off. I also agree with the common view that alternate fuel is not always realistic, but surely that is down to the individual Captains to sort out? As FullWings said, it is not what you load but what you do with it.

While we are at it, how about pressing for a survey of arrival fuel states v a v alt+reserve and seeing how many a/c subsequently 'committed' to a single runway destination and why? Let's be objective instead of subjective.

Judging by the huge and sometimes juvenile flurries of activity on this and the KLM thread and the sparse serious activity on the fuel planning thread, everyone and his dog appear blinded by the RY headlights.

[1stspotter]

Quote:
-FR crew is aware that diversions costs the airline lots of money. And also extra hours are not paid by FR.
How does this work? How are the crew paid then? If a flight is planned from point A to point B and diverts to C, are you suggesting they're not paid?



See this posting http://www.pprune.org/7612075-post208.html on the same thread about the financial consequences of a divert for Ryanair pilots on a contract.

[BBK]

BOAC

I won't debate the fuel planning aspects with you as I don't think that is the real issue here. I believe it is, as SD said earlier, the alleged culture of bullying and aggressive behaviour towards the pilots. These allegations suggest an environment utterly removed from that found in say BA, Virgin etc.

Lastly, I don't know if anyone has mentioned the fact that Ryanair pilots cannot belong to a union. What does that tell you about how management see its flight crew? Compare that to an article in the BALPA "Log" a few years ago where they interviewed a union rep at Southwest Airlines. He described a good relationship between the pilots' union and the company.

BBK

[fireflybob]

Lastly, I don't know if anyone has mentioned the fact that Ryanair pilots cannot belong to a union.

Not true! They have even publicly affirmed that individual pilots have every right to belong to a union (I did for the five years I worked for them and many of my colleagues were with more and more joining as I write!).

Of course, Ryanair don't want union recognition but that is another matter!

Personally I wouldn't dream of flying for any Company without being a member of a Pilot Union - when the proverbial hits the fan it's nice to have someone who is batting for you - and it certainly won't be the Company (whoever you work for!)

Interesting clip from the past here!

Unions (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jzRoslQtE74)

[BBK]

FFB

Fair enough I stand corrected. I thought it was membership of any union.

BBK

[BOAC]

Without company 'recognition', union membership gives only basic assistance such as legal advice but will not easily influence T&Cs. What is REPA up to these days? Have I missed a comment from them on this thread? Their last 'news item' appears to be 2005 and ITF have not made any mention of RY recently. Are they dead in the water?

[thebeast]

worth adding if you divert and come back without passengers then cabin crew are just paid for outbound sector.


Also the way of having around a 1/3 of pay dependent on flying for Ryanair contracts and 100% of pay for Brookfield contracts is bound to encourage people to fly when not well, people still have bills to pay particularly in winter when your not working much, i guess you could say the same about Easyjet flexicrew. You can then add the actual or perceived pressure from company management not to call in sick.

[fireflybob]

Without company 'recognition', union membership gives only basic assistance such as legal advice but will not easily influence T&Cs.

BOAC, precisely!

What is REPA up to these days?

I gather there is a lot going on behind the scenes with more and more joining the IAPA which is, I believe, working with REPA.

[BOAC]

ffb - is that IPA?

[1stspotter]

I watched the consumer programme of the German channel WDR on Ryanair. It was broadcasted in November 2012 and can be seen online
Die teuren Tricks der Billigflieger - WDR MEDIATHEK - WDR.de (http://www.wdr.de/mediathek/html/regional/2012/11/19/koennes-kaempft.xml)

Only in German language!

The programme showed two memos sent by base captain on fuel.

The programme did a much more deep and broader investigation on how Ryanair is able to offer such low prices for tickets than KRO Reporter did.

This programme had an interview with an anonymous Ryanair pilot and with Michael O'Leary himself.

Funny thing to note. The reporter went inside the HQ of Ryanair in Dublin for an interview. The HQ did not look like a HQ of a 300+ aircraft airline. The meeting room has a very sad looking, broken shades.
http://s14.postimage.org/tn9hn4c9t/shades.jpg

I guess this says something about the cost reducing culture of the airline.

The pilot also says Ryanair makes sure they do not clearly document pressure put on crew on paper. You have to read between the lines in memos to understand pressure.

Some interesting parts of the programme:
1. The Ryanair pilot tells Ryanair uses the airstair which are built into the Boeing 737-800 on a regular daily base. This is to reduce costs for steps provided by the handling agent. It also allows a very quick turnaround.
The pilot says these steps are not meant/designed to be used frequently. These airstairs are steep and some accidents happened of pax falling off. In one case someone lost a leg while using airsteps.
Airstair Vigilance | Flight Safety Foundation (http://flightsafety.org/aerosafety-world-magazine/september-2010/airstair-vigilance)

Also, according the pilot, Boeing did not design the steps to be used for daily operations.

O'Leary was asked by the reporter why Ryanair is using onboard steps while these are not designed for daily use. MOL response was:
"absolute nonsense. Onboard steps are certified, tested and approved for every situation.

The programme showed (not in the interview) a response of Boeing. See the screendump. I believe Boeing does not clearly state that airstairs cannot be used as a generall way of boarding. The reporter asks two questions in the same lines.
Picture of the email response of Boeing
http://s14.postimage.org/b8ud5eald/steps.jpg

2. The pilot states Ryanair is the only airline which allows a FO to be upgraded to commander after 'just' 1500 hours of flying in an aircraft over 25 tonnes. This is not enough experience to command a 70k tonnes heavy aircraft according the pilot.
MOL was not asked for a response.

3. The programme showed the memo sent to Ryanair pilots. Part of the content was described in this thread. It shows a memo issued in May 2008 and reissued in December 2011. It seems to come from the CRL base.
The memo writes: there is a 95% compliance to plog + 300 kg or less. Currently there is an average additional carriage of plog + 270 kg at CRL.
Not all of the memo can be read. It does say as well:
"The commander may take up to 300 kg. If more fuel is taken this has to be explained on the Voyage Report.
Picture of the memo
http://s1.postimage.org/5ltl4db0v/fuel_memo.jpg

Another memo quotes US Senator Daniel Moynihan 'you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. I trust this memo will be helpful in establishing facts. Thank you for reading this memo and thank you for your continued awareness of the efficiency element of the equation 'operate safely, efficiently and punctuality'

Picture of the memo
http://s9.postimage.org/lbdx1qoe7/fuel_letter.jpg

MOL says no pressure is put on pilot for taking minimal fuel.

4 The programme tells how Ryanair puts pressure on airports to lower airport fee and tax per passenger. And how they can all of a sudden leave an airport. Part of the business model is to use small airports. Those are cheap and also Ryanair as most imported customer can demand a lot. Tax payers pay the price.

[Capot]

In my five years with Ryanair ...........................Whilst I do not agree the ethics of Ryanair the technical and operational side of the Company is second to none thanks to their training system and the skill and dedication of all their crews. Exactly. I have personal knowledge and experience of working with (not for) Ryanair - maintenance related - and have said many times on Pprune that their maintenance and operations are excellent and in many respects well ahead of most legacy carriers, including the world's favourite which I have also experienced at close quarters. The simple reason for this is that good maintenance costs less than bad maintenance.

At the same time I think that the way they treat their customers is simply unacceptable; it's a mixture of quasi-fraudulent practices and contempt, which reaches into the way people are handled at airports. And they are often more expensive than any other airline on a given route, taking all charges and costs into account.

Last time I looked, Ryanair's average yield was higher than BA's, on short-haul. That was a few years (3? 4?) ago. Ryanair carefully cultivates the myth of its cheap fares, not least by keeping the "fare" low and adding ridiculous "charges", as well as simply shouting the nonsense so often that people believe it.

I love it when people talk about "perceived" things like "pressure". What this usually means is that there isn't a shred of evidence for whatever is "perceived", but let's complain about it anyway because everyone says it's there.

By the way, it's a long time since I did a flight plan and load sheet, but I seem to recall that the sector fuel required (aka "minimum" fuel) included a provision for unforeseens? The Captain could add to that, and did, if unusual events were a risk (aka foreseeable), ie airport closure at destination or alternate. But the norm of 90%+++ of departures was sector fuel calculated as per FOM. Anything wrong with that?

[1stspotter]

Some people downgrade the four pilots anonymous shown in KRO Reporter as liers or actors which have a agenda to damage Ryanair.

There have been more programmes showing current or ex-Ryanair pilots. The stories have a different aspect of the life of a Ryanair pilot.

In oktober 2010 Dutch TV programme Goudzoekers had an interview with a former Ryanair pilot (or someone in training). He told that he knew several pilots who slept in their car at airports because they could not afford a hotel. A Norwegian union leader confirmed the story. Severall sources told him pilots had to sleep in their car.

The programme can be seen online. Most parts are in dutch. It also has a small interview with MOL in english.
MOL states at 12 minutes 50 sec in the programme 'we have the highest payment for European airlines for pilots"
'we have a waiting list of 5000 pilots who want to work for us'
'the fact that unions are complaining proves we are good to other pilots and cabincrew'
'nobody leaves Ryanair to fly for BA. Because FR pays better and the rate of promotion is better. '
'last year less than 1% of the FR pilots left the company'
'our pilots earn 125.000 euro a year from the start of their career'
'first officers earned on average last year around 70.000 euro.Somebody earning 70.000 has to sleep in an airport carpark? Rubbish


Uitzending gemist | Goudzoekers, Ryanair op Nederland 2 (http://www.uitzendinggemist.net/aflevering/50172/Goudzoekers.html)

[Torque Tonight]

Boeing did not design the steps to be used for daily operations.

Bull. No mention in the FCOM of only using airstairs on alternate Thursdays. From crew point of view there are many valid areas of potential improvement in the FR setup. Perhaps best to stick to facts rather than muddying the waters with spurious rumours and fabrications.

[fireflybob]

ffb - is that IPA?

BOAC, Irish ALPA!

[BOAC]

Could a current RY contract pilot cut through all the smoke here and confirm:

1) You are only paid for scheduled flight time - 'extra' plus any diversion time is unpaid?

2) Taking MAD-VLC a stage further - suppose at VLC due to slow pax transfer it became impossible to operate back to base and you took 'min rest' at either VLC or after going to MAD? Who arranges and pays hotac?

3) Following 1), does the subsequent flight (VLC-MAD or VLC-base) become a 'scheduled payment' flight?

[luoto]

Interesting.

Sunday Times pays substantial damages to Ryanair over safety breaches story | PressGazette (http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sunday-times-pays-substantial-damages-ryanair-over-safety-breaches-story)

I make no comment over the validity of the claim or the apology but I do know, for a fact, about another news publication apology and another airline (not RYR) which was made as it was cheaper than fighting it, and later events proved the publication correct but by then it was too late.

[Zipster]

@BOAC

Hi BOAC, I am a current Ryanair pilot, let me try to answer those for you. We need to look at it from a contractors perspective, when it comes to employees it looks different. 72% of the workforce are contractors (2011 FR SEC Filing)

1) You are only paid for scheduled flight time - 'extra' plus any diversion time is unpaid?

Yes this is true, you only get paid for the hours put on your roster, diversions, holding, tech stops and ALL time spent on the ground is unpaid. For example if you are rostered for a 4 sector day and you end up diverting on sector one, you´ll most likely lose the last two sectors pay, and end up on the ground unpaid instead waiting for the passengers... In short you need to have the hours on your roster and the aircraft needs to be airborne, if not, no pay.

2) Taking MAD-VLC a stage further - suppose at VLC due to slow pax transfer it became impossible to operate back to base and you took 'min rest' at either VLC or after going to MAD? Who arranges and pays hotac?

In this case i would say the company, if you get stuck at a outstation in case of a diversion etc then the company pays and books at least for HOTAC and Transport, but the duty time spent is not paid to any crew member. Food and drinks if away from base is in my understanding always the responsibility of the crew-member.

3) Following 1), does the subsequent flight (VLC-MAD or VLC-base) become a 'scheduled payment' flight?

I think it will for payment to the crew, but only for the scheduled sector time, which is not very long in this case looking at MAD-VLC.

[Squawk-7600]

It's never "too late" in that regard, the defendant losing the libel case would have the ability to later sue the original plaintiff to recover the damages paid, plus interest, plus costs, and in some jurisdictions additional punitive damages would likely be awarded. By sheer coincidence at the bottom of the page in the link you provided was a story on Lance Armstrong, and that precise situation is occurring at the moment with him.

[Thunderbirdsix]

By sheer coincidence at the bottom of the page in the link you provided was a story on Lance Armstrong, and that precise situation is occurring at the moment with him.


Good grief will you guys ever give this non stop Ryanair bashing a rest its just non stop, anything published you are looking for a way to get at them.

Ryanair is a very safe airline, it seems to sicken most of the posters on this forum, you would be thrilled to bits if they had a serious incident.
:mad:

[Hangar6]

Fair point for 2013 I am going to resist FR bashing

2013 12 months 79.6 millions passengers carried 300+ planes and growing

hard to knock that to be fair:D

If only MOL would tone it down a bit.....sorry falling into that trap again...:O

[fireflybob]

2) Taking MAD-VLC a stage further - suppose at VLC due to slow pax transfer it became impossible to operate back to base and you took 'min rest' at either VLC or after going to MAD? Who arranges and pays hotac?

BOAC, in my experience whilst at Ryanair it would always be the Company who picked up the tab for hotac in this case.

I was not a contractor (thank goodness) so cannot comment on your other queries.

[BOAC]

Yes, that is 'normal' of course, but in view of........................

[racedo]

I make no comment over the validity of the claim or the apology but I do know, for a fact, about another news publication apology and another airline (not RYR) which was made as it was cheaper than fighting it, and later events proved the publication correct but by then it was too late.

So provide a link and the full context of the unsubstantiated claim you are making.

The "I make no comment" but then "know for a fact" is a mealy mouthed way of claiming you believe a story proven to be a lie.

ST stated unequivocally that no such Spanish report existed and that has proven to be fact, it never existed, so thereby them quoting a non existent report as fact has shown them to be lying.

If such a report existed then clearly it would already be in the public domain but based on the numerous sources across the Industry it has never existed.

[Squawk-7600]

Good grief will you guys ever give this non stop Ryanair bashing a rest its just non stop, anything published you are looking for a way to get at them.

Ryanair is a very safe airline, it seems to sicken most of the posters on this forum, you would be thrilled to bits if they had a serious incident.

How about taking a chill pill before quoting somebody :mad: If you bothered to actually read posts you would have noticed that other than asking questions about how pay and rostering works, purely out of curiosity as it's good to know how what contracts are like in other carriers, I have NEVER mentioned Ryanair in this thread, never mind "bashing" them :mad:

For your illiterate information, the quote of mine you went to all the trouble to cut and paste was to correct a post made about it being "too late" for litigation relating to a previous settlement. In fact that's often not the case and I even provided an example that wasn't even aviation related! FFS!! :mad:

[box]

Dear Marco

Your first programme was based on no evidence whatsoever, other than false claims made by

unidentified persons in darkened rooms precisely so their false claims could not be

tested. This is a new low for so called "investigative journalism".

We note that your two new claims are equally untrue and unsupported by any factual

evidence whatsoever. We now answer these false claims as follows:

1. Since Ryanair pilots can only fly a max of 900 hours per year (an average of just

18 hours per week, compared to most peoples' 40 hours per week), any Ryanair pilots

(regardless of whether they are direct employees or contractors) that miss a flight due to

illness can easily replace those flights before the end of the year and so no pilots lose

any pay for being "unfit to fly". Ryanair also requires pilots to declare if they feel

unfit to fly in which case they will be replaced by other standby pilots and such

certifications happen routinely.

Please ask your anonymous contributors to provide evidence of their flight hours in the

last 12 months which will confirm that they suffered no loss of pay as a result of being

unfit to fly at any time. These claims are simply false which is why you have provided no

evidence to support them.

2. Your first programme was completely untrue. Ryanair's fuel policy allows pilots

to take as much fuel as they want, and neither you nor your anonymous contributors

provided any evidence to the contrary, or any evidence of this so called "pressure".

The only pressure placed on Ryanair pilots is to fly safely, which is why each Ryanair

captain has full discretion on how much fuel they take.

You have also been misled about Ryanair's fuel league tables which rank only fuel burn per

month and not fuel loads per flight. The sole purpose of these tables is to encourage

pilots to fly safely (i.e. at the correct heights and speeds), they do not rank fuel loads

or extra fuel taken.

As these false claims demonstrate, your first programme and your second programme lack any

evidence whatsoever and are based solely on false claims made by anonymous contributors

who are unwilling to identify themselves precisely because these claims are untrue.

The factual position is that Ryanair has an unblemished 28 year safety record, the only

pressure placed on our pilots is to fly safely and as confirmed by the recent

Irish/Spanish safety authority statement Ryanair's safety is "on a par with the safest

airlines in Europe."

[Squawk-7600]

Box, is this a quote from a person "SM" or are you that person?

Either way, this has to be the most extraordinary statement I have read in a long while:

1. Since Ryanair pilots can only fly a max of 900 hours per year (an average of just 18 hours per week, compared to most peoples' 40 hours per week), any Ryanair pilots (regardless of whether they are direct employees or contractors) that miss a flight due to illness can easily replace those flights before the end of the year and so no pilots lose any pay for being "unfit to fly". Ryanair also requires pilots to declare if they feel unfit to fly in which case they will be replaced by other standby pilots and such certifications happen routinely.

[dwshimoda]

You have also been misled about Ryanair's fuel league tables which rank only fuel burn per month and not fuel loads per flight. The sole purpose of these tables is to encourage pilots to fly safely (i.e. at the correct heights and speeds), they do not rank fuel loads or extra fuel taken.

How does that work then? I thought ultimately the Boeing perf figures would give you the best FL and speeds, not to mention the FMC. What am I missing that a fuel league table would add?

[golfyankeesierra]

How does that work then?
I think what he means is that if you don't fly at economical levels and machnr (but instead barberpole-speed at FL290, which gives you best TAS, because you want to get home early for dinner) it will show up at the fuel leagues tables.

But the question is: who ends up at the top of the fuel league?

Is that the one who uses the fewest tripfuel, or is it the one who takes the fewest extra (captain's-)fuel overall per month?

[the_stranger]

@Squawk-7600

This was the reply of ryanair in an email send to the maker of the show..

[aviationvictim]

I have to agree with squawk-7600 on this one. This is by far the most factual incorrect official statement to come out of an airline in many years. Block hours is confused with duty hours as duty hours for most airlines is maxed at 55 hours a week. I think someone from the PR-office will be looking for different employment soon.:D




1. Since Ryanair pilots can only fly a max of 900 hours per year (an average of just 18 hours per week, compared to most peoples' 40 hours per week), any Ryanair pilots (regardless of whether they are direct employees or contractors) that miss a flight due to illness can easily replace those flights before the end of the year and so no pilots lose any pay for being "unfit to fly". Ryanair also requires pilots to declare if they feel unfit to fly in which case they will be replaced by other standby pilots and such certifications happen routinely.

[victorc10]

The fuel table compares plog burn and actual burn for each calendar month and is influenced very heavily by the routes flown. Some routes consistently give savings of 500-1000kg, others you will be lucky to save 100kg. In general those at the bottom will include people who have had missed approaches, diversions etc and also people who have only flown a few sectors and thus not had the advantage of a spread of routes and averaging. So basically it isn't really that statistically interesting since it compares people with 4hrs and 115hrs.....

[BOAC]

2 points from me:

1) Is any effort made by Ryanair to ensure an 'evening out' of paid work over the year as per the PR response? I hear rumours that a form of 'victimisation' can occur (on a roster basis) whereby those who 'annoy' for whatever reason get little or no paid work on a particular roster. What, if any, system is in place to ensure that at the end of the roster year the income/flying duty has been levelled out?

2) Without knowledge of the algorithms involved in fuel league tables, they are to a large extent worthless. The BA ones had all the 'managers' who rarely night-stopped (leading to no early AM arrivals) and nearly always 'worked' AM and 'chose' often to fly in the afternoon when things were more 'settled', at the top of the tables, and those regularly facing 'peak time' arrivals towards the bottom.

I think we need to ensure that those seeking employment with Ryanair are fully aware of the treatment and T&C they can expect, probably via the 'Terms and Endearment' forum. Obviously the likelihood of self-funding accommodation and living expenses for a few days at a base with mostly unpaid standby duty there is a serious factor. Obviously the information posted must be accurate and truthful to avoid the RY pack of legal hounds, but it needs to be done to be fair to the newcomers, and if, of course, the potential employees decide not to join, there may be the need to improve current conditions to maintain a work-force.

I still have not had an answer from current employees as to whether they knew about these 'T&C' before they signed or whether there has been a 'change' since. Any replies will be treated in strict confidence and can be via email if desired.

[Aldente]

I have to agree with squawk-7600 on this one. This is by far the most factual incorrect official statement to come out of an airline in many years. Block hours is confused with duty hours as duty hours for most airlines is maxed at 55 hours a week. I think someone from the PR-office will be looking for different employment soon.

No chance!

There is no confusion- they know *exactly* what they are doing. McNamara (and O'Leary) have used this statement many times before to try and show to the general public pilots are spoilt brats who are overpaid and underworked. They both know full well how many duty hours the average pilot works per week (usually well over 40).

This statement is designed to deliberately antagonise the pilot workforce. It is typical of the spiteful untruthful statements made on a regular basis by the management but don't just take my word for it:-

"The truth and Ryanair are uncomfortable bedfellows"
Mr Justice Peter Kelly speaking in the High Court in Dublin, June 4th 2010

[fireflybob]

So if The Sunday Times have to make an apology and pay money to charity for making unsubstantiated statements why doesn't the same apply here?

Club together for an action?

[aviationvictim]

I agree with you Aldente. They normally have no problem with alternative versions of the truth. However this statement is so laughably incorrect that any just mediocre news-reporter can tear it apart.

MOL is normally more cunning than this..

[737Jock]

However this statement is so laughably incorrect that any just mediocre news-reporter can tear it apart.

But they don't, most reporters are poor...

[Aldente]

Seconded - nearly all the press take it at face value and report as such.

This then gives rise to Joe Public making comments such as these (from a Daily Mirror blog)

How awful - imagine having to work 900 hours in a year - that must be 18 hours a week - must be a push for him to sit down for that long. Imagine also being forced to take a holiday - how mean of Ryanair. Give me a break please! 500k public servants lose their jobs and the Mirror complains about someone being forced to work 900 hours!

[1stspotter]

Spanish TV channel Antena 3 will broadcast this Friday a program on Ryanair. The content of the programme is not announced but I am pretty sure it will not benefit Ryanair.

Ryanair, en el punto de mira del nuevo 'Equipo de investigación de La Sexta - Ecoteuve.es (http://ecoteuve.eleconomista.es/programas/noticias/4513968/01/13/Ryanair-en-el-punto-de-mira-del-nuevo-Equipo-de-investigacion-de-La-Sexta.html)

Annoucement of the programme and a very short teaser video. Guess it explains the content
Ryanair: al límite - laSexta (http://www.lasexta.com/programas/equipo-investigacion/noticias/ryanair-limite_2013010500028.html#capa_modulo_comentarios)


Ryanair has had a lot of negative news in Spanish press. The unions in Spain do not like the lowcost carrier for several reasons. One of the reasons is the lose of jobs of carriers like Iberia. Guess they blaim Ryanair the bankruptcy of Spanair as well.

The manager of the news desk of Antena 3 is the wife of former CEO of Spanair and Vueling, Carlos Muñoz

Vueling Airlines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vueling_Airlines)

[1stspotter]

The crewcode of Ryanair pilots is shown on the fuel league list as well as the base.
Can a Rynair pilot easily identify their co-workers by the crewcode? (something like WQEWS

[Squawk-7600]

Out of curiosity, and just trying to follow the logic of the response regarding hours flown, how many hours per year are you guys at Ryanair doing? From that response it means you must all be up at 900 hrs consistently.

[SD.]

FO average is 700 - 850, CPT are up to the 850 - 900

Crewcode is made up from your forename and surname.
Eg Joe Bloggs would be BLOGJO

[Zipster]

True we can only "fly" 900 hours a year, however.

When he says "flying" he actually means the block times which are limited to a maximum of 900 hours a year (JAA rules). What he doesn´t say is that before each duty a minimum of 45 minutes are spent and a minimum of 30 minutes are also spent post flight. Add to that all turnaround times between flights, simulator checks, travelling and other time spent. Saying pilots in Ryanair only fly 900 hours a year is correct. But at the same time misleading, especially for someone not involved in the airline industry.

It is a bit like saying someone working in an office is "working" as long as they type on the keyboard and talking on the phone doesn´t count.

[1stspotter]

Posting from the terms and endearment forum
http://www.pprune.org/7450681-post18.html
Average of 55 hours per month at 60 euro per hour for FO.

I also read at another forum some FO fly 30 hours a month and make no hours during 5 day standby

[Facelookbovvered]

I cannot see anything changing MOL is way to ruthless and is always one step ahead of sloppy journalists and politicians. He and his team not only think the unthinkable but implement it.

He is on record of stating, amongst other things, that pilots are over paid, its that simple, they will push and push until something gives, people leave, so what, its a revenue opportunity to take another barrow load of €'s off of some starry eyed cadet and as long as he uses that cost advantage to keep headline fares below the competition he's on a winner and by killing the competition what choice do they have anyway?

So nothing will change, at least in the short to medium term,but over time the advantage that FR have enjoyed from the Hollywood Boeing deal will decrease, i think its very unlikely he will get the same type of bargain again from them or Airbus, question is does he have the ball's to buy Chinese?

[fitliker]

Can you name any large aircraft that does not have Chinese parts in it ?
You are oblivious to the supply chain if you think that the airlines are not already buying Chinese.

Does the flight crew have to pay to use the toilets on Ryan Air flights ?
If not, why not ?
And how many bags are they allowed ?
If they only hired pilots that weigh under 120 lbs,they would save a fortune on fuel every year.
I am surprised that they still hire anyone over 150 lbs:}:}

[Sober Lark]

It is apparent there are not very many (if any) 'real' Ryanair pilots discussing the demerits of working for said company which infers the vast majority are indeed satisfied in their work.

[Squawk-7600]

It is apparent there are not very many (if any) 'real' Ryanair pilots discussing the demerits of working for said company which infers the vast majority are indeed satisfied in their work.

It infers nothing of the sort. Given the sticky at the top of the board states categorically that the site owners will NOT guarantee anonymity there's a very good chance that anyone with anything negative to say about their employer will be extremely careful in how they may go about it, up to and including silence!

What is a "real" Ryanair pilot anyway?

[BBK]

Squawk 7600

To answer your question how about the chap who appeared in the documentary clearly identifiable.

[1stspotter]

It is apparent there are not very many (if any) 'real' Ryanair pilots discussing the demerits of working for said company which infers the vast majority are indeed satisfied in their work.

Soberlark: quite a few posters on Pprune post information which have such detailled and consistent information that I believe they are flying for Ryanair.

Also mind not all pilots feel the need to share information with the rest of the world on a public forum. There is a dedicated website for Ryanair pilots setup long time ago for a reason.

Also each and every Ryanair pilot has it ows experience with the company. Some, especially those longtimers with a Ryanair contract, are happy and earning good money. Some on a Brookfield contract might have a complete different experience.

FAQ (http://www.repaweb.org/faq.html)

REPAweb was set up (in 2004) because it was recognised that Ryanair pilots face a unique series of challenges, including a very specific management style and corporate culture. As a result it was concluded that the pilot employees required a secure forum on which they could anonymously join together to discuss issues of mutual interest.

It was also recognised that Ryanair has a unique pilot (and cabin-crew) workforce that has characteristics that cross traditional Pilot Association boundaries. For this reason it was realised that the existing model of representation is not longer valid for the Ryanair pan-European pilot workforce.

[Sober Lark]

Squawk-7600 - sorry, to clarify what I meant by 'real' that is they are genuine and authentic postings by Ryanair pilots. 1stspotter, I see your point but on such a serious matter as the Dutch / Spanish brought up you'd imagine those happy and with a clear conscience in their jobs at Ryanair would be prepared to support their employer in greater numbers than experienced.

[lederhosen]

A Ryanair captain flying 800 hours will probably actually work around 1600 hours in a year. Take off a couple of months for holidays, training and sickness etc. and you are left with about 40 working weeks. So half of Ryanair's pilots are making around 100,000 euros a year working a forty hour week. The occasional one posts that it is really not that bad and its true.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

But they could actually do that much duty every year without flying couldn't they. How much do they earn then?

[SD.]

Compared to an easyJet Milan based captain, doing the same job earns around 35k more and receives the associated benefits and perks.


If you ask a pilot with a young family, that's based 1500 miles away because there's not a fair and transparent basing system, with no chance of any annual leave in the peak times, sat in a hotel on unpaid standby duty. He is now worrying if the Italian tax man will come knocking on the door, life is completely different eh Lederhosen?

Still, you're alright though :ok:

[1stspotter]

I was wonderig is any limit excists on the percentage of contracted pilots any Irish registered airlines uses.

There is none.

This is what Irish Aviation Authority says.

"The Irish Aviation Authority’s Safety Regulatory Division is responsible for the safety of the total aviation system in Ireland, for the licensing of pilots, aircraft maintenance engineers and air traffic controllers and for the safety regulatory oversight of Irish registered aircraft, wherever they are operated.

It is responsible for ensuring that all aviation activities conducted by Irish air operators and maintenance organisations are in accordance with ICAO, EU and national requirements. In the case of airline pilots operating for an airline with an Irish AOC (Air Operators Certificate) the IAA is responsible to ensure that they are appropriately licensed and rated for the operations in which they are engaged.
The employment contracts between the pilots and the operators is outside the remit of the Irish Aviation Authority.”

[lederhosen]

There are plenty of downsides to Ryanair as to just about any outfit. The major upside is the probability of continued employment.

You can cherry pick better terms and conditions. By all accounts Easyjet is good for those with an established career as is Lord Spandex Monster's mob if you are not on a seasonal contract. But you need to be in the right place, Dortmund and Madrid spring to mind as far as Easyjet is concerned.

For Ryanair contractors based away from home unsure about tax and needing a regular income it is certainly not all positive.

Equally if you factor in possible upsides e.g time to upgrade, likelyhood that the airline will still be around in five years etc. then the numbers are not bad for example when compared to Air Berlin. There is no shortage of other shaky candidates.

I suspect there is a vast silent majority who are perfectly happy. Although to be honest most of us love to have a good moan.

[1stspotter]

A bit offtopic: just in the Netherlands there are 1100 pilots fresh from school without a job and a debt of 150k to 200k euro.

[1stspotter]

Quote:
A bit offtopic: just in the Netherlands there are 1100 pilots fresh from school without a job and a debt of 150k to 200k euro.
And I guarantee you that, even after watching this program on TV, every single one of them would take a job with RYR if offered one in the morning.

The problem for those is: after school they first need to do a type rating at Ryanair. That will costs them another 45K euro.

This will not guarantee a job at Ryanair. And IF you get a job, you will be paid for each hour flown. No pay for standby hours. You could easily be based at an airport far away etc etc. And in winter even less flying hours.

I am not so sure that all will accept a TR at FR and get more debts.

[RAT 5]

There are plenty of downsides to Ryanair as to just about any outfit. The major upside is the probability of continued employment.

A friend of mine, on the inside, tells that contracts are for 5 years. Some of his colleagues refused to sign the latest version for a variety of reasons, one being it was unreasonable in their eyes, and so were no longer required. He tells there are rumours others, after the 5 year term, were not offered new contracts even though there is still fresh recruitment. If this is true your statement needs questioning.

[1stspotter]

It would be interesting to know what the content of the contract between pilot and Brookfield / Storm McGinley is. Guess something like how much is paid per block hour per experience level. And for sure what costs are to be paid by the pilot.
And something about how many days of flying and how many days off. Something like you can request a preference for a base but it is up to Ryanair to decide where you will be based, for how long etc.
Also for sure how much 'management fee' is deducted from the salary which is for the accountant. 2% it is I believe!

Does the contract say something about a guaranteed minimum number of flying hours per year?

some info on contracts here.
http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/486572-strom-mcginley-ryr.html

A 5 year contract is what I understand.

[Squawk-7600]

Also for sure how much 'management fee' is deducted from the salary which is for the accountant. 2% it is I believe!

A "management fee" from one's salary? What do you mean???? :confused:

[Zipster]

The management fee is the fee each pilot on certain contracts pays or used to pay in order for their accountant to handle payroll, tax etc and a place as a director in the accountants prepared limited companies.

3% plus VAT. Total around 4%.

[Zipster]

@1st Spotter i know Storm have a minimum 30 hours per month but you get 10€ less per hour as a result. Salary 60, 75, 82 for F/O and 120, 130, 138 or 145 for Cpt. F/O figures are based on hours flown in the company and Captain what was on offer when you signed the contract.

1600 hours work a year seems much more accurate. But we need to deduct social security before we do anything in order to get a salary figure to compare to peers etc. In Italy i understand it is around 35%.

So instead of the very pleasant 900 hours a year making 100.000€.

You actually work more like 1600 hours and make around 65,000€ if you´re able to collect the 100k to start with.

[SD.]

They use the same principal with us now, as they started with pax.

FLY TO DUBLIN FOR €1.99

Add EU levy, admin fee, taxes, check-in fee, bla bla bla and that €1.99 turns into €100.

FLY FOR RYANAIR €120,000 salary on a 5/4 roster

Sounds lovely, but read between the lines and you get a poor deal compared to similar operators.

[Squawk-7600]

The management fee is the fee each pilot on certain contracts pays or used to pay in order for their accountant to handle payroll, tax etc and a place as a director in the accountants prepared limited companies.

3% plus VAT. Total around 4%.

I see. So can you set up your own company and bypass this "management fee" by handling your own accounts?

[Squawk-7600]

Thank you for putting this very thorough information up. While I will never fly for Ryanair myself, I'm still curious to here how the structure works. Sorry if I contributed to the jumping around, however it really is an extraordinary arrangement!

[Sober Lark]

So an individual has to set up as a Limited Company. There are supposed to be great financial advantages in that. Give us the name of such a company and for €3 we'll have a look at the accounts?

[1stspotter]

To get an understanding why pilots working for Ryanair are afraid to post details on their experiences and T&C here a link to a thread on pprune in 2006.

This will add to the understanding why pilots did their story on tv while being anonymous. If their names will be revealed they will lose their job. Chances to get a new job in Europe are very slim.

Ryanair went to High Court to force the website owners of Repaweb to identify the names of persons who posted on this website. Repa is Ryanair European Pilots' Association. A gathering for all Ryanair pilots, permanent or with Brookfield.

Ryanair loses legal bid to identify website critics [Archive] - PPRuNe Forums (http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-234377.html)

[lederhosen]

Just for the sake of clarity I said `probability of continued employment'. The point is that Ryanair as an airline is likely to be a long term survivor. It is possible that you as an individual may cease to be employed but improbable that all pilots will be made redundant.

Ryanair when copying Southwest decided to leave out the touchy feely corporate culture. Whether this is a reflection of O'Leary's character or just more typical of airline management in general I leave for you to decide. Certainly the fallacy that everything was rosy before the LCCs showed up is well and truly put to rest by (pprune contributor) Alan de Tourtoulon's book describing his early days in BEA, and which I can thoroughly recommend.

[lederhosen]

I would suggest that is good advice at least while the beloved leader is in power. He did suggest what seems a very long time ago that he was going to let someone else have a go. Things seem to have gone a bit quiet on that front. However the probability of a more enlightened regime really is unlikely.

[victorc10]

Actually no, there is no issue being at bottom of fuel league.

[Aldente]

Depends on which Base Captain you have ......

[1stspotter]

Ryanair claims to get 15 % more bookings in the last two weeks from the Netherlands since the broadcast of the two programmes by KRO Reporter about the fuel policy and two pilots confessing they once flew while not fit to.

A Ryanair spokesman said:
"The KRO programme was free publicity. We are gratefull for the attention""

Personally I have serious doubts about this statement. The statement cannot he checked for truth.

source:
Ryanair en 6 andere slechtnieuwsprofiteurs - Business - MT Management Team, de business uit het nieuws (http://www.mt.nl/332/72632/business/ryanair-en-6-andere-slechtnieuwsprofiteurs.html?utm_source=nieuwsbrief-mt&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=onze-maakindustrie-redt-de-export-6-profiteurs-van-slecht-nieuws-bob-communiceert-over-de-grens-775)

[1stspotter]

I understand the Spanish TV programma LaSexta will tonight show a Ryanair pilot telling that he is under pressure to take as less fuel as possible.
I guess he will be anonymous as well.
Interview with MOL will be in the programme as well.

taken from:
'Equipo de investigación' se estrena en laSexta con "Ryanair, al límite" - FormulaTV (http://www.formulatv.com/noticias/28806/equipo-de-investigacion-arranca-lasexta-ryanair-al-limite/)


Research Team 'lands this Friday, January 11, in the prime time of laSexta with a program that will analyze the controversy over the safety of Ryanair flights. The program from Antena 3 will air at 22:20 pm, just after 'laSexta column.' Voices of the airline industry complained that the company operates "on edge", a complaint also shared some of their employees. For the first time an active driver of the airline has on camera that the company undergoes to save fuel pressures. The program hosted by Gloria Serra has accessed documents that show these pressures.

Three emergency landings due to lack of fuel to the airline put in the spotlight
Consumer associations are overwhelmed by complaints from passengers of Ryanair. The company owes more than a million euros in compensation not paid. Meanwhile, autonomous regions and municipalities have spent years promoting the development of the airline advertising contracts millionaires. 'Research Team' will enter the headquarters of the company in Ireland and find that saving philosophy prevails in Ryanair. The program interviews Michael O'Leary, the controversial director of the company, on the latest incidents and allegations that call into question the safety of the low cost.

[Zipster]

I see. So can you set up your own company and bypass this "management fee" by handling your own accounts?

As far as i know this is not possible. I believe you need to choose one of the accountants 1st Spotter mentioned earlier in his post. Otherwise i doubt you would be able to work as a service provider for Ryanair via Brookfield Aviation via your limited company arrangement in Ireland.

[1stspotter]

I saw a short preview of the TV programme broadcasted last night at Spanish channel LaSexta. The showed an anonymous pilot of Ryanair. The preview also showed a letter which was not shown in the KRO and WDR programmes.

It also shows some customer complains.

Also Mr. Cullen of IALPA was interviewed.

Without watching the whole programme this seems to me more a sensational programme like UK scandal press than a serious, professional made programme. Alone the sensational background music shows the true intention of the programme.

the Ryanair letter says:
The Voyage Report (VR) indicated you were the commander of the ... FR. The VR shows that you carried xxx kg in excess of FPL/Block fuel without providing any explaination for the additional fuel carried.

Ops manual part A 8.1.7.8.6 sets out approved procedures for the uplift and usage of fuel.
Where departure fuel in more than 300 kg in excess of flight plan fuel an explaination for the uplift shall be recordered on the Voyage Report.

In accordance with the requirements of Operations Manual Part A you have to explain your decision to carry fuel in excess.

The pilot explains that the above letter is said to be added to the personal file of the pilot.

This is also written in the same letter. See a screendump of the letter here
http://s14.postimage.org/6ry3fzult/copy_of_letter_in_personal_file.jpg

I can imagine if a pilot is working as a contractor (which >70% of the pilots is) a letter in your personal file is not something 'nice'

On the other hand: I understand that writing an explaination on the VR for taking over 300 kg like 'due to weather' is okay and no questions are asked.

According to this article the programme also mentioned the fuel league
Un comandante de Ryanair: «Te presionan y te recuerdan que estás quemando demasiado combustible» - ABC.es (http://www.abc.es/sociedad/20130111/abci-ryanair-equipo-investigacion-201301112152.html#.UPEubIAXJSU.twitter)

I have not seen the complete programme.
preview :
Ryanair: al límite - laSexta (http://www.lasexta.com/programas/equipo-investigacion/noticia/ryanair-limite_2013010500028.html)

complete programme here
La Sexta - Vídeos de Equipo de Investigación TV - 11 de Enero de 2013 (http://www.lasexta.com/videos/equipo-investigacion/2013-enero-11-2013011100051.html)

[1stspotter]

From what I understand:

All Ryanair should explain on the Voyage Report the reason why they deciced to take more than 300 kg than listed on flightplan.
What I understand from postings at Pprune.org is that no questions are asked when a valid reason has been filled in on the VR.

If, as shown in the letter, a captain did *not* fill in a reason for taking over 300kg on the Voyage Report, he receives a standard letter that he should comply to the SOP of Ryanair. And that the *failure to explain* is added to his personal file.

[Bengerman]

Oh well, that's ok then. Carry on O'Leary.

[Sober Lark]

Then in future lock up anyone from any airline who ever has to divert because of a fuel emergency.

[Good memories]

Maybe the whole debate would be clearer if we stop writing about kg reserve fuel and start writing in minutes reserve fuel.

Good Flying!

[BOAC]

Exactly how many minutes more of 'life' would 300kg of fuel get you in a RYR aircraft - as a 737 pilot I would have thought you would known?:confused:

[737Jock]

Now thats good information! So if this is true RYR was disciplining crews for taking more taxi fuel then RYR put on the plog, even though this fuel was required for planning purposes.

Frankly this is ridiculous, as commanders we are allowed and indeed required to change the fuel numbers on the plog to reflect the actual planning situation. The plog is only the idea of a computer, thus thee can be mistakes, its not neccesarily a reflection of the actual planning conditions.
The number that roles out after adjustments is the minumum fuel required, on top of that extra fuel can be added.
I see no reason whatsoever to explain adjusting incorrect numbers!

[737Jock]

Ryanair base captain is not management? If a BC oversteps the mark I woukd expect his seniors to intervene! As such...

[ryanmaverick]

took 1000 kg more last week......im still alive...

[1stspotter]

Michael O'Leary visited Maastricht Aachen Airport today, one of the new bases of Ryanair. They have been operating for a while from this airport in the south of the Netherlands.

O'Leary announced Ryanair will take legal action against the Dutch TV programme KRO Reporter. Reporter spent two episodes on Ryanair. As well as a item in the regular news programme Brandpunt.

A small part of the press conference of MOL can be watched online. As usual all critics are rubbish. "KLM Pilots talk rubbish. If you are a big airline there will always someone against you"

[video] Baas Ryanair: 'we blijven in Maastricht en de KRO is rubbish' - Maastricht - dichtbij.nl - Maastricht (http://www.dichtbij.nl//maastricht/reizen/artikel/2604784/video-baas-ryanair-we-blijven-in-maastricht-en-de-kro-is-rubbish.aspx?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

Big part of the press conference was about the statements done by KRO Reporter. MOL showed a slide and the content is this:

False claims:
Ryanair planes operate with "unsafe amount of fuel" False
Ryanair pilots are "victims of a strict cost save policy which leads to a decrease to safety. False
Ryanair pilots fly when unfit to fly, risking passengers' lives" . False
Valencia 26 Jul "three distress calls due to lack of fuel " False

Facts
Irish and Spain Govts confirm Ryanair's safetly is "on par with the safest airlines in Europe"
No pressure on Ryanair pilots - Captain decides & takes as much file as they need
Pilots routinely call in sick and replace by stand-bys
No.1 priority is safety - 28 year outstanding & unblemsihed safety record

I am wondering why " Valencia 26 Jul three distress calls due to lack of fuel " is stated false by Ryanair.
There *were* three mayday calls by Ryanair. And a forth by LAN Chile not mentioned in the programme.

Some more info from Dutch newspaper Telegraaf
Ryanair neemt juridische stappen tegen KRO - Binnenland | Het laatste nieuws uit Nederland leest u op Telegraaf.nl [binnenland] (http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/21224271/__Ryanair_neemt_stappen_tegen_KRO__.html)

MOL requested the four pilots who were anonymous to make known their names. MOL guarantees they will not be sanctioned. Using their names MOL can prove they were allowed to call sick and ahd enough fuel in their aircraft.

According to MOL Ryanair's image has been damaged because of the news of KRO Reporter. But the passengers did not run away from the airline.

[Piltdown Man]

Just don't mention this one! (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/ryanair-captain-flew-unstable-approach-days-after-sons-death-327687/)

[LLuke]

I am not familiar with the exact in and outs of Ryanair, but isn't there somewhere a union or other legal vehicle that represents Ryanair pilots, but is fully independent from Ryanair, and can backup or deny the claims? Compare differences with other airliners?

I agree with Ryanair that the opinion of one anonymous pilot about safety doesn't mean anything... Proving claims true or false will be difficult.

[Aldente]

I see in the video clip of the press conference at Maastricht Michael O'Leary complains that Ryanair weren't given a chance to respond before the programme was broadcast.

Emails between KRO (the Dutch TV company) and Ryanair clearly show that not to be the case:-

http://content1d.omroep.nl/e6ccf2413dedbe57565b3383446740be/50f86ec7/kro/reporter/mailwisseling_reporter_ryanair.pdf


:=

[BEagle]

According to MOL Ryanair's image has been damaged because of the news of KRO Reporter.

Perhaps if he looked in the mirror, he might find other reasons?

[luoto]

Just how "independent" is the IAA and how well regarded is it by similar bodies? I don't know but I could see how in a small country where many interests are involved there can be "invisible pressures" and people perhaps putting a better shine on things than they might admit. Heck it happens in this country too... we have no corruption (or low corruption) officially but we all know that things are not as they always seem.

Note, for the avoidance of doubt, I make no assertions concerning RYR and the IAA, but am interested in just how robust the IAA is. To use a UK example, in the financial industry, the FSA is hardly viewed as a shining example of regulatory competence.

[Aldente]

About as "robust" as a chocolate fire guard.

[Sober Lark]

Reading between the lines, Ryanair have stated they have not been harmed by this TV report. Therefore their choice to let the publicity run out of steam of its own accord rather than the alternative of going to court to unmask the anonymous pilots and make them responsible for what they say makes perfect sense.

[1stspotter]

KRO had an interview with Michael O'Leary last Wednesday. The interview will be about the claim by Reporter that Ryanair puts pressure on pilots to take as less fuel as possible.

The interview can be seen at the Dutch tv this Sunday (January 20) in KRO Brandpunt at 22:15.
Shortly thereafter the programme will be available on internet. As the Dutch have subtitles the interview is understanble by english speakers.

Today Ryanair published their part of the story of email correspondance between them and KRO Reporter.
emails can be read here
Ryanair Publishes All Of Its Correspondence With KRO (http://www.ryanair.com/nl/nieuws/ryanair-publishes-all-of-its-correspondence-with-kro)

Ryanair Publishes All Of Its Correspondence With KRO


LETTERS CONFIRM KRO PROGRAMME 'COVER UP' OF EVIDENCE OF RYANAIR’S SAFETY AND FUEL COMPLIANCE


Ryanair, Europe’s only ultra-low cost airline, today (18 Jan) published all of its correspondence with Dutch TV station KRO after KRO falsely claimed that Ryanair failed to respond to queries from the KRO REPORTER TV show.


Ryanair now calls on KRO to explain why over the course of two 1 hour TV programmes it:


1.failed to highlight the joint Irish and Spanish Aviation Authority statement (18th Sept) which confirmed that Ryanair’s safety “ is on a par with the safest airlines in Europe” and


2.failed to quote from the official IAA Report into the 3 Valencia weather diversions on the 26th July last, which confirmed that each of the 3 aircraft: a.took extra fuel,
b.flew for 1 hour more than planned, and
c.each of the 3 pilots fully complied with EU operating and safety regulations.

Ryanair believes that KRO provided no evidence to support the false claims made by unidentified individuals, and KRO should now explain why two 1 hour television programmes failed to provide any balance or fairness, and covered up the above evidence of Ryanair’s long standing and continuing safety compliance.

Ryanair has instructed its Dutch lawyers to initiate legal proceedings against these two KRO television programmes which fell well short of any normal standard of journalistic fairness, balance or objectivity.

[Sober Lark]

Just in passing. Tonight I was booking with KLM and they invited me to complete a survey after I had finished. One of the questions - "The following list of statements describes different attitudes towards travelling. For each statement please indicate how strong you agree or disagree.

I think low-cost airlines cannot provide the same safety standards as the major airlines"

I found the layout of the questionnaire made it easier to tick the box 'agree completely' rather than 'disagree completely'. Seems a bit double dutch but what a question to be asking passengers.

[1stspotter]

Quite a few statements made by Ryanair in the past can easily be identified as false:

One of the statements is that the airline stated KRO Reporter did not give Ryanair a chance to respond to the accusations of anonymous pilots.

Well, the airline revealed today their own rubbish. On the Ryanair website is clearly seen Stephen McNamara does to respond to two requests by KRO Reporter for an interview. Also the email correspondance shows the airline did have the opportunity to respond. Also the response was shown in the programme.
The same email correspondance is available since December 28 on the KRO Reporter website.

Sad way to do your PR.

[Aldente]

Strange how MOL is protesting that Ryanair had not been given a chance to take part in the programme when (as previously mentioned) emails show otherwise.

http://content1a.omroep.nl/7ba674acfcfc35fc30f7346936634367/50f7f004/kro/reporter/mailwisseling_reporter_ryanair.pdf

Relevant extracts from emails sent to Ryanair by one of KRO’sproduction team clearly gives Ryanair several opportunities to take part in the programme. I think they were more than fair:-

13th Dec

As you requested,hereby a description of the topics we would like to discuss with Mr.O’Leary.

With regards to Mr.O’Leary’s time, we would of course be coming to him, so it would not cost him more than half an hour.

17th Dec

We hope you are willing to react to these issues in an interview. If you choose not to, we will give you the possibility to react by e-mail to the specific statements later on, before we broadcast our documentary.

19th Dec

Of course, we still offer you the possibility to react to the pilot's statements in an official interview.

21st Dec

Unfortunately,Ryanair did not want to react to our documentary in a television interview.As promised, we give you the opportunity to react to our program by e-mail.

Another own goal by Mr McNamara!

:D

[Hunting 4 Airbridge]

I remember the Ryr rep going mad when we tried to taxi his 737-200 to the compass space for engine runs, we had to tow it there and then were allowed on 15 mins fuel after a C check, we literally threw him out and carried on...horrible airline even back then and nothing had changed

[RAT 5]

I have an acquaintance who is obsessed with cost cutting in their house and life in general. It's not much fun over there. It has become like an eating disorder; it is addictive. Cost cutting can be like that; it becomes the total focus and is often only good in the short term. Sometimes it ends up costing you more than it saves, but that might become apparent a short while in the future. However, with some intelligent forethought, it could have been anticipated and avoided. One other trouble with manic cost cutting is it is often perpetuated by the very top man who holds the power reigns. They go unchallenged and those around then watch as the body of the business starts to wither on the vine. The obsessive cost cutting reaped rewards and the profit curve rose upwards. It then started to turn over and downwards, but was not yet ringing any alarm bells. Those who could see the trend remained silent. When the bubble burst it was too late. The times when increased investment would have bought increased gains went un-noticed in the fog of cuts and more cuts. An addiction does that and then it's too late.
Will this happen here? The market will tell us in the future. It's more than sad that any company making continuing large annual profit over a 5 year period can see it as equitable not to increase its staff's remuneration over the same period. What will be required to spread some of the wealth amongst the workers? When will enough be enough in profit? An addict never knows that answer.

[1stspotter]

Even the members of the board of Ryanair do not like the way Michael O'Leary communicates with others.

Ryanair raps O'Leary for 'pathetic personal abuse' after branding aviation commissioner a 'village idiot' - National News - Independent.ie (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ryanair-raps-oleary-for-pathetic-personal-abuse-after-branding-aviation-commissioner-a-village-idiot-3358001.html)

[1stspotter]

Just saw a very interesting interview between KRO Reporter and Michael O'Leary. MOL accepted the interview on the condition KRO would do no cutting in the interview.

The interview can be watched here. It is in english language with Dutch subtitles
Brandpunt - Confrontatie met Ryanair (http://brandpunt.kro.nl/seizoenen/2013/afleveringen/20-01-2013/fragmenten/confrontatie_met_ryanair)

The winner was clearly MOL. Lots of Tweets saying MOL was Mike Tyson versus some schoolboy.

MOL said those four anonymous pilots were not his pilots. He said there were four mayday calls at Valencia and said LAN Chile landed with 10 minutes of remaining fuel.
<edit: not true. Lan Chile aircraft had 2100 kg of remaining fuel after landing, final fuel reserve is 2800 kg. Makes a remaining fuel of around 22 minutes. >

He said the fuel league lists do not show how much fuel a captain loads but shows the fuelburn over a month period.
He told about a letter to pilots in which they are encouraged to take extra fuel for weather and diversions.

He said there is no law which says an aircraft must have at landing at least 30 minutes of fuel.

KRO Brandpunt published this evening two new documents on their site:
first a document showing European aviation law proving 30 minutes of fuel must be available after landing.
Secondly an internal document made by the Spanish ATC about the situation in Valencia. The document is available in Dutch and Spanish language

Brandpunt - Documenten bij uitzendingen Ryanair (http://brandpunt.kro.nl/seizoenen/2013/afleveringen/20-01-2013/fragmenten/confrontatie_met_ryanair/documenten_bij_uitzendingen_ryanair)

[Sober Lark]

Methinks he doth protest too much
I'd say hell is empty and all the devils are here David.

[RAT 5]

IMHO the problem is perception. It is difficult to divert & reverse, quickly, deep seated perception with facts: it takes a concerted campaign of PR and insistent factual presentation to overturn a strong perception. This difficulty can be enforced if the person involved cries wolf too often and is perceived, or worse, to be economic with the truth on a regular basis. When they are telling the truth no-one believes them and it is an uphill struggle of their own making to get the message across.
What goes around..............

[BOAC]

At the time of the occurrence, many airlines REQUIRED their crew to declare an emergency (PAN) if they anticipated landing with less than reserve fuel. It is really not sensible to wait until you are! Now (wef 15 Nov 2012) PAN has changed in ICAO to a 'Minimum Fuel" call.

[Juan Tugoh]

While the above may be true for the letter of the JAR ops law, company rules may override this, eg rules that state that should a commander thinks that they are in danger of landing with less than reserve they shall declare a PAN, when they know they will land with less than reserve then they shall declare a MAYDAY. So you make an approach expecting to land with reserve +5 minutes fuel, do you have to declare an emergency? If you go-around from this approach do you then wait until you hit reserve before declaring a MAYDAY or say something earlier to gain some priority and avoid making a poor situation worse. Letter of the law or airmanship?

This post refers to a previous post that quoted JAR Ops that has now been erased.

[BOAC]

But don't forget being sharp and using the warning system to ATC as above. It's legal!

[azpil]

Fr ask you to Say why you are taking extra fuel. In 7 year.s i took always What i want and i Never heard something about.

[RAT 5]

We are back to the concept of perception. There are many low experienced captains in RYR who have been born & bred within that culture. I can only imagine what the command course has to say about fuel in its training. These guys have not been round the block. From asking senior F/O's, in various airlines, "what fuel we should take?" I've often received a mix of blank stares, "the captain always decides", or some finger in the wind calculation. The education was not there to make a reasoned choice, nor was it encouraged. It is easy to say "take what you want, just justify it." That is the correct culture, but you have to have the gumption, experience and courage to make those decisions. That's what you are paid for; correct decisions. Is that the case in your company? If the airlines are now going to upgrade captains with less experience than was common for an FO hiring some years ago they need a very in-depth command course with many 'what if' scenario discussions. They will not have seen too much in their 4 years. A classroom discussion is better than nothing. That is, of course, if the command course is given by one of the 'old farts' who have seen quite a lot of it. There's more to being a captain than an ace at SOP's.

[Aldente]

Not many "old farts" doing the training in Ryanair these days (probably all gone to Emirates). Check out the link below from the careers section of the Ryanair website and see how rapidly guys are promoted to a training position.

I joined Ryanair in 2003 as a cadet with a total time of 200 hours........
then:-
After upgrading and achieving 500 PIC hours on type I applied for a Type Rating Examiner (TRE) position. I am now a Type Rating Instructor/Type Rating Examiner and a Line Training Captain

500 hours PIC in Ryanair can be as little as 6 months.

Here's the link in full - judge for yourselves.....

Careers in travel - Pilot Recruitment (http://www.ryanair.com/en/careers/job/10002)

:)

[Piltdown Man]

In my eyes, the KRO reporter looked a complete ****. Firstly, he assumed that his facts were correct. His first stumbling block was the (30 minutes) final reserve fuel. It has to be there only before departure. It can be burnt. If it looks like you are going to burn it, you declare an emergency. The RYR guys in question did just that. As for extra fuel, it generally only ever extends the holding time. It's a commercial risk, not a safety one. It's the job of the pilots to manage these risks. As for the fuel league tables, who knows? If they are for fuel burnt (which I suspect they are are), then again MOL scores a point. If they are about carrying extra fuel, then that's different but again, is that a safety issue? It's only when guys are fired as a result of being on the wrong end of a table that it becomes a safety issue. Finally, you have to be very naive to believe MOL would accept anybody's word that the guys in the darkened rooms were his pilots. You can not publicly criticise MOL AND keep your job.

PM

[Squawk-7600]

In my eyes, the KRO reporter looked a complete ****. Firstly, he assumed that his facts were correct. His first stumbling block was the (30 minutes) final reserve fuel. It has to be there only before departure. It can be burnt.

Is that what OPS 1.375 (b) 1. says?

[Aldente]

Finally, you have to be very naive to believe MOL would accept anybody's word that the guys in the darkened rooms were his pilots. You can not publicly criticise MOL AND keep your job.

And what about the clearly, identifiable and *named* ex RYR captain that also appeared in a "brightly lit room" then? Others on this forum and elsewhere have confirmed his credentials.

The interviewer missed a trick there and didn't even ask about him.

[BOAC]

Squawk-7600 we always seem to go round in circles on this! MOL is technically correct - there is no 'legal requirement' to have reserve fuel on landing. As many have said, it is a 'legal requirement' to load it before departure. Why not actually read and quote 1.375 (see ii 2 below)? There you can see that is is a 'legal requirement' to manage the fuel en-route so as to 'expect' to land with a minimum of reserves, BUT if things go wrong, you declare an emergency, and then quite 'legally' you will land with what you have. No-one yet has found a way to fill up RyanAir 737s in flight.

1.375 b 2

2. however, if, as a result of an in-flight fuel check, the expected usable fuel remaining on arrival at the destination aerodrome is less than:

(i) the required alternate fuel plus final reserve fuel, the commander must take into account the traffic and the operational conditions prevailing at the destination aerodrome, at the destination alternate aerodrome and at any other adequate aerodrome, in deciding whether to proceed to the destination aerodrome or to divert so as to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel, or

(ii) the final reserve fuel if no alternate aerodrome is required, the commander must take appropriate action and proceed to an adequate aerodrome so as to perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel;

The underlined are the 'legal requirements' in flight. In ii the 'appropriate action' includes an emergency declaration. Can we put this one to bed now?

[737Jock]

You forgot to underline some minor details BOAC:

perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel

perform a safe landing with not less than final reserve fuel

So don't land with less than final reserve fuel! I don't see how that makes final reserve usable from an inflight fuel planning point of view, or how it makes the reporter incorrect.
There thus is a legal requirement to land with final reserve intact, in both cases.

[BOAC]

737jock - I do not understand your point. You have (you say) been flying long enough to know that however many nasty grabbing lawyers are circling, sh*t does happen and you can do NOTHING about it providing you have taken the appropriate action.

How do you propose, 'legally', to ENSURE final reserve will always be there whatever happens? Of course it is 'useable' - whatever is the point of carrying it if you cannot 'use it' when you need to? You might as well stick on another 1000kg of load and carry no reserve. You are not allowed to 'plan' to use it. You have lost me.

[Squawk-7600]

Hello BOAC, thank you for providing that information. The section you quoted provides the action to be taken in the event of a specific scenario (the calculated useable fuel on landing, at the nearest adequate aerodrome where a safe landing can be performed, is less than final reserve fuel). Can you also now please advise where in EU-OPS it states that the declared emergency overrides the requirements you pointed out, instead of merely that the aircraft is not complying with their requirements? Point 2 states "However if, as a result ...", does the requirement to declare an emergency also begin with a similar "However if as a result ...."?

[BOAC]

Can you also now please advise where in EU-OPS it states that the declared emergency overrides the requirements you pointed out, instead of merely that the aircraft is not complying with their requirements? There seems to be a resistance to recognising that things can go wrong in aviation and an assumption that one can 'override the requirements' to plan to land with reserve fuel'. When you work out you are unlikely to land with reserve fuel that section REQUIRES you to form an alternate plan.(which is common sense). If that alternate plan then goes tits up - let's take a silly scenario - you are on your way to an alternate airfield which you CAN reach with reserve fuel when a fuel leak develops in one tank/engine. What do you do? Decide you now cannot comply with the 'legal' requirements' so all is lost - and just crash?

Point 2 states "However if, as a result ...", does the requirement to declare an emergency also begin with a similar "However if as a result ...."? - I am not understanding this question. The section requires the commander to take 'the appropriate action' which includes gaining priority through an emergency call. Why do you need additional stimulus?

[windytoo]

Let's try this chaps: In the air-- if you land with final reserve fuel, you do not have to advise anybody. However if you are going to land below your final reserve fuel you need to tell someone, so that they can factor that into their traffic planning,and hopefully get you down safely.
It appears to be different on the ground however, depending on what company you work for. The first sentence remains the same but the second reads, "if you continue to land with more fuel than final reserve, then you will be invited to talk to someone about your poor fuel planning and being at the wrong end of the fuel ladder".
The Pilots V Accountants, or Safety V Money debate as some see it, has been ongoing for decades but it seems that in the present climate, driven by the ultra low cost airlines, we have almost reached the tipping point. Passenger comfort has disappeared off into the distance, only erosion into safety is left.

[justroll]

I finally took he effort to look at the two KRO video's since there was a sort-a-like cut/paste version broadcasted yesterday on commercial telly here in Belgium (VTM - not really cataloged as a quality station :p )

Anyhow , - as non pilot - I must say that after reading this thread I'm personnaly more disturbed about the ethics in RY than the fuel policy (which is a indirect results).

I'm a IT contractor, the difference between the contracting pilot @ RY is that they are forced in this way of worked, compared to me, it was a free a deliberate choice. All the hassle of running your own company, paperwork & deadlines for filling TAX reports etc.. might be exaggerated, although it does bring up some stress, and a pilot should be stress free (well at least before taking off). As a contractor I'm also paid by the performed working hour, my current customer is about 1H30 drive (one way), and when i'm sick, i'll stay at home, just in order not to risk anything. Since being in a hospital is "no pay", and it sure hell won't be for a few days.

I was going to book my regular annual trip from BRU to FAO ; but when hell brake loose about RY it made me thinking. I'm replanning my trip and thinking of choosing TAP for AMS -> LIS ; hoping that the pressure on pilots isn't there. (wishfull thinking?)

Do you guys experience that kind of "RY" pressure (bullying, intimidation, etc..) at your workfloor, and would you ever fly a plain when feeling not like it ? Or is this the broadcast a complete set-up and are RY pilots free to fly as like a "premium" airline ?

[Piltdown Man]

...are RY pilots free to fly as like a "premium" airline?

In general no. They are denied union recognition, must toe the party line and they will do what they are told. Going sick is also pretty risky. And don't be late too often. They are run by what could at best be described as bestial, brutal, feral management. But as long as people want "cheap" flights, Ryanair will stay in business.

In return, some of RYR pilots are the best paid pilots in the world. Those on the older contracts will receive in the order of €130,000 to €150,000 this year. Out of this they have to arrange their own tax, pension, car parking, accommodation, medical, licence, uniform, meals (at work) etc. They will also have a stable roster pattern and have a degree certainty in their lives. I'll also stick my neck out and suggest that they some of the most competent pilots as well, which can be demonstrated by their record.

However, I'd prefer to walk than fly Ryanair. I don't like MOL and what he stands for. So I do what MOL does and that is, not fly RYR but instead go with another carrier.

[RAT 5]

"In return, some of RYR pilots are the best paid pilots in the world. Those on the older contracts will receive in the order of €130,000 to €150,000 this year."

I really don't think so. As you yourself said there is NO company or state pension, sick pay, holiday pay, hotel provided, transport provided: you pay for your sim checks & do unpaid SBY's away from home etc. etc. Friends on the inside say there has been no pay rise for 5 years and current contract rates have gone down. Hours are not guaranteed and so income fluctuates wildly. These stated facts, even some by yourself, contradict your other statement. Your only mitigating circumstance is if that quoted gross figure is net, which it is not; and it also assumes 900hrs/pa, which I doubt very few do any where near, especially as 40% of the fleet is grounded every winter. Then with those sums perhaps you have enough funds to pay all the costs.

[1stspotter]

Ryanair legal department will have a busy time with television programmes which are telling things FR does not like.

Besides the KRO Reporter programmes Belgium commercial station VTM broadcasted a shortened version of the KRO Reporter programme. I guess they will get a letter from the Ryaniar lawyer as well.

See a small preview here
Mayday, Ryanairvlucht in nood | VTM (http://vtm.be/telefacts/mayday-ryanairvlucht-in-nood)

Since November 2012 there have been tv programmes mentioning the business model of Ryanair in Germany (WDR), The Netherlands (KRO), Belgium (VTM) , France and Spain (LaSexta).

[aerobat]

RAT 5
You are confusing Ryanair pilots with Brookfield or other contract pilots that fly for Ryanair and there is a huge difference.
Ryanair UK pilots receive sick pay, holiday pay, sector pay on holiday days and have pension contributions matched by the company up to £5000 per year.
We also get £5000 a year for incidental expenses - parking, uniform cleaning etc and do not have to pay for the sim.
This is vastly different to the contract pilots who only receive payment per flying hour.

[Depone]

Aerobat, your situation is wholly unrepresentative of the average Ryanair pilot.

[aerobat]

Depone, my situation is typical of a pilot that is employed by Ryanair. It is not typical of a pilot working at Ryanair but employed by an agency.
Just to clarify, at Ryanair there are two pilot groups. One group are employed by Ryanair, have employee privileges and are in a minority. The other group - the majority are employed as contractors through Brookfield etc and only get paid by the flying hour.
This is not a situation I agree with and only posted on here to give further insight into why some pilot are perfectly happy flying for Ryanair and others are not.

[Sober Lark]

However, I'd prefer to walk than fly Ryanair. I don't like MOL and what he stands for. So I do what MOL does and that is, not fly RYR but instead go with another carrier.

Dutch TV station wishes to interview anonymous poster.

[1stspotter]

Dutch Secretary of State for Infrastructure and Environment writes to the Members of Parliament she does not see any reason to investigate the Ryanair fuel or safety policy.
https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-31936-129.html


The letter of the IAA Irish Aviation Authority in response to questions of the Dutch Secretary of State can be read here.

The letter says for instance
The lAA operates a Mandatory Oeeurrence Reporting (MOR) system and a Confidential Reporting system and, as far as we can establish from our data, there are na previous MAYDAY ealls as a result of fuel shortage other than the ones referred to at Valencia, Ryanair's fuel policy is fully compliant with EU OPS

read more:
https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/blg-204355.pdf

[jackharr]

Davy Gravy (in 404)

You got it is one.

[Sober Lark]

David, with Michael O'Leary passenger numbers are constantly increasing, and at this point in time it might just be suiting Ryanair to have such a passenger uplift control mechanism in place rather than have him step down ;)

[RAT 5]

It would seem RYR think nothing of tagging on a € here and a € there. 2€/pax for calamities cover e.g. volcanos etc. That's €150m per year for nothing. And that's only 1 extra charge squirrelled in under the radar. No pay rise for the crews in 5 years and the new contracts are on lower rates than before. Yet it would take only 0.70c per pax to give the crews a 20% pay rise. That would only recover them to inflation over the past 7 years, which they have never received. Another €1.00/pax would establish a decent company contribution to a pension fund. Those 2 items are considered unworthy of the worlds favourite airline and largest in Europe. Yet the cost is less than the volcano tax. Makes you wonder where the priorities are?

[racedo]

He shouldn't be on a TV show engaging in 'bar room brawl' type boorish debates about RYR's safety record or the recent spate 'near death' incidents that have occured,

Ryanairs safety record is excellent so unless you can prove otherwise then would withdraw that remark.

As for "near death" incidents. Could you please outline where people were close to death.

[racedo]

Interesting choice of words at the end of the first paragraph here where they describe the 8% increase in fares as an "improvement" http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif
Why would an airline that portrays itself as 'the low fares airline' describe an increase in its own fares as an improvement?

As the document concerned is a communication to the owners of the business then please detail why that would not be the case.

[Piltdown Man]

Passenger numbers may have increased by 3% but the load factor remained flat at 84%. Average fares INCREASED by 8% and ancillary revenue INCREASED by 24%.

A quick bit of online translation gives the following:

"Weez squeezd un extra ate percent outa da buggas for der fairs un weez reelly hammerd dem on duz extras loik. Bejessus, wezz reely screwin deez feckers und de still keep cuumin! Moik, day must be reeelly stoopid!"

PM

[Sober Lark]

My translation is totally different. I read happy shareholders.

[Pablo_Diablo]

Passenger numbers may have increased by 3%. May. Not the month since the first one would be a cap so it needs to be the other may.

Are FR saying they are not sure if, what is it now 2,5 million people boarded their airplanes or not?

[BEagle]

To many people Michael O'Leary 'IS' Ryanair, and how he comes across in the media has a direct effect on how these people view the company, there are many people who refuse to fly RYR simply because of the loathing they have for this man and his attitude to his customers (and staff).

Quite possibly very true - and such people's refusal to fly Ryanair has absolutely nothing to do with any 'safety fears' of the type misreported by the European press.

The airline's shareholders are probably happy, but at the expense of whom?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Surely we're near death all the time?!

[skyflyer737]

Davy Gravy - your comments seem ridiculous.

First - there have been no near death incidents whatsoever.

Second - Ryanair is a business. Every business will seek to increase its revenue and an increase in fares IS an improvement from a business perspective as long as customers continue to support the airline - and around 79 million in the last year have.

Third - low fares are relative. They still remain lower on average than other carriers.

Your apparent lack of business knowledge is forgiveable but scaremongering about near death incidents is ridiculous.

By the way, I am a contractor at Ryanair and have had a pay rise in the last year when signing a new contract. Once again you're wide of the mark. The amount I earn is perfectly acceptable to me and allows me plenty of opportunity to put money into a private pension.

[Sober Lark]

David G, I work with statistics and numbers all the time. From what you write I get the distinct impression that your risk perception is out of kilter. A book by David Ropeik & George Gray called 'Risk' may help you. It is a practical guide for deciding what's really safe and what's really dangerous in the world around you.

[skyflyer737]

Davy - I am in agreement with Sober Lark. You don't seem to understand the incidents.

The incidents you mention - were they incidents? Yes. Were they 'near death' incidents? Absolutely not.

Do other airlines have their fair share of incidents? Yes they do. Ryanair, being the largest operator in Europe and operating around 1600 flights a day over the summer season, of course, statistically will have more incidents than smaller carriers - just like BA will lose more bags at Heathrow than any other carrier, simply because they are the biggest carrier there.

I am not a supporter of MOL or they way he treats staff or suppliers and the way some customers are treated - but as a Captain I will defend the company's excellent record when ludicrous comments about near death incidents are exaggerated out of all proportion.

[Zipster]

By the way, I am a contractor at Ryanair and have had a pay rise in the last year when signing a new contract. Once again you're wide of the mark. The amount I earn is perfectly acceptable to me and allows me plenty of opportunity to put money into a private pension.

Ok so you had a payrise in € or £ which looks good initially, but if you take a closer look at the contract as a whole it is much more likely it is a pay cut.

It is almost impossible to understand the true implications of some of the clauses without being a taxation or legal expert and without spending countless hours to find out what each clause actually means.

I would say you are a minority thinking like that skyflyer737, i work for the same company.

[skyflyer737]

I see where you're coming from Zipster but I'm UK based, pay UK corporation tax and UK income tax and my take home pay on an annual basis has risen since I signed the new contract. I may be in the minority but that's simply the way it has worked out for me. I personally haven't found the contract a problem

[Zipster]

That would mean you are the exception to the rule more or less, but good for you personally skyflyer. So many different circumstances for a large company so good seeing it works out for some.

Lots of people though having contracts of employment especially in Italy at the moment are facing very different circumstances where there is a real possibility they could owe social tax they had no reason to believe they were not compliant with in the first place. Contractors are possibly next, other countries to follow suit most likely. There is another thread about this so i wont go into more detail of that situation.

So back to the KRO show for a second, from my understanding after watching both episodes the core issue was not the fuel emergencies, but instead the core issue was the way Ryanair conducts its business and the corporate culture in place leading to a overall degradation of flight safety. With fuel emergencies being one result of that culture. The social tax situation and the weak contracts being offered is another example (since the two are closely related) of this culture which brings us back to the situation in Italy once again.

In Italy there are pilots and cabincrew flying aircraft as we speak that has just found out he or she owes social tax backdated all the way from 2006 when they have just following what was setout in their respective contracts. This is clearly disgraceful for anyone with some common sense. So we now see that the constant cost cutting has now backfired so badly staff are now in the firing line unknowingly they were not compliant in the first place and will take the hit personally. I´ll let anyone decide for themselves what this could mean towards flight safety but this could be one thing to add and possibly clarify what these guys in the show mean also.

Ryanair constantly says safety is on par with the best in Europe, using fatalities or hull losses as the metric for that statement then this is possibly true.

But lets face it flight safety is not all about fatalities or hull losses, flight safety is also about taking care of the people working for you in sensitive roles such as flight and cabin crew and ensure you don´t put them in situations where you basically screw them over potentially just to get an edge over the competition.

[skyflyer737]

Zipster - I couldn't agree more with you on all accounts. I'm just lucky my contract works for me (at the moment, but things can change)

Good to be back on topic with regards to the TV programme too. Wise words Zipster and well put.

[No RYR for me]

Please please RYR go to court! We all want to hear the whole story in front of a judge instead of through the RYR PR department...... :D

[Aldente]

Well in the "Brandpunt" programme that interviewed O'Leary after the KRO programmes were broadcast, MOL stated categorically that Ryanair was taking legal action (even though the interviewer asked him "when?")

Surely he must be telling the truth?........

[Facelookbovvered]

I worry when a pilot says he pays corporation tax, i doubt you work (ie do any work) other than for Ryanair, you wear a Ryanair uniform, Ryanair set your roster, in my book you work for them, now we all know about agencies and "supply" companies, but don't you find it rather odd that a company the size of FR operates in this way, there can be only one reason and that is that its cheaper for FR to get you to jump through all these convoluted hoops, i suspect that the majority of risk in these questionable, but legal practices falls upon the employee, ultimately the rules will catch up, FR are not being clever they are being devious if they can't operate properly they should give up, the employee's may well reap what the employers has sown.:eek::eek::ugh:

[JW411]

Just exactly how much money did you make last year?

Just exactly how much money did the dreaded MOL make last year?

[Sunnyjohn]

Interesting to see the way that the Spanish government is tackling air competition from Ryanair (apart from attempting court cases, that is). Just googled fares and times from Valencia to Seville by Ave and Ryanair. Taking into account two hold bags (on Ave you can take 3 per person), the rail fare is slightly cheaper and, allowing 30 minutes each side for travel to and from airports, the journey time door to door is exactly the same - 3hr 30 min. Lots of adverts in the Spanish press and on Renfe's site trumpeting new lower fares. He's going to lose his internal Spanish flights without doubt - I give it a year!

[BOAC]

Ah! But will the trains carry enough fuel?

[Alycidon]

They won't be carrying any fuel, they're electric!

[Sober Lark]

Passenger journeys of between 400 and 800 km will overwhelmingly prefer high speed rail where it is an option.

It is irrefutable that unlike Iberia, AVE will more than cover its costs. Ryanair makes hay whilst the sun shines.

LAX-SFO only 400 miles and 7 million PAX. High speed train what's keeping you?