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

[1stspotter]

Dutch TV programm Reporter broadcasts at December 28 an episode titled 'Ryanair pilots denominated alarm over safety'
Since the press release about this program the news was picked up by many newspapers and others

Online newssite
Piloten Ryanair luiden noodklok over onveilig beleid | nu.nl/buitenland | Het laatste nieuws het eerst op nu.nl (http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/2992316/piloten-ryanair-luiden-noodklok-onveilig-beleid.html)

Dutch political party CDA has questions about Ryanair
CDA wil opheldering over Ryanair - Binnenland | Het laatste nieuws uit Nederland leest u op Telegraaf.nl [binnenland] (http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/21186049/__CDA_wil_opheldering_Ryanair__.html)

Belgium newspaper De Standaard
Ryanair-piloten waarschuwen op Nederlandse televisie voor ... - De Standaard (http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20121228_00416344&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_term=biz&utm_content=article&utm_campaign=seeding)

Dutch newspaper NRC
Piloten klappen uit de school over veiligheid Ryanair :: nrc.nl (http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2012/12/28/piloten-luiden-noodklok-over-veiligheid-ryanair/)

The Sun
Ryanair ‘puts passengers’ lives in danger’ warn pilots | The Sun |News (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4719278/Ryanair-puts-passengers-lives-in-danger-warn-pilots.html)

German newspaper Bild Zeitung
Piloten behaupten im niederländischen TV: Ryanair fliegt mit zu wenig Sprit - News Ausland - Bild.de (http://www.bild.de/news/ausland/ryanair/piloten-sollen-mit-moeglichst-wenig-sprit-fliegen-27916116.bild.html)

Italian La Stampa
La Stampa - Ryanair, la denuncia choc dei piloti “Sempre in volo con meno carburante” (http://www.lastampa.it/2012/12/28/economia/ryanair-la-denuncia-choc-dei-piloti-sempre-in-volo-con-meno-carburante-hMGbU1Y7uSWCWsJ1QngUXO/pagina.html)

More info and recording
Reporter - Mayday Mayday (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2012/afleveringen/28-12-2012)
Professional organizations call for research

Also on Dutch Teletekst news about the concerns
NOS Teletekst (http://teletekst.nos.nl/?109-01)


Ryanair pilots regularly fly with less fuel than they would like. That is, four pilots of Ryanair in the KRO Reporter. They argue that, to cut, are put under pressure to minimize refueling. Their involvement in the program KRO describe them as an emergency. "I hope it does not crash needed to awaken everyone," said one of them. Professional Reporter advocate in-depth investigation into the fuel policy of the Irish airline.

"There is pressure on pilots to minimize refueling in order to save money for the company," says one of the pilots. This pressure leads according to the four security risks. "We always look at the edges, the edges of the regulations," says one of them. "Affects the safety? Yes, it does, "adds a colleague.

The pilots establish a connection with the events of 26 July. In Valencia landed one evening three aircraft of Ryanair with an emergency, a so-Mayday call, due to lack of fuel. During a press conference in Madrid, the Ryanair board on the correct procedures. But a Spanish air traffic indicates that there was an "emergency procedure. From a reconstruction of that night shows that a disaster was close. The incident was a direct result of the pilots of the rigid fuel policy of Ryanair. "If nothing changes, then it goes downhill safety", says a pilot. "Yes, I'm afraid that something will happen if things do not change," says another.

Nico For Bach, president of the European Cockpit Association (ECA) is deeply concerned about the policy of Ryanair: "It is waiting for a time a plane completely out of fuel left. For Bach calls for a thorough investigation. The Agency receives approval from the Dutch Association of Pilots. Chairman of Evert Zwol: "I would like to call it to the bottom to go. In the Netherlands, but also on a European site, to be very good to look what's playing. "

The four whistleblowers do in the broadcast report of a "deep-seated fear culture" within the company. Kites are, they say, are barely able to resist the pressure. "When pilots express their concerns, they are punished, they say. One of the penalties imposed is critical pilots transfer to a base far from their homes. A former commander describes the style of Ryanair management as: "A regime of oppression, a dictatorship."

[JanetFlight]

"There is pressure on pilots to minimize refueling in order to save money for the company,"

...and this only happens at RYR..!?:rolleyes:

[doubleu-anker]

It is not a crime, to have an accident. It is a crime however, to run out of fuel.

If I as Captain, am dictated to on the amount of fuel I should carry, is the day I give up.

[despegue]

My company would NEVER pressure me to take minimum fuel, in fact we do not even have a fuel policy at all. it is PURELY the CREW who is responsible for SENSIBLE FUEL MANAGEMENT, and so it should be.

I do not fly FR, I find them the scum of the Industry, and their pilots, who after all are Officers and a VITAL part in the company should AT NO POINT have accepted their deteriorating positions and insults from their management.

[J.O.]

The final responsibility for safe and legal fuel amounts rests with the pilot in command. Any captain who faces pressure from management to take less fuel should ask his chief pilot to put it in writing that they have taken over said responsibility on their authority - and then share that letter with their CAA should that chief pilot actually have the courage to write said letter.

[Sobelena]

Any Captain who would allow management to dictate how much fuel he/she takes on is a coward and not fit to be a Captain.

[ROSCO328]

I do not think it is right to call the pilots cowards or scum. I do not fly with or for Ryr but from what I read/hear it really is a company who bully and punish their staff without hesitation!.

We have a relatively sensible fuel policy at my airline where commanders are encouraged to save fuel where possible however if I choose to take an extra ton or 2 extra I certainly would not hear anything of it from management.

Easy to say you would leave if you where dictated to regards fuel decisions but bills still need paying and food put on the table. Do not envy these guys/gals one little bit.

Good luck.

[fmgc]

So lets say you work for an airline, let's call it Brian Airways, and they have a reputation for bullying their pilots.

So you are called in for an interview as you are consistently taking more than minimum fuel. You show how brave you are and the result is that you are sacked. Which is easy to do as you are only a contractor anyway.

What now? Who do you go and work for now? You have a mortgage to pay, kids to feed.

What few airlines that are recruiting now are unlikely to recruit you with that stigma attached to you.

Any Captain who would allow management to dictate how much fuel he/she takes on is a coward and not fit to be a Captain.

That is a crass and ignorant statement.

I am no fan of Brian Airways but I do respect their pilots.

[Sobelena]

Not crass at all, just the simple truth, like it or not.

And by the way, Roscoe328, nobody has called pilots "scum". Just re-read despegue's post, the poster is refering to the airline and not it's pilots.

[TDK mk2]

Well there you have it everyone, Sobelena speaks the truth. Not an opinion but the (simple) truth.

[M.Mouse]

Sobelena

Your statement is indeed crass and ignorant.

Few pilots are in a position to resist a determined and dictatorial management. Standing on principles is fine and dandy if you have plenty of money, no mortgage, no family to feed and really don't care if you cannot get another flying job.

I very much doubt you are a professional pilot to make such a statement as you did.

[G-AWZK]

Few pilots are in a position to resist a determined and dictatorial management.
isnt that what a union is for? Oh yes.....

[Sobelena]

So you are suggesting that safety takes second place to management bullying? We all have mortgages and mouths to feed but if as a Captain you allow management bullying to overule your professional judgement, you're in the wrong airline or job and should get out pronto. I'm sorry if you consider my opinion crass but there you have it.

[gwillie]

I just don't understand it...........what's the big bloody deal?????????

Air Canada, long ago now, demonstrated that an empty tank was "doable".

Then, there was Air Transat.

Of course, there was most recently Sully.....now, while fuel wasn't the issue there, the same principle applied:

Glide baby, glide.

[TDK mk2]

ah, so he admits that it is his opinion, rather than an undefinable truth.

[shaun ryder]

Fact is as stated before, a lot of these guys are paid by the hour. Therefore they are far more susceptible to management pressure. Surely an obvious flight safety issue. As for unions, forget it. This culture of contract pilots is a disgrace. I just can't imagine ever using Ryanair, the whole thing stinks. I don't think the pilots are cowards at all, just bullied and poorly treated by their management.

[M.Mouse]

despegue

You have absolutely no idea of my background.

You seem unable to address the argument but instead launch into a personal attack.

Enjoy your black and white world.

[fmgc]

If you have no balls to take your responsibility towards your first priority at all times, safety, then please get out of Aviation

You can't use the safety argument all the time. If you took that argument to it's logical conclusion then you would never go flying.

The fact is that flying for an airline always will be a compromise between safety and commercialism. Just getting airborne degrades safety, where do you draw the line?

Most airlines do now have a fuel policy but the decent ones won't question you if you add a bit extra when the weather is bad etc.

PLOG fuel will provide enough fuel to do the job under normal circumstances. When circumstances are compromised then take some more.

[Permafrost_ATPL]

despegue, who do you fly for and where can I apply? I'd happy be to give up my command for the chance of sitting next to a lovely mentor such as yourself.

[Armchairflyer]

Wonder how many of the upright brigade here would exhibit the same tone and determination vis-à-vis a manager giving them hell about taking "unnecessary" (from a blunt-end bean counter perspective) extra fuel, knowing that a) his/her bonus depends on financial savings (and not on flight crews feeling good about their fuel status while enroute), and b) carpeting or maybe even firing a pilot for being kind of insubordinate and a financial burden will not mean any trouble from top management.

[1stspotter]

Dutch newssite has an article about the news and quotes a Dutch Ryanair pilot.

Piloten Ryanair luiden noodklok over onveilig beleid | nu.nl/buitenland | Het laatste nieuws het eerst op nu.nl (http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/2992316/piloten-ryanair-luiden-noodklok-onveilig-beleid.html)


below a Google translate of the reply of a Dutch Ryanair pilot in the article mentioned above. Sorry for some weird translations

A Dutch Ryanair pilot qualifies NU.nl against the objections of his colleagues about the fuel policy of the airline. "Our phones are always plenty of air fuel. Such amounts are established by law and that is what our pilots to. And when a kite with arguments can demonstrate, for example, a weather situation, he added kerosene needs he gets it without problems . "

The pilot sets the ringing of the alarm "not smart action" to find his four colleagues. "It seems like slander of dissatisfaction with the pressure that prevails with Ryanair. That is in my opinion not be higher than other companies which profit is important. There has never been a Ryanair aircraft crashed. If this is done we can packing, so the security is of paramount importance. "


list

At Ryanair is underway with a list, which is maintained with whom the best fuel omspringt. To a high or low ranking are no consequences. "The pilots watch, but a few, barely on that list. Nobody forces you to something. There are pilots who even as low as possible on that list would be. You're a pilot yourself with."

The pilot is more worried about the contracts of many pilots who only get paid when they fly. "Therefore take colleagues sometimes risks, while they may be too sick to fly. It may just 1,000 euros cost if you one day can not work. Society there is very sharp, but it cost the company any money. For the pilots However this also that you do in person. If I do not feel well and I have the responsibility over 180 men, I will not fly. But I can not speak for 3,000 colleagues. "

[Whip Whitaker]

Few pilots are in a position to resist a determined and dictatorial management.
Standing on principles is fine and dandy if you have plenty of money, no
mortgage, no family to feed and really don't care if you cannot get another
flying job.


I have seen quite a few pilots put up with stuff that goes a lot further than fuel management, management getting involved with "tech" issues, loading, FTL's etc. In an environment where there is no protection from unions, no seniority, moving of fleets based on "company needs and ability" a management as described above will have a field day if they wish to get "involved". Anybody believing that this is not the case is naive at best.

Having said that, it seems that people are loosing self respect and a willingness to maintain a certain amount of dignity. In the same Dutch newspaper that the orginal poster is refering to, it mentions a huge shortage of technical educated people. There are other options out there.

Am I now supposed to feel sorry for crews that sold there souls to the devil? Or was there no way that they could see any of this coming?

What did these guys and girls expect, that there was going to be an end to all kinds of mistreatment and the company goal to safe money in every way they can?

I just read a post, "Finnair do a Norwegian", where do you think these companies come up with the ideas? Might it be possible that a certain carrier has done all the homework for them?

The Dutch are not going to give these guys the sucker punch they deserve, they will have some tea and biscuits (koekjes) and move on.

You guys made your bed and now have to sleep in it, and a lot more people will sleep in the same fashion before all this is over.

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Here is another despegue quote!!!
It was certainly not the choice of nearly anybody within EAT to become a German airline, from the Belgian quality outfit it once was.
Now, the gestapo has taken over and with their xenophobic behaviour want to root out everything non German, including Belgian instructors
Eat is NOT a National airline, it is International and the lingua franka in aviation is only English. Eat aircraft can be based wherever in Europe, and has absolutely NO German heritage. It is simply racism.

[doubleu-anker]

"Now, the gestapo has taken over and with their xenophobic behaviour want to root out everything non German, including Belgian instructors"

Old habits do die hard. :}

[icemanalgeria]

I don't work for Ryanair, and I don't like their management.

But, they are not the only airline working exactly to the rules of the authorities.Do they think it is unsafe, if so they and they alone can solve the problem. CHANGE THE RULES!

But they won't, Europe is so busy with the "Green world" they forget what their brief is, or should be SAFETY.

We now have new Euro FTL's which don't take into account the crews, only take account of economy.

So until the Authorities wake up, we may have accidents because of no fuel or accidents because the crew did a 17 hour duty with rest on the aircraft in the galley on a cabin jump seat, with constant noise unable to sleep.

airline will always push the regulations to the edge, so let the Authorities understand that and build a buffer into the regulations.

[A and C]

While less than keen on the general attitude of the Ryanair management and the enforcement of the fuel policy they are only working within the rules set down by EASA.

On the other hand I would look very carefully at the Spanish low fuel incidents and decide if you think that there is more to this story than Ryanair using minimum fuel.

There are more than two sides to this story with a lot of bending the truth especially from some in the south of Europe.

[maybepilot]

There are more than two sides to this story with a lot of bending the truth especially from some in the south of Europe.

Please explain.

[A and C]

I think that when the inquires into the recent reported Ryanair fuel shortages in Spain you will find that the air traffic services were less than proactive, this has been conveniently ignored by those who are trying to make a political capital in faviour of the old protectionist ways.

I am not saying the Ryanair management are whiter than white just that there are others who are quite happy to be very economical with the truth to further their anti Ryanair objectives.

[despegue]

At least I do tend to keep the discussion lively:}

Ok, I am not known for my political correctness, that I do admit. But only because I give dearly for this profession and despise those who participate in its demise.

[maybepilot]

I think that when the inquires into the recent reported Ryanair fuel shortages in Spain you will find that the air traffic services were less than proactive, this has been conveniently ignored by those who are trying to make a political capital in faviour of the old protectionist ways.

I am not saying the Ryanair management are whiter than white just that there are others who are quite happy to be very economical with the truth to further their anti Ryanair objectives.

3 maydays of the same airline, the same day, at the same airport, for the same reason.....
Spanish ATC is known for being pretty bad but they definitely don't decide how much fuel you should carry and at what kerosene level you should make the decision to divert.

By the way what are the political reasons for the "northern" dutch to come up with such public accusations as these TV/Radio/News seem to show?
Either everyone is wrong, from the north to the south of Europe, or the untold story is in the Irish field.

[A and C]

Ryanair are simply not flying around with less fuel than is required by law, wth all the anti Ryanair publicity doing the rounds do you think that the authority's within EASA are not going to check ? my guess is that the authorities are doing regular ramp checks and finding that Ryanair are within the regulations.......Just !

As I understand it the three aircraft at the same airport had something to do with a number of thunderstorms all at the same time.

As for the Dutch interest, I think this has more to do with the press looking for a story, airline stories are by their very nature international and get reused in a number of countries being presented as some sort of news exclusive that seems to be unique unless you read the papers in several country's.

[rigpiggy]

let this be a lesson to all, download a tapatalk app, and use it during any company discussions, from dispatch, to flt ops, to when you are called on the carpet. I had a particularly disagreeable CP that made the mistake of putting stuff in writing. Needless to say my counsel, laughed about it as after that everything they did had"malice, and forethought"

[fmgc]

Needless to say my counsel, laughed about it as after that everything they did had"malice, and forethought"

No matter how much you are in the right legally or morally DO NOT ever take your employer to court or even take lawyers into your Company.

You will never ever find good employment again.

This is a sorry state for employees and it is a far cry from a perfect system, but it is what it is.

[Scoobywill]

What we really need is for David Cameron to stand up and state that all companies adhering to the CAA determined fuel policies are morally unjust and should feel ashamed.
It worked with Starbucks!

[PT6Driver]

For what it is worth I am no fan of this company however on another thread about the fuel mayday incidents it is reported that the Ryanair Captains did indeed uplift MORE than the minimum fuel figure.

In other words they looked at the weather and took EXTRA to account for this. A combination of factors including weather and ATC all had their part to play.

For information they were not the only airline to divert and subsequently have a long routing resulting in a low fuel situation. They did not land with far less than final reserve unlike another airline.

Links on the other thread to official reports etc.

[jetopa]

Don't beat up Ryanair, beat up the authorities


@ Icemanalgeria

Exactly right. Does anybody think it's coincidental that Ryanair is lobbying against anything that harms their way of doing business at the HQ of EASA?

[Say Mach Number]

As a long serving Training Captain in Ryanair all I can say is the Ryanair fuel policy is you can 'take as much as you want' as long as you justify the extra above the minimum as explained below.

If its a flight where its sector fuel and for example plog fuel is 7450kgs our company policy is round to nearest hundred and add a hundred so minimum fuel becomes 7600kgs.

If I want to take a tonne or two more then I do so and couldnt give two hoots what my Base Captain says.

Only time I have asked to justify my fuel was when I took extra fuel due fog and forgot to put it on the voyage report. Fair cop didnt follow the rules. 2 second discussion all done and dusted.

Not threatened with the sack, demotion or asked to pay for the extra fuel carried. (I say that cos that will be next rumour doing the rounds)

I cant speak for other Captains in FR but I certainly dont feel under pressure. I take what I want but then when weather allows I also take minimum where appropriate.

Simples

[grafity]

I do not fly FR, I find them the scum of the Industry, and their pilots, who after all are Officers and a VITAL part in the company should AT NO POINT have accepted their deteriorating positions and insults from their management.

This attitude stinks, the only people that could have prevented the deterioration in pay and conditions of flight crew over the last number of years, was those well established in the industry. In any walk of life you do what you can to get your career kick started. Your probably the same type of who bitches about the youth of today not doing enough to get work and having a bad attitude.
I'd say it's actually been the lame duck(if it doesn't effect me) attitude of those in a bargaining position that could have an effect on companies, that has allowed for the spiral dive in T&Cs.

[Say Mach Number]

I think there are a few misconceptions as do people really think the nearly 3000 Ryanair pilots enjoy insults and deteriorating conditions - of course not. In my opinion the thing that irks a lot of people is the inability to get leave and of course the respect issue from management.

As for deteriorating conditions am not so sure;

Fixed 5 on 4 off roster
Ok money between £115-120k TRE
Final salary pension (not available now but small pension being offered)
£5k per year to cover expenses and medicals etc
£60 net per day per annual leave day
£230 net day off payment plus sector pay on day
28 days leave
New aircraft 737-800
Lucky to be in a UK base where I want to be.

I cant speak for contractors as I am a permanent employee but this is always the dilemma with FR. They make it just palatable enough that you dont start looking elsewhere.

Nearly 3000 pilots now we cant all be delude - can we?????

Also Ryanair is probably single handed keeping the flying schools of Europe in business as I cant think of any other airlines still hiring in numbers and giving some hope to those wannabes out there shelling out massive wonga on a CPL.

[1stspotter]

Just saw part 1 of a 2 part series on Ryanair by dutch TV program 'KRO Reporter'

The hours after the program ended #Ryanair was trending topic on Twitter
So the program got a lot of attention.

The program interviewed four Ryanair pilots. Their faces and voices were made unrecognizable. The program made a reconstruction of the three diversions of Ryanair aircraft to Valencia on the same day. All three declared mayday because of low fuel. A Spanish air traffic controller was interviewed as well. Just after the first Ryanair aircraft landed a LAN Chile aircraft diverting to Valencia declared mayday as well. Engine 3 of the Airbus A340 from Frankfurt to Madrid was auto shutdown because of low fuel flow. See
26-julio-2012. EI-EKK. Boeing B737-800. CC-CQF. Airbus A340-300. EI-DHH. Boeing 737-800. EI-ENM. Boeing B737-800. Aproximación al Aeropuerto de Valencia. - 2012 - Investigación - CIAIAC - Órganos Colegiados - Ministerio de Fomento (http://www.fomento.gob.es/MFOM/LANG_CASTELLANO/ORGANOS_COLEGIADOS/CIAIAC/INVESTIGACION/2012/APROXIMACION_VALENCIA_ENG.htm)

Very soon after the LAN Chile mayday call the other two Ryanair aircraft declared mayday as well. If the LAN Chile could not evacuate the runway there could be a very nasty situation.

Michael O'leary was seen as well in a press conference in Madrid.

Also interviewed was an ex Ryanair pilot and someone working for the Dutch pilot union. Most of the program is in english so you can see the recording.

KRO Reporter: Mayday Mayday - Uitzending Gemist (http://www.uitzendinggemist.nl/afleveringen/1315947)

Reporter - Mayday Mayday (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2012/afleveringen/28-12-2012)


The tv program had some email correspondance with Ryanair. See this pdf
http://content1b.omroep.nl/b629b40f92f1ca777df11d794456ac39/50de074d/kro/reporter/mailwisseling_reporter_ryanair.pdf

Thursday part 2 of the program

[Basil]

SMN,
Your comments re fuel sound very reasonable.
I was lucky to fly for BA, GF and Cathay in none of which I heard of an extra fuel interview. In fact, in Cathay, I once asked, and the boss said "Yes, we do keep a fuel league table and you are close to the bottom (take most extra) but that's for interest. We'd never have mentioned it if you hadn't asked. Whatever makes the commander comfortable is OK with us."

[icemanalgeria]

I will excuse you !

because there are rules, the companies have a yard stick, they can say they follow the rules !

[Bearcat]

Another bloody Ryanair thread.......when will it end!

[Whip Whitaker]

Another bloody Ryanair thread.......when will it end!


Hopefully not until they are no longer there, if European aviation is a cow, than they are the arse of the beast.

[Dan Winterland]

''Ryanair are simply not flying around with less fuel than is required by law, wth all the anti Ryanair publicity doing the rounds do you think that the authority's within EASA are not going to check ? my guess is that the authorities are doing regular ramp checks and finding that Ryanair are within the regulations.......Just !''

The minimums are just that - the minimum fuel required to complete the task within the regulations. The problem is that these minimums have become the targets for many airline managers - just like the FTLs. If the minimum becomes the norm and saftey is compromised then it's time for the authorities to grow some balls and raise the minimums. Low cost (cheap) operators will complain, but if it's seen that they can't adequately regulate their own operation within common sense parameters then they only have themselves to blame.

[fox niner]

(....sigh...)

The problem is not the amount of fuel they carry. That is probably within legal limits.

It is about the culture of fear in the company that causes pilots not to report irregularities for fear of repercussions.

I saw the TV report. shocking revelations. This morning here in the Netherlands, the government secretary for aviation is demanding an explanation from her Irish counterpart regarding these allegations. To be continued.

[maybepilot]

Say Mach Number,

I read a memo from my association about T&C's at Ryanair which differ from what you claim since you would seem to belong to a small minority.
I read that over 70% of the pilots are contractors, either self employed or forced to setup their own ltd company.
The document says that these setups are often placing the pilots into an illegal status from a tax,social security and law perspective depending on which country they are based in and resident.
The 5/4 roster is only applied to old bases and all new ones have a 5/3 summer pattern which makes commuting very difficult for the majority of pilots since very few get to be based where they wish.
Some pilots don't have a base at all and are commuting across Europe during their off days at their own expense to reach the weekly assigned airport where they operate from.
Holidays only get granted during winter months.
Everyone pays for HOTAC and transport to/from recurrent training.
Salaries reduce if you upgrade to captain or change base.
There is no basic salary paid and no guarantee for a minimum wage since they only get paid by the hour flown.
There is no pension scheme nor sick pay in place.
There is no pilot representation at all and there are no negotiations when it comes to contractual issues.

It sounds very strange to hear such different things about the same outfit but I'm sure the above must be very close to reality otherwise the lazy guys at my association wouldn't have wasted their time in producing it.

[Facelookbovvered]

Its still the airline that people with low hours want to join (there is no one else) to get hours in order to get out and join another airline, FR is not a career airline.

There is fear, especially from the insecure, I know of a guy recently who uttered the word NO to his base Capt (It was his choice to say yes or no to the question posed) the next roster reflected his base Capt pleasure, a month on the Russian front line mainly standby away from his less than 2 month old Son in Southern Spain, are FR doing anything wrong or illegal ? no of course not, are they behaving like a caring employer, no of course not, do they give a stuff, no of course not!

Eventually the management (i use the word loosely) will push someone over the edge, i just hope they are not alone in the flight deck upstairs at the time.

I think the fuel issue at Valencia is a red herring, I'm sure they all had extra fuel but the weather was worse than expected and when things start going wrong in Spain (ATC) a sensible amount of extra fuel is suddenly not enough

Payment by the hour, self employed, no sick pay no holiday pay, but actually employed (i.e. only working for one company, wearing said company uniform, at the behest of one company) is not self employed and everything to do with lowering employment costs, simples....if FR or its employee's are not paying the correct amount of tax & social insurance they should have their feet put to the fire in the same way that Starbucks and other have in the UK.

The problem with that is that the punters don't give a stuff, Ryanairs problems start and stop at the top, the employee's, for that's what they are, are by and large good people and a significant number are embarrassed by the antics of their clown of a boss, ah but he's very successful isn't he?? NO he isn't he cynically exploits his customer, the authorities, airports and of course his mainly loyal employee's.

The UK banking industry was also (RBS) held up as a shining example of corporate success. The only circumstance under which i now fly FR is if my employer says i must, its not for no reason that there are endless threads about Ryanair on Pprune and isn't about a success story, it might be safe, it might be cheap?, it might be on time, but the story time and time again is about exploitation,fear,intimidation,bullying, not words you normally equate to a success story ??

[A and C]

You talk of being forced to be a contractor but for some individuals this is an advantage, job related expenses can be set against tax, their is no problem with the social taxes as long as you pay them and from my experience the job security is about the same as being employed............... Next to nil !

I was employed by Debonair, XL & Viking and lost my job overnight and what did I get for all the tax that had been taken from me under the governments PAYE program ? A few thousand pounds in a lump sum some months later and £52 per week........ Some reward for the 40% tax that they stole from my pay without giving me any real alllowance for work related expenses.

Needless to say I did not even bother with the unemployment pay, I got out he big red toolbox and went back to fixing aircraft were I could make a weeks unemployment benifit (benifit ????!!!!) before tea brake on day one.

Employment is not the answer to all the ills of working in the airlines, it won't give you job security, it is just an excuse for the government to dip into your pay and take what ever they wish......... And give very little back when you find yourself out of work.

We all know that Ryanair are the very worst airline to work for so why do it ? If the pilots voted with their feet the RYR management would have to improve the T&C'S.

Now lets get back to the fuel issue, it is clear that RYR always have the legal minimum fuel when they leave the gate and as far as I can see only one RYR aircraft landed below final reserve fuel and the fact that the other RYR aircraft declared an emergency seems to indicate the need to impress on ATC the seriousness of the unfolding situation.

Perhaps some who have more knowlage of ths incident would like to comment on the rumour that one RYR aircraft was kept in the hold dispite requests for a diversion for so long that the captain had to tell ATC that he was compelled to take up a heading to the diversion airfield without ATC clearance.

[maybepilot]

A and C,

it is not an issue of personal convenience as in your case, it is about the legal status of the majority of our colleagues in Ryanair and alikes.
I am not a Southern European resident nor citizen and in my northern European country these practices are called "disguised self employment" for the purpose of tax and social security evasion and are the cause of unfair competition that can lead , in extreme cases, to the bankruptcy of the competitors who play by the rules and becomes a social cost in a country where the tax payers have to pay unemployment benefits to their fellow citizens who unfairly lost their jobs.

In my country it is also illegal to have people pay to get a job when there are unemployed professionals on the market and Ryanair doesn't even give these unemployed pilots the chance of an interview, but they claim to be Irish and don't care about the local laws. Funny however how they love to exploit the profit opportunity this country offers them.

[gmtmaster2]

Say Mach Number and Maybepilot

The reality in Ryanair is that both of your stories are correct!

Being a Ryanair employee myself I can agree with a lot of what Say Mach Number has written, however I have to say that when time came around that we had to "negotiate" a new deal, there was NO negotiating, it was take it or leave it!

Working with and being friend of a lot of contractors I have a pretty good idea what is happening to them and most of it is like you have mentioned Maybepilot!

So yes unfortunately there is a big difference in many aspects between a Ryanair employee and a contractor.

Being so that more than 70% of the pilots are contractors one can understand why so many are frustrated with their conditions, and I am afraid that because of this frustration and the inability to bring about any change in their working conditions up to now, some have decided to speak out against the Ryanair fuel policy (which is equal to any other european company) and bring this in relation ship with the bullying culture within the company.

I have always taken extra fuel with me if I felt for whatever reason that it was necessary, I have never been questioned by the base captain or company by doing so, but having said this I do strongly believe that the monthly published fuel league is WRONG and should not be published at all!

[A and C]

Some of us are sick to death of of those inside Ryanair constantly telling us how bad it is. It is for you and the other usual suspects to stand up together and get union membership organized or vote with your feet and find another job.

You are all very keen on playing the poor oppressed pilots while hiding behind a user name on this forum but untill you lot get some backbone and stand up for what you say is right nothing will change.

[topaky]

Everyone hides behind nicknames here, it's the spirit of the website.

I work for a classic airline and I fully support the Ryanair pilots in their struggle for decent T&C'S , for legality and for democratic representation.

It's not about them but about all of us.

[BOAC]

topaky -assuming you read and understood A and C's post, do you have any practical suggestions for RY pilots and 'all of us' or are you simply waving from the armchair?

[sarah737]

Back to the topic!
Two KLM skippers were criticising Fr's fuel policy whilst on that 26th of July one of the many aircraft not having extra fuel was... KLM...
I was in the hold over MAD when KLM checked in: "MAD app the KLM XXX level YYY position ZZZ, whe have 10 min extra fuel request expected approach time". When ATC was unable to give them an answer they diverted to, J think, BCN. If that night there would have been any holding at BCN they would have been in exactly the same situation as the Ryans in VLC
Do you guys think Spanish ATC was as good and helpfull as the ATC guy was telling?

[green granite]

The real problem is too many pilots chasing too few jobs thereby allowing the likes of Ryanair to dictate term to you, ie. take it or leave it................................... perhaps you should campaign to get the retirement age reduced to 60 thus reducing the number of pilots available......................oh wait a minute it's only recently gone up from there.

[RAT 5]

This is about fuel planning. It is the same in every airline (9) I've worked for and in 4 different countries. They want you to minimise cost, and that is sensible. However, it is also sensible to educate your crews how to make a sensible fuel plan. Here is where some companies differ. In many there was a free fuel overload amount, and more than that was only with a reason. This was also true with friends in national carriers. Fuel is a crew thing and an educational moment for the apprentice flying with you. Sadly I often found no understanding of how to make a realistic fuel plan. Sometimes it was minimum e.g. a multi rwy airport in CAVOK with an ALTN less than the minimum diversion fuel, but the F/O wanted to take the freebie amount. Why? Then in dodgy conditions all around they wanted to take the freebie and 200kgs (just a bit) more. I made the calculation of Hold, G/A, 2nd approach, negotiate with ATC (non-radar) for a diversion clearance, and then divert to arrive with 45mins due to others doing the same as there was only 1 ALTN. Additional fuel was 1 hour. "Wow, are we allowed to do that?" "It's what we're paid for, son." There are now captains with only 4 years total experience in only 1 airline. They know only the culture of that airline, and if it is one of intimidation there is only one result. There will be times when fuel calculations will not be sensible, but if they've never been trained nor seen it done properly then their apprenticeship will have been in vain. However, they will always be legal: sensible? That's another story.

[A and C]

A very good post about fuel planning and when I worked for XL airways the company worked hard to get the fuel flight plans adjusted for individual aircraft.

This gave the crews very reliable information that they could base the fuel uplift on. There was no fuel policy apart from trying to carry as little as you could for economy and as much as you needed for safety.

When the pilots became confident in the fuel planning system the result was that few people just added fuel "to be sure" it always became a properly considered decision on what was the appropriate fuel load for that flight.

[BEagle]

The only circumstance under which i now fly FR is if my employer says I must

If anyone told me I 'must' fly FR, I'd refuse. I simply will not lower myself to such a level....

[Dan Dare]

multi rwy airport in CAVOK with an ALTN less than the minimum diversion fuel

Much like LHR when BAW38 landed short. Suddenly you do not have multi-runway airport, you have a closed airport with fire Cat 0 and more diversions than the nearby diversions can take or Japan in 2011 when a whole country closed. Where do you go then? It is thoroughly unpleasant to be able to give no special handling to the diversion Pans and Maydays because there are so many of them. I expect it is even less pleasant to be one of them. One day an event will leave us with less available landing runway than aircraft needing them.

[BOAC]

you have a closed airport with fire Cat 0 and more diversions than the nearby diversions can take or Japan in 2011 when a whole country closed. - none of which prevent landings by aircraft in emergency. You just get on and do it.

[RAT 5]

That would be planning in anticipation of multiple failures with the whole operation. If you follow that line of thinking you could end up off-loading pax to accommodate all the fuel to cover all the possibilities. You have to stop somewhere.

[Tom the Tenor]

And a Happy New Year to you too, BEagle! :)

You are a scream!

[1stspotter]

The program can be seen here:
Reporter - Mayday Mayday (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2012/afleveringen/28-12-2012)

At minute 34:00 one of the interviewed pilots tell this:

Pilot: "If I take off and seconds after take off I get a message on my computer that I do not have enough fuel on arrival. If I get that message already at take off than I starts to wonder something must be wrong here "
Reporter: did that happened to you?
Pilot: it happened last week

How is this possible? What I understand this could caused by a bad programming of the FMC by the crew or not taking into account winds enroute. Any comments?

[737Jock]

Nor does an A340 stuck at the end of a 3215m single runway airfield prevent an emergency landing... a 737 can land within 2000m easily.

However I have seen MXP close, because of a suspected fire either onboard an aircraft parked at the gate or even in the terminal itself. Never found out exactly.
No blocked runways whatsoever! Simple fire category downgrade and ATC closing the airport.

MXP = fire 9

Sorry but flying around northern europe and especially london airfields is an entirely different ATC perspective then southern europe. Especially spain and especially madrid.
The extra fuel those Ryr aircraft took are less then what I take on a cavok day into Madrid! I have never had to think hey maybe I shouldn't have taken it cause I didn't use it.
MAD atc is piss poor on a cavok day and completely unreliable. They once sent me around from 7nm to threshold. After the G/A I queried the reason... Previous aircraft had not reported runway vacated, eventhough they have groundradar, us flying at final approach speed and thus having 2-3 minutes to go. Landing 20 minutes after the G/A.
They are useless and can't space aircraft into a decent sequence. And groundcontrol is even worse. Don't get me starter on their meteorologists either...

Anyone going with plog fuel into MAD on a regular basis is bound to encounter problems. Anybody waiting to reach minimum fuel before diverting in spain is likely to encounter problems.
My reason on the plog... MAD/spanish ATC... Never queried by management or trainers.

Some places require planning for multiple contingencies certainly if bad ATC is one of them. And even in northern europe simply busy airspace requires some thinking ahead.

Do I feel any pressure from my management (not FR btw)... No...

Any pilot who feels pressured to take less fuel than what he wants is one too many! And it is up to management to create an environment where this doesn't happen. Publishing fuel league tables is not a good way to promote this imho.

The valencia incident has equal blame between pilots and atc. ATC for not being up to standard on even a normal day and the Pilots for not realising this!

Yes fuel is expensive, try having a crash. Although I suspect the beancounters in aviation statistically inferred that you can have one every 7 years or so, I don't want to be that statistic. Nor get my company or my head all over the news.

[BOAC]

Possibly. What is more relevant is what did that crew land with?

[737Jock]

http://www.ryanair.com/doc/news/2012/iaa_report_valencia_EN.pdf

FR2054 landed with 1029kgs final reserve 1104kgs.
FR5998 landed with 1160kgs final reserve 1119kgs.
FR5389 landed with 1228kgs final reserve 1090kgs.

FR2054 plog was 5887kgs they took 6500kgs. 600kg extra. Diverted at 2900kgs.
FR5998 plog was 8917kgs they took 9200kgs. 300kg extra. Diverted at 2900kgs with minimum 2664kgs.
FR5389 plog was 11,828kgs they took 12,720kgs. 800kg extra. Diverted at 2600kgs with minimum 2588kgs.

Apart from FR2054 all aircraft landed with the legal minimum. And they all took extra. Only FR5389 diverted at the minimum, because he declared mayday early he landed 138kg above final reserve. The other 2 show that our diversion routings are not realistic when everybody needs to divert.

What more evidence is needed that the reserves our plogs prescribe are not sufficient for MAD?
In fact I believe our legal reserves are a very bare minimum for most destinations! Not allowing any time to overthink or execute a mildly complicated QRH checklist once those minimums are reached.
Those 30 minutes are only 30 minutes if you don't have to go-around from fully configured.

[the_stranger]

@Sarah737
Two KLM skippers were criticising Fr's fuel policy whilst on that 26th of July one of the many aircraft not having extra fuel was... KLM...
I was in the hold over MAD when KLM checked in: "MAD app the KLM XXX level YYY position ZZZ, whe have 10 min extra fuel request expected approach time". When ATC was unable to give them an answer they diverted to, J think, BCN. If that night there would have been any holding at BCN they would have been in exactly the same situation as the Ryans in VLC
You don't know that. They had 10 minutes of extra fuel, that's all you know. Extra on top of what? Bare final reserve plus altn fuel? Or final reserve plus altn plus a margin to cover a holding at destination?
In fact, we know when they arrived at BCN (I am assuming the flight to the possible holdng at BCN) they had at least 10 minutes to spare, since they went for BCN with 10 minutes extra.
We do know at least one FR landed with less then 30 minutes left.

[BOAC]

737Jock - my post was for 1stspotter.

We really should not be regurgitating all this stuff again - it was thrashed out before and it is only some sensationalist rubbish Dutch TV programme that has sparked it back to life.

OK - here we go again - 737Jock - your post shows

that not one RY took PLOG fuel
the only one that left the div from the hold until they reached go-round fuel state arrived with 'plenty' at the div.

so - what is the point of your commentAnyone going with plog fuel into MAD on a regular basis is bound to encounter problems. Anybody waiting to reach minimum fuel before diverting in spain is likely to encounter problems. ??

By the way, ATC cannot 'close' an airport to any aircraft in an emergency.

[abrugi]

safety first ,that will be my answer to the boos,with a full report to the CAA on behalf the innocent pax .

[737Jock]

My point is that our legal reserves are not that safe at all! Ryanairs planned diversion routes were not realistic in terms of fuel, I doubt my company's are any better. Nor for that matter KLM's, BA, LH, AF or any other carrier.

My point is that our minimum plog fuel on a nice day can very quickly turn into scraping the bottem of the barrel.

ATC can cause a lot of problems and creating emergency aircraft by downgrading the fire cat from 9 to 0 in an instant when there is 1 small fire somewhere on the airport.
Brave man who waits around for emergency fuel status before diverting to another airport btw.
Which is where the problem (the alternate) will be. Not that multiple runway cavok destination. Or did you drop the alternate as it was such a nice day with multiple non crossing runways and seperate approach aids.

Sorry but when someone starts mixing statistics into plog fuel, KLM does this for instance, I start doubting. My company stopped with planning for longest SID and STAR, instead a computer determines likely arrival based on rwy configuration.
Every slack is cut from minimum plog fuel by commercial drive. Maybe its time for the authorities to increase the legal minima and thus provide a level playing field.

And soon we can add EASA ftl into the mix of minimum fuel ops and possibly inexperienced crew.

Yes all this could happen to any airline, but when pilots feel pressured regarding their fuel decision something is wrong. Fuel league tables are wrong.
Just saying that these 4 pilots are weak and can take the fuel they want is not the answer to the problem. Nor that they are lying. There is a cultural problem in FR it seems.

[BOAC]

This is getting tedious! The mistake RY made was (I covered this on the original thread)

Brave man who waits around for emergency fuel status before diverting to another airport btw. - to wait until near 'div fuel' (CMR) to divert - pointless in that weather, but NOT 'dangerous'.

In addition

To put themselves in the hands of Spanish ATC

To put themselves in the same piece of sky as a Lan Chile flight that obviously could not handle its own fuel system.
----------------------------------------------------

There is NO requirement in aviation to carry any 'holding' fuel if you are not going to hold. Simple!My company stopped with planning for longest SID and STAR, instead a computer determines likely arrival based on rwy configuration. - does it work? If not, you need to take extra and annotate the plog accordingly. If it does, either stop complaining or leave for another airline that does.Maybe its time for the authorities to increase the legal minima and thus provide a level playing field. - I quite agree, but they have not. That is where the effort needs to be, not in RY bashing.What would be a 'level playing field' by the way?

[Loose rivets]

Do you know what I'd do under these circumstances - a rhetorical question.

I would start a database logging just who did the pressuring. Most of the crew of that airline would have to agree. It would be database held privately, but all relevant flight details recorded. Possibly, a copy of the plog and fuel receipts.

Boxes to tick. Is the bloke qualified? In addition to this, do they, or did they, hold ALTP / ATPL / ATP, and were they ever fully operational aircrew?

I would guess there are not may people that can tell the skipper what to do and it would be interesting to see any spikes in a graph pointing towards individuals who are company-minded to the point of obsession.

Before you go into hyper-spuffle, I can tell you, I've met a few of these.

[BOAC]

Yes, worth a look, but remember the 'pressurising' will not be documented unless you take a 'prisoner's friend' into the 'no coffee no biscuits' chat.

We had one little weasel at BA LGW (ex ground engineer I think) who took on a flight management post and staring walking around with the fuel league table folder obvious under his arm until it was suggested he might want to fold it VERY SMALL to avoid too much pain.:).

[737Jock]

Ryanair bashing? Where do I bash ryanair? As I said this could have happened to any airline.

What I am saying is that somethimg is wrong when (even only one) pilots feel pressured into taking minimum plog fuel. Or are taking less extra fuel then they feel comfortable with. I am saying that publishing fuel league tables is wrong.
And that if pilots feel pressured its up to management to make sure they don't feel pressured.
Instead of stating that the pilots saying they feel pressured are lying or trying to identify them through flight numbers and names. Clearly these pilots feel they have no where internally to go to.
For me that is enougn evidence for me that there is a cultural problem within ryanair.

As long as you take plog fuel you are legal, as long as you land with final reserve you are legal. Legal does not equal safe imho.

You seem to completely miss the point of
Brave man who waits around for emergency fuel status before diverting to another airport btw.
This was in relation to your: By the way, ATC cannot 'close' an airport to any aircraft in an emergency. Not to the valencia diversions.

[737Jock]

How don't u understand level playing field? If the rules are equal for all companies to take more fuel then it's a level playing field in terms of competition.

You seem to just be talking about what is legal and what is not BOAC. I'm talking about what is safe in todays busy european airspace. Maybe the legalities regarding fuel reserves are a bit outdated.
There is NO requirement in aviation to carry any 'holding' fuel if you are not going to hold. Simple!
Maybe holding fuel should be dictated even if you are not going to hold.

does it work? If not, you need to take extra and annotate the plog accordingly. If it does, either stop complaining or leave for another airline that does.

That would actually be pressuring now wouldn't it? I can luckily take what I want without fear of represailles or a manager asking me if the system doesn't work or if I would like to seek employment elsewhere...

Does it work! Do I get direct routings throughout europe, yes! I can't answer if it works, because daily routings do not reflect planned routings.
But what I can see is that the planned alternate routes for ryanair did not work on that day.

But at least we know from which direction you are coming BOAC, thanks for making it clear.

[BOAC]

Ryanair bashing!!?? Have you read the whole thread? Looked at what the TV programme purported to display as the truth?You seem to completely miss the point of
Brave man who waits around for emergency fuel status before diverting to another airport btw. This was in relation to your:
By the way, ATC cannot 'close' an airport to any aircraft in an emergency. - well, I am still missing the point. I can see absolutely NO connection:ugh: Hey ho!If the rules are equal for all companies to take more fuel then it's a level playing field in terms of competition. - it just seems you do not understand aircraft operations. The RULES are equal. DittoMaybe holding fuel should be dictated even if you are not going to hold.:confused::confused:But what I can see is that the planned alternate routes for ryanair did not work on that day - you did notice they were not flown, didn't you? Refer to mistake number 1.

[737Jock]

So now I need to be accountable for what other people write on this topic BOAC, or what the program reports?

Ryanair was given opportunity to respond to the program, they didn't! If you read the emails Mcnamera sent to the program, well... I think it's like they just run away from the fact that 4 pilots out of 3000 feel pressured. That is not normal and 4 out of 3000 is too much. 1 out of 3000 is too much.
Clearly you think they should go to another airline, I think ryanair should reconsider their internal policies.

I can't help it that you don't understand... just believe me that it wasn't related to the valencia incident. I'm not going to spell it out for you. Hey ho!

[BOAC]

Yes. You are posting on this thread. NB the thread title
Dutch TV reports on 'Ryanair pilots denominated alarm over safety'

If your whole 'thrust' is about EU-OPS rules, why not start a new thread?

PS I would not have responded either if I ran an airline.

[737Jock]

Yes and I am not bashing Ryanair. I give my opinion on what I think that should be done about 4 pilots feeling pressured. I don't think the answer is that they should seek other employment.
And I think there is evidence that our legal fuel minima should be reviewed, as those rules stem from a very different age of aviation. Where compitition was less fierce, fuel was cheap and airspace was relatively quiet. Maybe this program will help promote this review. As said valencia could have happened to any other airline.

Other posters can take accountability for what they write, and the program for what they produced. And ryanair for not responding to the program.

It doesn't really matter how many others feel pressured, 1 is too many. And imho fuel league tables do not create a healthy environment.

But it becomes even more clear that you simply don't seem to be able to understand the simplest of sentence:
So now I need to be accountable for what other people write on this topic BOAC, or what the program reports? when this is your answer to that question:
Yes. You are posting on this thread. NB the thread title
Dutch TV reports on 'Ryanair pilots denominated alarm over safety'

The thread title is accurate as it reflects the content of the program. Is the program correct in saying safety is threatened in ryanair. I don't know.
I think the fuel policy culture in my company is safer then in FR from the info that they gave me in the program. I don't know if it is unsafe, I can only compare to my reference.
Bigger question is if safe is equal to legal minimums. This seemed to be the message from the IAA report.

[sarah737]

This are quotes from a private message a friend of mine got, a couple of months ago, after he posted some comments about FR.
I'm a journalist and am looking into the issue more generally, and would love to speak to a pilot about it. Would you be willing to have a chat?

and
I would be happy to speak to you anonymously - it's the information I am interested in, and I would not be identifying any pilots.

[737Jock]

BOAC: I quite agree, but they have not. That is where the effort needs to be, not in RY bashing.What would be a 'level playing field' by the way?

So when I actually steer the discussion in this thread into the direction of discussing legal fuel minima you then say:

If your whole 'thrust' is about EU-OPS rules, why not start a new thread?

Do you even know what you want BOAC?

you did notice they were not flown, didn't you? Refer to mistake number 1.
Thats what I'm saying the planned route does not match the actual route which was evidently too optimistic. Thus not enough fuel was available. So I'm suggesting alternate route planning should have some slack, cause I think that in most cases the planned route won't be flown.

I think you are the one not understanding aircraft operations, its all about planning. Crap in crap out. And I think in most companies the alternate routes are just that, too optimistic. Especially on a nice day, cause what would cause diversions on a nice day: unexpected weather and airports closing for normal operations. Both likely leading to many aircraft diverting with minimum fuel.

Unless you know of a way (not involving a pan or mayday) to force ATC to let you fly the company planned diversion route, while everybody is diverting as well, you will quickly encounter a fuel pan pan or mayday in order to ensure that you do fly the planned route and land with 30min.

[dannyalliga]

sarah737,

In the case of this TV program the pilots involved were also identified by a notary and one even spoke openly, this is both about the people and the story as well.

[BOAC]

Oh dear - this thread needs moving to spotters or JB really.

AnywayUnless you know of a way (not involving a pan or mayday) to force ATC to let you fly the company planned diversion route, while everybody is diverting as well, you will quickly encounter a fuel pan pan or mayday in order to ensure that you do fly the planned route and land with 30min. - looks to me as if you have answered your own question. Yes - you TELL them you are setting off for the alternate. It is called 'command'. Safety comes first, ATC later. Their job is to provide the service. Assuming you have asked them first and they have refused, then you declare a Mayday.because you will be below F Reserve. It is not difficult.

Go on, be brave - start a thread on Safety CRM and QA about EUOPS fuel planning. I'm sure you will get interest.

[737Jock]

Was there a questionmark BOAC? Kind of QED...

So your suggestion is to intercept the ILS without clearance and without declaring a Pan or a Mayday? Just do it...
Screwing up ATC's plan, possibly endangering other peoples lives in other aircraft, cause you are in command...

As I said the only possibility is to declare a Mayday. But to me it sounds a bit foolish to plan your alternate fuel with a mayday in mind. But thats exactly what overoptimistic alternate route planning does.
And from what I get that is pretty much what airlines are doing in Europe.

And yes EASA can do something about that!

You sound more like a spotter to me, command also extends outside your own aircraft.

[BOAC]

I'm afraid I have come to the conclusion that you are possibly a bit short of marbles. Who mentioned an ILS?

Care to add a little to your (empty) profile?

[737Jock]

you TELL them you are setting off for the alternate. It is called 'command'. Safety comes first, ATC later. Their job is to provide the service.

Thats apparently the answer to this (which was completely rethoric):

Unless you know of a way (not involving a pan or mayday) to force ATC to let you fly the company planned diversion route

Seems to me your only interest is slinging insults at people, learn to read!
Btw telling them that you are diverting doesn't guarentee you will fly the planned diversion route. They will sequence you with all the other diverting traffic! They won't guarentee an overoptimistic fuel planning towards that alternate.

So you will need to declare a Mayday to guarentee that the fuel planning works. What if everybody does exactly that? How is ATC supposed to sequence 10 mayday aircraft all about to land with less then final reserve.

Care to add a little to your (empty) profile?
To what end? As if retired, ATPL and UK tells me anything about you... might as well have made it up.

Saying random stuff like "its called, command" when nothing was asked in a rethoric question and not displaying any ability to make connections between various posts or recognizing sarcasm tells me a lot more about you. As do comments regarding me taking responsibility for others people's posts or even the dutch tv show.
If anybody is a bit short of marbles, it's you i'm afraid.

[Say Mach Number]

As a permanent employee of Ryanair is true my t and c's are different from contractors and as I have said times before I dont go out of base at all, yes I pay for my medicals, hotac for sims, loss of licence, petrol money to sim centre but then I get £5000pa allowance to cover all the above on top of my basic salary and flight pay. But i dont get a no delay bonus as someone asked, such a thing doesnt exist. Dont give them ideas.

As for the fuel policy I dont believe its any different from any other airline in Europe however there is a perception among some of our pilots that their is some pressure from management. But not by me and most of friends in my base. I think some of this is a self fulfilling prophecy and if you hear it enough times from other pilots you start to believe it despite perhaps never having coming across it yourself.

Have management revamped the fuel policy - yes - but only to ask us to justify our extra fuel carried above the min instead of plus 300 above min. But thats it and all of a sudden we have a fuel issue in Ryanair.

The truth is that if someone asked me if I get treated well in Ryanair I would probably say no but then I can't say I get treated badly. Ryanair does what it says on the tin no more no less. Fixed roster, ok money, new planes but then I am not a contractor.

However the way I read that management treat out contractors which are now the majority is coming back to haunt them but its does us no favours when the rest of our own industry run us down. We are a safe airline with excellent training, high standards, new aircraft and good pilots. And I can assure you they are good pilots when you consider some of the s++t holes we fly. No radar, no ils, circling, snow covered runways and so on, it does sort the men from the boys despite what people may believe.

Wouldnt we all like to work for a major airline but we all can't and lets face it Ryanair, Easyjet, Norwegian, Air Berlin and the like wouldnt even exist if the legacy carriers hadn't underestimated the locos and opened a space in the market for them with their high fares and cartels. I think they all thought we would go the way of Laker. Not so.

But please dont confuse me with management. I am a professional pilot and do not accept second best from myself or any pilot I instruct or examine. We are not Ryanair management but you choose to assume we are like them. I repeat we are not...................

[737Jock]

I believe you Say Mach Number, but still it's up to the management to make sure there exists no perception of pressure amongst any of the pilots isn't it?

Comments like this from Stephen MCNamara (email with the dutch tv show) don't really promote this in my opinion:
Reporter - Mayday Mayday (first link - mailwisseling met ryanair (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2012/afleveringen/28-12-2012)
The reason why your alleged pilots wish to hide behind anonymity is because there is no truth to their claims.
Why don’t you take steps to verify these claims with the independent IAA and stop wasting our time with what are clearly false and baseless accusations.
Anonymous claims cannot be taken seriously, particularly when they have no basis in truth.
You have offered no evidence to support your anonymous claims and therefore all you have quoted is falsehoods and rumours. We don’t respond to falsehoods and rumours.

You even confirm yourself that some pilots feel this way, and the identity of these 4 ryanair pilots and their employment with Ryanair was legally confirmed by a Notary.

Having so many different pilot groups in one airline doesn't really promote unity. Some groups may feel very different then you as a long-serving permanent trainer.

Usually when there's smoke, there's fire...

[I Just Drive]

SayMachNo nailed the day in the life of an FR captain. Here here.

[737Jock]

Very true LYKA, but we should note that the beancounters believe that This statement: The OFP ALTN fuel is always going to be a best guess, based upon planning factors (fuel req, route, altitude and weights). is in fact not a best guess but an accurate amount.

They believe that the numbers a computer pumps out are actually the minimum fuel required, and they see their proof in extra fuel not being used.

When I change taxi trip and alternate fuel, none of this is extra fuel. But on the beancounters spreadsheet it shows up like this. A computer OFP is not neccessarily a legal OFP, crap in crap out as always.
The fuel they see as extra might just be the minimum required to make the flight legal. Unused fuel does not equal unneccessary fuel.

In order to protect the travelling public from overzealous beancounters and the harsh reality of fierce competition I can imagine that a margin of 15 minutes could be added to the alternate fuel as a legal requirement.

Painful maybe... But it would be equal to everybody.

[BOAC]

the crew felt they couldn't make a reasoned argument to their management for taking EXTRA fuel (I.e., more than OFP+300).Lyka - what are you talking about?FR2054 plog was 5887kgs they took 6500kgs. 600kg extra.
FR5998 plog was 8917kgs they took 9200kgs. 300kg extra.
FR5389 plog was 11,828kgs they took 12,720kgs. 800kg extra. .If some of you looked at the facts you will realise they took enough fuel.

Jeter des perles aux pourceaux?

[737Jock]

I wonder what everybody else took? All those aircraft that didn't declare a Mayday.

[737Jock]

I'd be careful about being prescriptive as it typically would not take into account differences in flight planning methods, operational capabilities, available infrastructure, or the operational requirements of aircraft. Moving to a statistical based fuel planning approach offers, IMHO, a greater level of operational realism without removing the CMD from the decision making.

As I said it might be painful, but I only see statistics being used to reduce fuel loads to the minimum.
Operational reality is that the majority of flights get direct routings and don't have to hold at destination and land at the first attempt. So they use less fuel than planned. Statistically speaking that is.

[captplaystation]

To really understand the "situation" please read the thread (currently just above this one) "Fog overwhelms BCN 23RD Dec"

If you ever arrived in BCN/MAD/anywhere in Spain ( + Italy etc) in cr@p wx this will be old hat to you. . . . but, I would read this before you start casting doubts on the RYR crew that evening.

[737Jock]

Captplaystation I Fly there very often. Pretty much described an Atc event in post 69.

Flying in northern europe is very different then southern europe, it just ain't as slick when things get busy. This is a realistic ATC environment requiring additional fuel on even the best day imho.

I hope that ATC in these countries is a valid reason to take extra fuel in all company's. If there is such a thing as a "valid" reason.

[BOAC]

This thread is becoming more 'Alice in Wonderland' with every post. I still struggle with the fact that based on the information and supportive evidence these crew had (TAF's, NOTAMS etc), the crew felt they couldn't make a reasoned argument to their management for taking EXTRA fuel (I.e., more than OFP+300). The fact that the TAF may have said PROB40 TEMPO etc doesn't mean there isn't a risk of deviation from the OFP assumtions that needs to be mitigated in some way (change of ALTN, extra fuel etc). - now you are saying you didn't say that? Which 'AF prob40 TEMPO' are you on about then?

Was that a white rabbit I just saw?

[Squawk-7600]

Perhaps some who have more knowlage of ths incident would like to comment on the rumour that one RYR aircraft was kept in the hold dispite requests for a diversion for so long that the captain had to tell ATC that he was compelled to take up a heading to the diversion airfield without ATC clearance.

The incident, including the radar tracks, are well documented on AVHerald under this link News: Thunderstorms in Madrid on Jul 26th 2012, landings, diversions, fuel emergencies and Ryanair (http://avherald.com/h?article=454af355/0013&opt=0) The summary also clearly states the amount of fuel on board at the time the crew chose to divert and compared that to the flight plan diversion fuel (based of course on a diversion from the destination). In contrast, their position at the time of diversion can be deduced from the radar tracks.

I have no personal comment on this incident to add, and instead invite others to read the report including the conclusions from the IAA. Both the facts of these incidents and the report by the IAA should be read carefully and not just skimmed over. Beware of those who may like to build "strawman" arguments in order to lead others down a wrong path and hence to false conclusions. Some people and organisations are skilled at manipulating facts in order to masquerade at honesty, when in fact it is simply a smoke-screen presented to divert attention from the actual issue.

[Aldente]

BOAC are you saying you would have done the same then ?


Lyka - what are you talking about?
Quote:
FR2054 plog was 5887kgs they took 6500kgs. 600kg extra.
FR5998 plog was 8917kgs they took 9200kgs. 300kg extra.
FR5389 plog was 11,828kgs they took 12,720kgs. 800kg extra. .
If some of you looked at the facts you will realise they took enough fuel.

Really ?!!!

Looking at the above figures, the FR5998 took just 283 kg extra into a known busy TMA at a major airport on a night with extensive FORECAST thunderstorm activity.

And as 737Jock says :-

I wonder what everybody else took? All those aircraft that didn't declare a Mayday

[BOAC]

Aldente - since you ask, I cannot answer that question. I would review my 'excess' fuel decision based on company policy. It is worth reading Rat 5 post #61 if anyone bothers to look at preceding posts. Had I been 998, unless I had 'acquired' a reasonable excess en route I would have been kicking and screaming to go to my div. Since 998 diverted with 2900kg (around 8-900kg more than flt plan) but landed just above F Reserve, I assume it did, but got caught up in the Lan Chile fiasco - but I cannot fault their decision making. No-one normally plans on a regular basis for what happened at MAD/VLC.

To amplify: If I am 'expected' to take plog fuel I would try to do that, on the understanding that the company would prefer me NOT to hold at destination but to make an early diversion, possibly even before arrival at dest, with all the associated costs and disruption to schedules etc. I do not know RY's policy on this, but I repeat - you do not need 'extra' fuel for holding at destination if you do not intend to do that and any diversion decision made and executed before finals would always have significant excess fuel for the ensuing diversion issues..

Now then, in my last two companies before retirement in which my fuel decisions were never challenged, I would, on a 737-8 on that evening, probably have taken around 1000-1200 more as a ball-park figure with every intention of burning that in a (30 min) hold or the g/a that would be likely since those companies preferred passengers at destination.

There will, of course, be occasions when even with 2T extra, in some situations pilots might burn that in a g/a and/or hold and still finish up diverting. (NB Not normally me, as I would probably have legged to to a div early to get the bowser/handling/coaches etc first).

I repeat - the 'sin' is not to take 'insufficient' extra fuel, but to do the wrong thing with what you have got.

I am no longer bothered by aircraft fuel decisions, but some posters seem to be very exercised by the rules and regs. It is time for them to put up or shut up both 1) here and 2) in the real world.

1) Start a serious thread to campaign for a change in EUOPS fuel policy and work through your pilots' union for the same. [Don't have one? See 2)]
2) If you consider your company fuel policy is 'dangerous', report it to the regulator or if you feel you cannot 'risk' that, find a better company

If you do neither, stop whinging here.

[aviationvictim]

I wouldn't normally get involved in the Ryanair-bashing on this forum as I work for the orange side and probably not completely objective in matters of our main competitor. However....

None of these aircraft had even close to the amount of fuel they should have brought for MAD with TS forecast(assuming the numbers quoted here are correct). Taking 300 extra in Madrid on a good day is pushing it. If this is a company policy issue or not is not for me to say. It could be lack of good judgement on the commanders involved. Hopefully they will have learnt from it.

If FR pilots feel they will be putting their job on the line for bringing the required amount of fuel for less than standard days then yes there is a problem in FR both with the management enforcing such a policy but also with the commanders accepting it. It is the responsibility of the commander to ensure the correct amounts of fuel is uplifted and no company, FR or otherwise, will support you when you flameout on final to your alternate.

Accepting bullying on a day to day basis while hoping for the newspapers to tell your boss not to intervene with your job is probably not the correct way to exercise the privileges of your ATPL..

[fox niner]

And as 737Jock says :-

I wonder what everybody else took? All those aircraft that didn't declare a Mayday

Ok here goes. Someone mentioned a KLM aircraft who, on that night, decided to divert to BCN. Just to give everyone an insight on how we at KLM handle LEMD/MAD.
KLM uses statistics over the past two years, per a/c type, per destination, per flight number, etc. to determine how much fuel is needed for a particular flight.
The system works very well. It sometimes surprises me how accurate it is.
For some destinations however, it is not enough to just apply the decision tree that is in place. One of these destinations is LEMD/MAD.
So KLM has this company instruction in place, specifically for Madrid:

CO142/12 COMPANY NOTAM
**********************
MADRID LEMD/MAD.
CONTRARY TO OM A (BOM) 8.1 - 7.2, DUE TO UNEXPECTED DELAYS DURING
ARRIVALS ON FLIGHTS TO MAD, 99% CONT FUEL COVERAGE SHALL BE
APPLIED TO KL1699, KL1701, KL1703, KL1705 AND KL1707.
CREW AND FLIGHT DISPATCH ARE URGED TO COMMUNICATE ACTIVELY DURING
FLIGHT PREPARATION AND IN-FLIGHT TO EVALUATE THE IMPACT OF ACTUAL
AND EXPECTED AIRPORT WEATHER, ATC CAPACITY, TRAFFIC, ETC.
IN CASE OF EXTENSIVE DELAY IFR FEEDBACK IS HIGHLY APPRECIATED.
SOURCE: SPL/OL
END VALID: 01FEB2013 2359Z

It has been in place for at least two years now because too many flights had to divert. What does it say? (layman's translation): 99% coverage in stead of the usual 90% coverage.....Which means:
The mentioned KLM flights have to take at least 16 minutes extra fuel, which is +/- 550 kgs.
The KLM flight that evening therefore had at least 16 minutes additional fuel which was added by dispatch. On top of that, the commander can add any extra fuel that he/she finds necessary.
The KLM flight thast night also had to comply to this company instruction, and therefore had at least this amount of additional fuel.

I hope this creates a picture as to how much fuel other a/c were carrying that evening.

[Aldente]

BOAC your amplified explanation is one i would go along with. Like you I would like to think I would never have found myself in that situation and would have made an early decision to "cut and run" to get ahead of the queue at the diversion airfield. Myself and the F/O would have then been having a nice relaxing cup of tea on the ground whilst waiting for ops to decide what they wanted us to do next, whilst some of my colleagues still in the air were wishing they had done the same.

In my opinion this has less to do with company fuel policy and more about the low experience levels of some of the crews.

We are both on the same page here.....

[BOAC]

F9 - thanks for that insight. A good solution. You will have people quaking in their shoes, of course at the thought of only '16 minutes extra' as a minimum:)

Do I assume that "99%" is 99% of the normal 5% and that the norm is 90% of same?

In my day, BA went completely 'statistical' on contingency and were often around 3% - with plogs worked on destination and arrival time. I do not recall them ever exceeding 5%.

EDIT: Actually having re-read your post, 16 minutes seems high for a 5% contingency? Did you have some other factor?

[Dan Winterland]

''FR2054 plog was 5887kgs they took 6500kgs. 600kg extra.
FR5998 plog was 8917kgs they took 9200kgs. 300kg extra.
FR5389 plog was 11,828kgs they took 12,720kgs. 800kg extra. .

If some of you looked at the facts you will realise they took enough fuel.''



Not in my book!

[TakeItEasy]

If the Aviation Authorities would have the balls, they would simply change the rules and establish a mandatory Requirement that EVERY Airline with ANY Aircraft has to carry a minimum additional Fuel for an Extra Flight Time of eg 20mins on top of the Flight planned Fuel.

[BOAC]

.....you mean as the CAA have for flights into the London major airports?

[TakeItEasy]

The Airline, I work for is operating with Flight planned Fuel to STN. STN is a major Airport (at least for me). That's why it would make sense to have Extra Fuel for 20mins for EVERY Airport in Europe.

[Facelookbovvered]

Whats the point in taking 283Kg of extra fuel, what will it give you in a 738? maybe 7 minutes, my point here is that if you land with FRF + ALT fuel -283Kg after been given one and half holds it makes no odds, so whats the point?

If however you need to load extra fuel for any reason (other than say remote de ice) why piss about with 300Kg if you need it you need, i have lost count the number of times I have seen others go down the path of i need extra xxxx Kgs to be told it will mean off loading bags, to then say ok xxxxKgs - xxKgs?

If extra fuel is needed take if not don't, part of the reason that bean counter get the hump is that they see the fleets figures day after day with aircraft landing well above FRF+ALT+CON+ with additional fuel taken on top, there is nothing unprofessional or demeaning by a commander stating on a plog his/her reason for taking extra fuel on the contrary it demonstrates authority, some arse saying because I can is not acceptable.

Fuel league tables

A good management tool that should not be made public below hopefully a discrete CP. Someone will always be bottom and someone will always be top.

It encourages the less experienced (who may need it more) to take less than they are comfortable with, who then spend the entire flight obsessed with fuel remaining at destination rather than concentrating on the wider picture and generating options

Take it easy

London (LHR) is a special case, I have operated into LHR a couple of hundred times and at a guess have held (BOV) 1 in 3. At CDG i have operated a couple of thousand times and only ever held maybe a dozen times, mainly before the 4th runway opened, at STN it seems to be mainly Northern arrival that get held due to interaction with LTN and sequencing of arrival from the South East. 20 min is over the top for most European airports unless there are Wx issues in which 20 min is an absolute minimum

[fox niner]

BOAC:

99% means: when you carry this amount of fuel, you have a 99% probability of arriving at your destination with all alternate fuel + final reserve fuel on board

90% means: when you carry this amount of fuel, you have only 90% probability of arriving at your destination with all alternate fuel + final reserve fuel on board

For all flights, 90% is the minimum amount. Once again, it is all statistics.

[BOAC]

F9 - now I AM puzzled! Assuming your '16 minutes' reflects an ??AMS-MAD flight?? that works out to a contingency of around 10% - a positive luxury these days. How does KLM tie this into the regulatory 'contingency' requirement? Is that figure (cont) shown on the plog? Any ideas what the '90%' extra time would be?

Facelook - I agree with your para1 - personally I cannot see the point. The minimal extra 'thinking' it gives time for should have taken place before arrival. It looks to me like someone unwilling to exceed 300kg for whatever reason.

Re your para 3 aircraft landing well above FRF+ALT+CON+ with additional fuel taken on top, - this is the factor many seem unable to recognise. You take extra fuel, perhaps on a regular basis 'just because', and on a regular basis you 'land well above FRF+ALT+CON' - obviously the 'extra' fuel was NOT needed on a regular basis. I cannot see what is so difficult about that.

[PENKO]

The bottom line is that they HAD taken extra fuel.
I would have taken a bit more because just as BOAC I prefer to offload my pax at destination. These guys might have had other priorities but as far as block fuel is concerned, what they did was NOT unsafe or crazy or unprofessional. They just limited their holding time above Madrid and the chances of dropping their pax at destination. That is between them and Ryanair. So why are we still discussing the ammount of block fuel?

What we can discuss is if they should have diverted earlier. That is ALL we can discuss regarding safety. And on that I have no comment because I wasn't there that night.

Regarding the Dutch TV program: what a sad state of journalism.

[BOAC]

Now that the white rabbit has withdrawn the nonsensical post and the rest of the Alice characters seem to have quietened down, can we summarise this thread on a sensationalist TV programme with:

All aircraft took ENOUGH fuel

All three appear to have commenced diversion later than sensible, but still SAFELY

All three were caught by an apparently incompetent Lan Chile crew on the way to the div

All three exercised the correct procedures when short of fuel.

RyanAir management operate within the regulations regarding planned fuel uplifts.

There is significant feeling that EUOPS planning requirements, despite not having changed for at least 20 years, are wrong.

Now to avoid further 'Oozlum circling' round the same old trees, I ask the mods to either close or move this thread.

[root]

There is significant feeling that EUOPS planning requirements, despite not having changed for at least 20 years, are wrong.


Perhaps the rules need reviewing.
Since they seem awfully keen to change FLT duty limitations perhaps it is also time to review legal fuel requirements. Perhaps 30 minutes of holding fuel at 1500' is no longer adequate in today's super-congested airspace,

[BOAC]

root - I don't think that will help. All that will do is effectively raise the F Reserves and folk will still be whinging and wetting their pants. If there is to be a change it would need to be EITHER a raised contingency OR a mandatory destination holding fuel OR some airport/runway/route analysis by airlines, monitored by the regulator and appropriate 'EXTRA' fuel added (as the CAA did with the London majors.)

However, no-one seems really bothered, and the airlines, quite reasonably, would scream blue murder and point out that 99% of all flights at the moment land with excess fuel - so what's the problem?

[sleeper]

BOAC
F9 - now I AM puzzled! Assuming your '16 minutes' reflects an ??AMS-MAD flight??
that works out to a contingency of around 10% - a positive luxury these days.
How does KLM tie this into the regulatory 'contingency' requirement? Is that
figure (cont) shown on the plog? Any ideas what the '90%' extra time would be?

The 16 minutes is not a percentage of the flightplan fuel.
It is the average (90 % or 99%) of the delays in the previous months.
So in a month with lots of delays due to wx for instance, the cont fuel will reflect those delays and can even be 30 min.

In slow months, with no delays, it goes down to the minimum of 5 minutes.

This fuel will be presented to you as the minimum blockfuel for that flight. On top of that you can take extra fuel.

[BOAC]

I think you are saying that the 'extra' goes down as contingency? I don't think you would get away with that in the UK since the CAA have insisted (rightly IMO) that holding fuel is added to trip. Then 'contingency' is added.

Thanks for the clarification. Whichever way it helps to sort the dilemma.

[sleeper]

Cont fuel is added to the flightplan by the despatcher and is always as described earlier. It is not included in tripfuel.
Extra fuel is added by the aircrew.
Those are the terms used in my company, cont and extra fuel.

[Paschi]

How can you call FR pilots scum? Its easy talking from a position with a sucure job, now you loose the job and FR needs pilots........
We are all profesioal pilots and we should all respect each other

[BOAC]

.....and indeed, sleeper, I think standard terms. What I am saying is that 'contingency' is not intended for arrival delays, but for other unexpected abnormalities. Where 'arrival delays' are anticipated, the UK CAA require that added to planned trip. Same result, different approach.

Out of interest, can you, as with 'true' contingency fuel, 'legally' burn all your 'contingency' before take-off and what happens if you do use it all en-route before destination? ie Is it just a planning 'thought' or an operational one?

[sleeper]

BOAC,

Yes you can burn up all cont and extra fuel enroute.
If you then encounter a delay it is diversion time or commit to destination (in exceptional circumstances).

To be exact: Our cont fuel is the statistical delay encountered on previous "whole" flights. Not just arrival delays.

[BOAC]

Ah - very similar to BA's 'statistical contingency' then.

[1stspotter]

The second episode of KRO Reporter which will be on air this Thursday will show the financial and contractual situation of Ryanair pilots.
Also the Fuel League will be mentioned.

The makers of the program spoke to several current Ryanair pilots (not just the four shown on tv), ex Ryanair pilots and have insight in contracts and memo's.

[Squawk-7600]

BOAC
All three were caught by an apparently incompetent Lan Chile crew on the way to the div

That is not correct. According to the official IAA report and AVHerald reporting, FR-2054 landed before LAN. There is no evidence from the official reports to suggest that any of the aircraft were affected by LAN "on the way to the div" as you suggest. In fact it was stated that the congestion was at the diversion airport, caused in part by the number of Maydays in addition to the sheer number of diverting aircraft. Notwithstanding the fact that all operators were effected (some by LAN and Ryanair), the only aircraft to declare Maydays were the four mentioned, three of whom were Ryanair aircraft. The latter, presumably, the reason questions were asked and this documentary commissioned.

[badedas]

Regarding the Dutch TV program: what a sad state of journalism.

Remember PENKO, it was the VNV - DALPA (read KLM pilots) that is behind it. They reported 4 years ago that Ryanair was unsafe and they continue to bang on FR as it proves certain things they don't want the world to know. In fact, most of them are arrogant tw7(*s, pardon my French. With respect to safety, I don't think klm pilots should be telling others how to do their jobs. About the documentary, well it's journalism at the level of news of the world.

[maybepilot]

B738driver,

100% agree with you and with the fact that this TV program is trying to address issues that go well beyond the fuel emergencies.
It is obvious to me , as a professional pilot , that something wrong is going on in that airline and it is also quite evident that some people have an interest in hijacking the thread in order to divert the attention away from those issues.

[PENKO]

I do agree that the tv-show (can't call it anything else) was highlighting other issues. But those extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The only evidence offered were those mayday calls. You can't base a show which alludes that FR-pilots do not take enough fuel, on an incident in which ALL involved pilots took on far more fuel than legally required!

During the show it was repeated many times that passengers don't realise that the cheap tickets FR offers are a direct result of pilots not taking enough fuel. Which is a very dubious claim :ugh:


And no, I do not work for FR!

[Squawk-7600]

738driver
I was not discussing anything, I was correcting an incorrect assertion by another member. You are free to discuss whatever you choose. As, I guess, am I.

[grafity]

Wasn't the LAN engine failure due to "fuel starvation"? This seems to be an extremely biased documentary to say the least.

What these captains are basically saying is that they're willing to take-off with less then the fuel they're comfortable with, risking there own life and nearly 200 others because they're afraid they won't get their new base or a promotion or worst case get asked to leave. This says as much about them as it does about the bad culture within Ryanair.

[Aldente]

grafity did you read what B738driver just said about getting back on topic?!

There is already another long and extensive thread regarding the RYR fuel Maydays as stated.

The programme talked about a culture of fear within Ryanair, not just about fuel There is a second show discussing other aspects of working for Ryanair to be shown on Thursday..

[topaky]

not just about fuel There is a second show discussing other aspects of working for Ryanair to be shown on Thursday

Interesting, any info on Dutch media on the content of the second show?

[BEagle]

I don't think you would get away with that in the UK since the CAA have insisted (rightly IMO) that holding fuel is added to trip. Then 'contingency' is added.

BOAC, for clarification, do you mean 'holding fuel' at destination? It is my understanding that legal minimum alternate fuel from dest to altn includes only go-around, climb, cruise, descent, 30 min holding at 1500 ft agl and an approach, but does not include any contingency.

[PENKO]

What these captains are basically saying is that they're willing to take-off with less then the fuel they're comfortable with, risking there own life and nearly 200 others because they're afraid they won't get their new base or a promotion or worst case get asked to leave. This says as much about them as it does about the bad culture within Ryanair

Exactly. Now I will give them some credit because I'm sure the Dutch tv-makers edited their words for max 'sensationalism'. But the closing statement of one of the pilots who claimed he took off with less then minimum fuel are very dubious and reflects worse on him then on his boss. But again, let's hope it is just bad editing.

[737Jock]

BOAC, how is KLM's 90 cont or 99 cont similar to BA's?

The 16 minutes is not a percentage of the flightplan fuel.
It is the average (90 % or 99%) of the delays in the previous months.
So in a month with lots of delays due to wx for instance, the cont fuel will reflect those delays and can even be 30 min.

In slow months, with no delays, it goes down to the minimum of 5 minutes.



In my day, BA went completely 'statistical' on contingency and were often around 3% - with plogs worked on destination and arrival time. I do not recall them ever exceeding 5%.

Clearly KLM takes more then 5% based on statistics, they add this delay fuel on top of the minimum contingency of 5 minutes or 5% of trip fuel. In accordance with normal EUops rules.

Regarding BA taking less then 5% of trip fuel... my ops manual states this about reduced contingency
Reduction of Contingency Fuel by the Use of 3% ERA
Not less than 3% or 5 minutes, which ever is greater, of the planned Trip Fuel or in the event of in flight replanning, 3% of the Trip Fuel for the remainder of the flight, provided that an en-route alternate is available in accordance with the diagram below. The en-route alternate should be located within a circle having a radius equal to 20% of the total flight plan distance, the centre of which lies on the planned route at a distance from the destination of 25% of the total flight plan distance, or at 20% of the total flight plan distance plus 50 NM, whichever is the greater; as illustrated below.

Does BA do this on a regular basis? And how does taking less then the minimum 5minutes /5% of trip involve statistics?

Contingency fuel:

Fuel to cover deviations from the planned operating conditions such as unfavourable variations in cruise altitude or track, deviations from the forecast wind values or any other unforeseen adverse circumstances.

Contingency Fuel shall be the higher of (1) or (2) below:

5% of the planned Trip Fuel or in the event of in-flight replanning, 5% of the Trip Fuel for the remainder of the flight.

an amount of fuel to fly for 5 minutes at holding speed at 1500 ft above the destination aerodrome in standard conditions.

How can anybody statistically determine unforseen conditions I wonder? Or statistically determine deviations from planned operating conditions?

[dannyalliga]

Spanish protectionism, Dutch biased media, 4 mentally unstable individuals claiming to be FR pilots, a second show on the way that will surely be full of false claims......poor Ryanair, everything and everyone seem to be against their highly legal and morally unquestionable way of doing business.

The third reich as well as The Roman Empire have all fallen just like any other regime is bound to end if based on fear and threats.
History repeats itself, Ryanair fans would be better off learning from it.

[grafity]

Aldente I was making a point about the interview with the Spanish ATCO, he say's in the interview that the LAN called a mayday "not because of fuel shortage, but because of engine failure." A bit disingenuous if the reason the engine shut down was due to fuel starvation.
@23:50 in this clip KRO Reporter: Mayday Mayday - Uitzending Gemist (http://www.uitzendinggemist.nl/afleveringen/1315947)

The documentary goes out of it's way to attack Ryanair as the only bad guy in this event. From what I can see the LAN was the nearest miss on the night and they played it down as a none event. They've also made heroes out of Spanish ATC who seem to have been a major contributor to the whole mess. I'm not saying Ryanair haven't questions to answer from this incident, but if these guys are going to make a documentary they should at least make some effort to keep a bit of integrity to their argument. From what I understood of this documentary even Michael Moore would be cringing.

If you read my post you will also notice that most of it is talking about the culture within Ryanair, but maybe you didn't like the fact that I talked about the culture of these individual Captains within the airline. They're supposed to be commanders of the aircraft, if they can justify extra fuel then take it and make the justification if need be, if you can't justify it, then why are you taking it? If you can justify and don't take then maybe you should resign yourself to the right seat.

I have to say that having followed the ECA for the last 6 months or so they come across to me as an embarrassment to the profession. I suspect that they are a major motivator behind this documentary. I would love to see better terms and conditions for flight crew but these guys are just going about it the wrong way. They had a number of baseless claims on facebook following this Madrid incident and their Cpt. Dead Tired campaign just makes Pilots look incompetent and spoiled. Stop trying bull**** the public that Ryanair aren't safe, when in fact they are one of the safest. There seems to be plenty of ways to hit them where it hurts. Contract employment for one, start lobbying EASA and National Authorities to improve conditions for pilots. The states are doing it, 1500hours minimums for F/O's would reduce the pool of wannabes fairly rapidly and force better conditions.

[Aldente]

International version of programme now available on the KRO website, with English subtitles.


Reporter - Mayday Mayday - International version (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2012/afleveringen/28-12-2012/extras/mayday_mayday_-_international_version)

Part two on Thursday in which other topics will be discussed.

[JW411]

I see that the interesting letter from the ATC Supervisor in Madrid has been moved to the ATC forum.

[bille1319]

What if Ryanair are using frugal dispatchers / ops who factor in the standard passenger weight in their load sheet based on 3rd world countries instead of bulging western ones resulting in a lighter payload hence fuel calculation and also forget to model in some of the heavier hand luggage that their passengers carry nowadays.:rolleyes:

[Lord Spandex Masher]

You're allowed to take more than "minimum reserve fuel"?

Well that's something.

[BOAC]

Don't forget poor MOL is having 'difficulty' with his PR department.:)

[A and C]

You are too close to the problem...........take a few steps back and you will see it more clearly.

The facts are the RYR fuel policy is tight but within the regulations, but just meeting the regulations is not always safe.

The documentary program had an agenda to be critical to Ryanair and that they have done but at the expence of not telling the whole truth about the shortcomings of the Spanish ATC system.

Having worked a damp lease for Ryanair I have to say that I did not like the attitude of the company towards the crews one little bit but I would never take less fuel than I was happy with and I was questioned as to why I had that fuel loaded. Some of the other pilots regarded these questions about fuel loads as a subtle form of intimidation........ I treated them as an inquiry into fuel policy and found that when justified on safety grounds I had no problems, others seemed to not have the backbone to stand up to such enquirys from the management and found it easier to fly around with flight plan fuel that they were not happy with rather than face off the management.

Keeping the airline staff in a constant state of unease is a Ryanair tactic to get the most from people, I think that the TV people should have used that as a starting point for the documentary and looked at the way this state of unease is achived and the resulting effects on the operation as a whole.

Now that would be a documentary worth watching !

[1stspotter]

Keeping the airline staff in a constant state of unease is a Ryanair tactic to get the most from people, I think that the TV people should have used that as a starting point for the documentary and looked at the way this state of unease is achived and the resulting effects on the operation as a whole.

Now that would be a documentary worth watching !

A en C:
The second episode of the KRO Reporter programme to be broadcasted this Thursday will deal with contracts of Ryanair pilots and terms and conditions of the airline.
I am sure this episode will be available with english subtitles as well. URL of the second episode will be posted when it is available.

I think the agenda of the programme is to make the general public and politic aware of the financial and contract situation of Ryanair pilots and the possible effect on flight safety. Maybe the programme starts/re-starts a discussion in politics and pilots to have a union.
I guess that is one of the drivers to have to programme available with english subtitels as well.

[1stspotter]

Just came across a letter/diary of a Ryanair captain posted on internet. Guess this describes the kind of stress some of Ryanair pilots feel.

He describes someone of the cabin crew was not fit to fly. But the crewmember did not call sick 2 hours before departure. Ryanair OPS wanted to register this as a no show.
The captain also needed to use some pressure at OPS to get a different, CAT3 aircraft.

Life on the Line (http://www.scribd.com/doc/115133965/Life-on-the-Line)

[dannyalliga]

Keeping the airline staff in a constant state of unease is a Ryanair tactic to get the most from people, I think that the TV people should have used that as a starting point for the documentary and looked at the way this state of unease is achived and the resulting effects on the operation as a whole.



The second episode of the KRO Reporter programme to be broadcasted this Thursday will deal with contracts of Ryanair pilots and terms and conditions of the airline.

I think I know what kind of stuff to expect from the second part of the TV show which I am looking forward to of course, however what I am looking forward to the most is the kind of propaganda you and those like you will come up with in order to justify a sick business model which will inevitably backfire against those very people who created it and support it.

[A and C]

Was the last paragraph aimed at me?

[1stspotter]

Dannyyalliga:
or was your message meant for me?
If you read carefully you will learn that I am against the way Ryanair management treats its pilots and its passengers in a way to reduce costs and keep fares low.

Just read another story in which pax were given Euro 5 to buy food and drinks at Charleroi. The night before the flight to MAD had to return while flying Mid France. The next morning they could not depart because (I guess) the flight data monitoring system was removed from the aircraft the night before and sent to BCN for analyses.

I believe this is not a fair way to do business and it will turn against them in the long run.

[A and C]

The FDM tape is usually just a cassette that can be changed in seconds, I don't think they would remove the whole box just to read the FDM.

It would be my guess that the aircraft was awaiting parts to fix the problem that had resulted in the aircraft returning.

Oh ! I am assuming that the pax got €5 each for refreshments, that won't go very far in the average airport terminal !

[1stspotter]

A German TV programma broadcasted in November about Ryanair.
They also showed a Ryanair pilot who talked about memos on fuel reduction, no payment when you call sick etc.
It is in German language.

Die teuren Tricks der Billigflieger - WDR MEDIATHEK - WDR.de (http://www.wdr.de/mediathek/html/regional/2012/11/19/koennes-kaempft.xml)

[1stspotter]

This is the translated text showing the reason the Ryanair aircraft could not depart CRL to MAD on its second attemp the day after they had to return.
Full story in french here:
200 passagers du vol Bruxelles - Madrid sequestrés par Ryanair (http://www.americas-fr.com/tourisme/actualite/200-passagers-du-vol-bruxelles-madrid-sequestres-par-ryanair-16981.html)

This time it was human error: The system of recording data in the cabin, which had been taken the previous night to analyze the data of the incident, had not been placed in the device but was sent to Barcelona. He had to wait for his return

[1stspotter]

KRO Brandpunt Reporter just released a press release about the content of the second episode of the programme to be broadcasted this evening on Dutch tv.

The press release in dutch language can be read here.
Brandpunt Reporter - Ryanair piloten vliegen ook als ze ziek zijn (http://www.nieuwsbank.nl/inp/2013/01/03/T057.htm?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Nieuwsbank-Media+%28Nieuwsbank+-+Media%29)

This press release got a lot of attention in the dutch press as well (just like the fuel issue). Below just a few. Sure the foreign press will start to publish very soon just as they did with the news on fuel usage.

Telegraaf (biggest Dutch newspaper)
'Piloten Ryanair vliegen als ze ziek zijn' - Reizen en vakanties | U leest er alles over op Reiskrant.nl van De Telegraaf [reiskrant] (http://www.telegraaf.nl/reiskrant/21194726/___Piloten_vliegen_als_ze_ziek_zijn___.html)


BNR
Ryanair-piloten: ziekte geen excuus om niet te vliegen (http://www.bnr.nl/topic/mobiliteit/266545-1301/ryanair-piloten-ziekte-geen-excuus-om-niet-te-vliegen)

Trouw (Dutch newspaper)
'Piloten Ryanair vliegen als ze ziek zijn' - Home - Trouw.nl (http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4324/Nieuws/article/detail/3371594/2013/01/03/Piloten-Ryanair-vliegen-als-ze-ziek-zijn.dhtml?utm_source=scherm1&utm_medium=button&utm_campaign=Cookiecheck)

Eindhovens Dagblad (Dutch newspaper)
'Piloten Ryanair vliegen als ze ziek zijn' (http://www.ed.nl/algemeen/binnenland/piloten-ryanair-vliegen-als-ze-ziek-zijn-1.3589697)

The Google Translate is:

Under pressure from management

Ryanair pilots fly even if they are unable to do so. They stand by working with Ryanair under pressure to also fly if they `unfit to fly 'are. That is punishable according to European regulations. They do their statements in the program Brandpunt KRO Reporter
Thursday. Professional organizations want an investigation into the company of the Irish airline.

In Brandpunt Reporter three captains and co-pilot tell their story. This shows that pilots of Ryanair which are sick or tired are sitting in the cockpit. "The company we are in this position. That should not happen. " A colleague adds: "If we do not fly, we do not get paid.
So if you're sick, feel not fit, or if you have personal problems, it will affect your income. "

Ryanair does not accepts professional organizations and trade unions as partners. The legal status of most Ryanair pilots is weak because they involve a complicated structure are hired as 'contractors'. A pilot says: "It is exploitation. You lose your morale and motivation. You
feel like a slave. " Most pilots are only paid per flight hour and have no health insurance, disability insurance and pensions. A former commander of Ryanair says: "It is obvious that they are going to fly when they are not so capable." In the programme Brandpunt Reporter pilots admit that they have flown while there were not capable. "There is too much at stake to this kind of risk-taking, but we do it every day," admits one of them. According to Nico Voorbeek, president of the European Cockpit Association (ECA)
the 'Very difficult for pilots to admit this, because it concerns an offense. "

"This is shocking. I'm deeply impressed because it touches our professional pride 'reacts chairman Evert van Zwol of the Dutch Association of Pilots (VNV). Both professional organization who last week called for an investigation into the fuel policy of the Irish
prize fighter, want now broaden teh investigation. Nico Voorbeek: "I think that a study should be done to the company Ryanair. Evert van Zwol adds: "This culture is very bad for security, act of government is desirable."

[1stspotter]

Ryanair responded today to the news that the airline let sick pilots fly. Realy do not understand their PR office. They said the tv programme did not give Ryanair a chance to respond. This is untrue. Correspondence between programma and Ryanair can be found on the website of the tv programme.



Here the press release
Ryanair dismisses false claims from KRO REPORTER (http://www.ryanair.com/nl/nieuws/ryanair-dismisses-false-claims-from-kro-reporter)

edit: found the press release in English, deleted translated one

Ryanair dismisses false claims from KRO REPORTER


Ryanair, Europe’s favourite airline, today (3 Jan) dismissed the latest false claims by Dutch TV programme KRO REPORTER, which, just like last week’s programme, are unsupported by any factual evidence whatsoever. KRO's latest false claims, again made anonymously by unidentified contributors so that they cannot be tested or verified, is that pilots fly when they feel unwell (“unfit to fly”) or otherwise they would lose money.


This claim is manifestly untrue. Ryanair pilots routinely report being “unfit to fly” and are routinely replaced by standby pilots who are rostered on standby precisely to provide this cover. Equally, since Ryanair pilots can (by law) not fly more than 900 hours per year (an average of just 18 hours per week) they can and routinely do recover these occasional sick days later in the year.



The falsity of these latest KRO REPORTER claims is proven by the fact that in the last full roster year to March 2012, out of a total of over 1,700 contractor pilots, over 1,010 (or more than 58%) reported “unfit to fly” at some time during the year. These false claims are also disproven by the fact that Ryanair rosters over 200 pilots on standby on a daily basis to cover pilot sickness and other eventualities. Over the past 7 days, from Wed 26 Dec – Wed 2 Jan, a total of 169 pilots reported themselves as "unfit to fly" and were replaced by a standby pilot. These factual figures disprove KRO REPORTER’S anonymous false claims.


Ryanair now calls for an investigation into the low standards of journalism exhibited by this KRO REPORTER programme which masquerades as investigative journalism, but has over two separate broadcasts offered no evidence of any wrongdoing or of any safety breaches but has instead based its programmes on false claims from anonymous people whose identities have been hidden by this programme precisely because their claims are untrue.



The contributions by KLM pilots are equally unreliable since they don’t work for Ryanair and instead work for a competitor airline. The only factual evidence in these matters is the official IAA report into the 3 Valencia weather diversions on 26 July last which confirmed that all 3 aircraft took extra fuel on the night in question, and Ryanair’s continuing compliance with all EU safety regulations including pilot hours and sickness provisions.



Ryanair’s Stephen McNamara said;

“Perhaps KRO REPORTER should now explain why 169 Ryanair pilots reported themselves “unfit to fly” in the last 7 days if, as their programme claims, Ryanair pilots are unwilling or afraid to do so.”

[16024]

Yep, but if you call in sick with less than 2 hours notice you get a no-show.
This was mentioned earlier, and it's important to understand the details.
So you wake up at 4:00 for a 6:00 report feeling totally unfit. By the time you gather your wits and get to the phone it's 4:10. Now you remember the time your lousy iPhone didn't go off last year, and the time your car wouldn't start the year before that, and somebody said something about "three strikes", so in you go , feeling like ****, ears blocked and dizzy.

[fireflybob]

Yep, but if you call in sick with less than 2 hours notice you get a no-show.
This was mentioned earlier, and it's important to understand the details.
So you wake up at 4:00 for a 6:00 report feeling totally unfit. By the time you gather your wits and get to the phone it's 4:10. Now you remember the time your lousy iPhone didn't go off last year, and the time your car wouldn't start the year before that, and somebody said something about "three strikes", so in you go , feeling like ****, ears blocked and dizzy.

16024, I know where you are coming from but sorry if you are a Professional pilot you are legally obliged to go sick if you are not fit to operate irrespective of when this happens and irrespective of the consequences.

If you report for duty when you are not fit to operate then you may regret it for the rest of your life!

I would rather be on the street having made the correct decisions rather than prostituting myself for any employer.

[scottishpoet]

No fuel

Unfit Pilots

This is one of the busiest fleets in Europe, carried the 2nd highest number of passengers in Europe in 2012 after Lufthansa. If so much is wrong, why are their planes not repeatedly falling out the sky?

[Aldente]

So what about the ex Ryanair Captain that *wasn't* anonymous then?

They seem to have conveniently ignored him in their complaints.

[Mondeoman]

I work for an ULTRA low cost airline ! I have never even been asked why, directly or indirectly why I took more fuel, the company works on the simple basis of 'he must have a reason' , and allow me to use my own judgement of each situation ! They ask me to save fuel for sure, but never dictate to me how, my point is simple....not all low costs are the same. Not all things in my Low cost are perfect, but in this regard, i admit...faultless.

NOT ALL LOW COSTS ARE THE SAME !!! Fly safe to all :)

[Herod]

One thing that people seem to have missed is that none of the Ryanair pilots were forced to sign their contracts. I was with buzz when it was swallowed by Ryanair and had the opportunity to join them. The contract spelled out the terms and conditions, which to my mind were unacceptable. As a result I didn't sign and was made redundant. I don't altogether buy the argument "the new pilot must find work somewhere" either. Anyone with ideas of getting into this profession (trade?) should have done his homework. Yes, I was working when conditions were different, but I still knew what I was getting into.

[Sober Lark]

Ryanair is Europe's most popular airline but apparently also the EUs most hated airline! Whilst it is obvious Ryanair don't have to deal with any real aircraft disasters they do seem to be constantly fighting social media PR disasters. For those who work with her and for those who fly with her, I hope their new PR team understand that fire prevention is better than constant fire fighting.

[pilotsince99]

Ryanair is Europe's most popular airline but apparently also the EUs most hated airline! Whilst it is obvious Ryanair don't have to deal with any real aircraft disasters they do seem to be constantly fighting social media PR disasters. For those who work with her and for those who fly with her, I hope their new PR team understand that fire prevention is better than constant fire fighting

It doesn't help that they advertise in the big news papers, that getting rid of one pilot would save the customer 10 Pounds per seat. Also the numerous court cases, in Italy and Germany with regards to avoidance of national insurance and giving different weight than what is actually being used don't help.
I am not surprised that authorities are looking into which corners Ryanair might cut with regards to safety.

[Hotel Tango]

My thoughts are that to a large extent RYR have brought this unfavourable media attention unto themselves. If MOL & co had stayed low profile over the years and just got on with it they probably wouldn't be targeted as they are now. The airline they were (originally) supposed to be emulating, Southwest Airlines, has seldom, if ever, attracted the kind of controversial publicity which RYR has.

[170to5]

One thing guys....

Just because an airline hasn't had a crash, doesn't necessarily mean it is completely safe.

Taking Ryanair as an example, because we're talking about them (also, I won't argue that other carriers have their near misses, but the ones I've heard coming from Ryanair are as scary as I've heard without it all ending in a heaped pile of metal)...

What about the orbit on finals that took a crew below the elevation of Cork airport, leading ATC to hit the crash button? What about the well-publicised incident in Rome with the bereaved Captain? What about the aeroplane that failed to go-around when instructed to twice in Dublin, flying at 200kts at a mile finals, barely avoiding an A330 that was taking off? What about the runway excursions that seem to stay out of the press somehow?

Does the fact that none of these serious incidents led to deaths mean that RYR is an extremely safe carrier? Or just an extremely lucky one?

There are, I'm sure, far more stories of crews (many of who are my friends) saving a very unpleasant situation from being exacerbated, as in all carriers, but this idiotic attitude, most disappointingly from pilots, that "no crashes = safe operation" drive me nuts. There are so many examples proving that isn't the case, it's foolish to believe otherwise.

And of course, the point that exasperates us all, whoever we work for, is that punters will only ever worry about how much their suitcase is costing them...

[Aldente]

What about the orbit on finals that took a crew below the elevation of Cork airport, leading ATC to hit the crash button? What about the well-publicised incident in Rome with the bereaved Captain? What about the aeroplane that failed to go-around when instructed to twice in Dublin, flying at 200kts at a mile finals, barely avoiding an A330 that was taking off? What about the runway excursions that seem to stay out of the press somehow?

And Memmingen of course - potential CFIT- high speed, high ROD descending to something like 450'agl whilst still 4 miles from the airfield before terrain pull up warning and go-around.

Inappropriate runway selected for approach and landing, by crew's own admission, "to save time" (and get back on schedule presumably).

Hotel Tango , you are spot on with your observations! Live by the sword and die by the sword.........

[16024]

Firefly Bob wrote:

if you are a Professional pilot you are obliged to go sick if you are not fit to operate

Well I don't know if this is a pop at me, I don't even work for them.

The thread is about safety concerns of those who do, and the perceived pressures, real or not.

If I were in charge of the largest airline in Europe, I would be very mindful of the public perception of my safety culture. Certainly not arrogant and dismissive about it.

[737Jock]

Sure the president of ECA and VNV are KLM pilots, but obviously they aren't speaking as KLM pilots but as spokesmen for the industrial organisations.

Sadly the big orange airline is doing exactly the same thing with regard to contractors.

But at least the union is trying to stop this, see what they have to say:

BALPA | EASYJET PROFITS BUILT ON USE OF CASUAL LABOUR (http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/News/EASYJET-PROFITS-BUILT-ON-USE-OF-CASUAL-PILOT-LABOU.aspx)

BALPA | EASYJET BONUS DIFFICULT FOR PILOTS TO SWALLOW (http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/News/EASYJET-CEO-BONUS-DIFFICULT-FOR-PILOTS-TO-SWALLOW.aspx)

BALPA | PASSENGERS SHOULD SPARE A THOUGHT FOR PILOTS (http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/News/PASSENGERS-SHOULD-SPARE-A-THOUGHT-FOR-PILOTS.aspx)

BALPA | AIRLINES ON NOTICE TO STOP PILOT EXPLOITATION (http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/News/AIRLINES-ON-NOTICE-TO-STOP-PILOT-EXPLOITATION.aspx)AIRLINES ON NOTICE TO STOP PILOT EXPLOITATION

03/11/2012

*
British pilots have today unanimously agreed to say 'enough is enough' to the ever-growing use of 'contract pilots' in UK airlines.

At its Annual Delegates Conference, the British Airline Pilots' Association (BALPA) heard from two young pilots, recently trained, who spoke of the struggle they have had to fulfil their dream of being an airline pilot.

BALPA General Secretary, Jim McAuslan, said:

'I have rarely seen conference so united, and so determined to tackle an issue. *

'Unlike in previous decades it is now normal for trainee pilots to have to pay for all their training themselves, with no guarantee job at the end of it, and then be forced onto different contracts from permanent* pilots with substandard terms and conditions.* And in certain circumstances pilots are forced to set up their own company so the airline can treat them as contractors, rather than employees, which they effectively are.

'The result is pilots not just on lower terms and conditions than permanent employees, but their effectively being exploited because of their love for the job.* Pilots should not have to sleep in airport car parks because they can't afford a hotel room; that's not good for flight safety. And it is simply wrong for recently-qualified pilots to have to service debts so huge that they have to pay £1,400 a month of their £1,600 salary in repayments.

'BALPA is not going to allow this situation to continue.* This unfairness needs to be tackled across the industry.* That's why today, permanent pilots in easyJet expressed their support to their 'FlexiCrew' colleagues who are on these other contracts.* The message is simple: easyJet plane – easyJet pilot.

'But this is not just about easyJet.* We will be working airline by airline to ensure this is tackled.

'We will be putting pressure on the regulator to ensure that their own rules around contract pilots are followed, which we do not think they currently are, and where we think they are insufficient, urging change.

'We will be considering all legal avenues to stop this practice.

'We will be looking at the tax implications of airlines' use of contract pilots, and ensuring our members have all the information they need to ensure they are protected.* We have already urged the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee to look into the tax issues around contract pilots.

'And conference did not rule out the use of industrial action to deal with this insidious threat to pilots' futures.'

The TUC's General Secretary-designate, Frances O'Grady, spoke at BALPA's conference yesterday and expressed her support for BALPA's many campaigns, including our desire to tackle the growing use of casual labour in aviation.


Support the easyjet plane easyjet pilot campaign by going to facebook and like/share the campaign logo: http://www.facebook.com/BALPApilots

[fireflybob]

Well I don't know if this is a pop at me, I don't even work for them.

16024, it wasn't intended to be a "pop" at anyone but a statement of the responsibilities of an aircraft Commander and other members of Flight Crew which are enshrined in Air Law, as I am sure you know.

[Facelookbovvered]

Now that i have your attention what i meant to write was "why should Ryanair pay for pilots that it doesn't employ that go sick?"

If I employ the services of a builder or plumber and he doesn't turn up I would not be expected to pay him for not being able to do what i contracted him to do.

Of course he/she is not driving my vehicle or wearing my uniform or not allowed to undertake plumbing or building work for another party, so in a nut shell there you have it, these people are by any reasonable argument employee's of Ryanair, if it is a genuine at arm's length relationship then the agency should be paying the sick pay, setting the roster, agreeing leave periods deciding on where you will be based and so on.

I know other companies have followed Ryanair down this path, but why, well to me it seems that without doing so they make themselves uncompetitive in terms of their cost base?

The only other profession that i can think of that works on ethos of no work no pay is prostitution, for that is what being a pilot is fast becoming, you get screwed at every turn and your in so deep with debts your only salvation is to put up with, but at least a tart (sorry sex industry operative) gets to pick her/his? days off and which street to work.

So if these pilots don't work for Ryanair, why is their PR department even attempting to defend their sick policy?

Southwest marks out of 10? well i have flown with them and the are first class

Ryanair have to date been saved by the EGWPS on more than one occasion and to be fair they have an excellent training and know only to well that their first crash if down to them, would probably be their last.

The Spanish, Italians, Germans and now the Dutch it seems are on their case.

[Squawk-7600]

I know other companies have followed Ryanair down this path, but why, well to me it seems that without doing so they make themselves uncompetitive in terms of their cost base?

Uncompetitive, compared to whom? Only compared to the next company who has been allowed to lower the bar still lower?

[16024]

the responsibilities of an aircraft Commander and other members of Flight Crew which are enshrined in Air Law

And we are still deflecting responsibility for safety away from the company.

Which is the whole point of this thread.

" We provided them with the weapons and the ammunition, and pointed out the target, and offered the bounty, but they decided to open fire..."

Or:

"We provided the unguarded machinery, but they decided to stick their hands in..."

[badedas]

As a ryanair pilot I do not understand the fuzz and the negativism.... Sorry beats me, but I see arguments of many of you which are sadly wrong. It's 1am now, should I list all these wrong arguments/statements etc then it'll be 4am before I tuck in.
And if I am sick, I do not fly.

737Jock
"Sure the president of ECA and VNV are KLM pilots, but obviously they aren't speaking as KLM pilots but as spokesmen for the industrial organisations."

What do these guys know about ryanair? Did they work for ryanair? Have they hard facts or just surfing on the crest of an enourmous wave of rumours by people feeling somehow wronged by ryanair... These chicken litlle like characters are on the payroll of an airline (KLM) that is threatened economically by ryanair. I really think it shows enormous arrogance and frankly stupidity by going public like that. The little respect I had for these folks is now fully gone.

[dannyalliga]

The crap this airline is made of is slowly but surely surfacing, the comments of those who still try to defend this sick and decaying business model are more and more pathetic but the worst thing is the position of our managers who will rather live in denial then admit a problem and try to fix it.
I welcome and thank all the pilots involved including our KLM colleagues who are fighting a battle for us while we should fight it ourselves.

[737Jock]

Your from belgium badebas, I assume you speak dutch, but these guys respond with regard to the statements made by the 4 pilots.

"if this is whats happening...." "if this is true..."

And they give information on study debts carried by new pilots.

[A and C]

While not totaly disagreeing with you about the atmosphere Ryanair staff have to work under I feel that the management are unlikely to punish a genuine case of sickness as it is not in there interest to do so, in my opinion they create an aggressive management stance to keep the staff in line and the spineless just buckle under and do as they say ( and write all sorts of rubbish here) while those with genuine problems who stand up and say so will get a reasonable hearing.

As I said in a post before I think you should take a few steps back and look at your employers with a clear head, may be then you would start posing contructive information rather than your outbursts based on your aspirations and dreams for the future.

I have been in a lot of airlines and there are always people who are determined to be oppressed victims of the system ( and tell any one unfortunate to listen all about it.............. At some length !) what I am saying to you is don't talk yourself into becoming one of life's professonal victims.

[1stspotter]

The second episode of the KRO Reporter programme is online now.
Most part is in dutch, an ex Ryanair pilot is speaking english language.
Reporter - Mayday Mayday deel 2 (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2013/afleveringen/03-01-2013)

The effect on social media of the two programmes can be seen in the link below. It shows the activity on dutch social media on Ryanair (not sure what is measured) and the sentiment.

Coosto blog – Ryanair perikelen (http://blog.coosto.nl/ryanair-perikelen/)

The second episode had a lot of repeats of the first episode. The same error: again was mentioned that out of 17 diversions from Madrid to Valencia only three aircraft (all Ryanair) declared mayday. The programme did not mention Lan Chile had an engine flame out because of low fuel.

I believe the makers of the programme cut corners in their research by just asking a few people about their opinions. All of them have an agenda against Ryanair. I guess that is what media is about.

The most revealing part was a confession of one or two pilots who did fly while they were not fit to fly (in one reason too tired to fly). Other pilots refused to answer the question whether they ever flew while not fit to.
Besides the story of the four current pilots and the one ex-pilot the programme did not show any hard evidence (memo's etc) of pressure. They did show the fuel league table. But not a prove of pressure by the management to keep extra fuel to an undesired minimum.

BTW: can any other Ryanair pilot identify its coworker pilot on the crewcode?

There must be more than 1 ex-Ryanair pilot who like to reveal their feelings/experiences I guess.

I do believe the culture of the management is sick. I do believe there is pressure. But that is based on reading many forum, not on the programme.
Also not all pilots will feel the pressure. It will strongly depend on the mood/character and backbone of the base captain.

Read to many stories about crew members being sacked 11 months after the start for unknow reasons etc. Also pilots flying not employed by Ryanair but flying on a hour based contract is not healty. This is acceptable for IT or other business but not in aviation. Do think the EU should stop this. Easyjet goes the same way.

[dannyalliga]

in my opinion they create an aggressive management stance to keep the staff in line and the spineless just buckle under and do as they say ( and write all sorts of rubbish here) while those with genuine problems who stand up and say so will get a reasonable hearing.

I think you involuntarily said it all: there are spineless pilots in Ryanair who just buckle under and fly sick or fatigued, leave with minimum fuel even when it is not appropriate etc. due to aggressive management stance.
There are also pilots with balls in Ryanair who do not accept bullying and refuse to fly sick or fatigued and carry the fuel they deem appropriate for the day.

You passengers should just hope your pilots on the day belong to the latter category.

To me there is an evident problem within the company culture that can potentially affect safety, if for you A and C this way of doing business is fine please let me know who you fly for and I will avoid your outfit just like I do with mine for my personal and family travels.

[PH-Chucky]

Some Ryanair-colleagues who respond in this thread are the perfect example of being "higher in the food-chain" and who have no interest in looking back what has happened to their fellow colleagues who have joined the same company since then...

Why brag about your 120K salary and that you work from the base you prefer if the majority of you colleagues are contracters whose T&C are falling faster as a rock and are shipped through Europe to different bases faster than DHL is delivering it's parcels....

These freshmen who have joined Ryanair the recent years have to pay for TR and own expenses which means they have to fund an additional 45K euro after already having paid 100K+ for their flight training. That means they are well beyond their arses in debts, and in no position to argue with their employer about working hours, rostering, base allocation or any decisions they make during their working days.

We call it FEAR!! Fear of being scheduled with only low hours and many SBY's, fear of being allocated to a base that lies even further towards Russian territory, or fear of not having the possibility to live a normal social life because the company hasn't implemented any form of "Corporate Social Responsibility" for it's workforce that is helping to achieve Ryanair's multimilion profit.

Things will not improve when nobody within Ryanair's 'foodchain' (regardless of position) is willing to look backward. Please acknowledge the deterioration within your company. You might be Captain by now with good T&C's, but then again you are flying with these freshmen who are in a completely different mindset without any financial and/or job certainties by Ryanair. They might not tell you to 'go-around' or that they are unfit-to-fly.....

I hope these freshmen are professional enough during their daily operation as a pilot for Ryanair to make the right decisions in the interest of safety, but how much more decrease in T&C's are they willing to accept before they can't be that professional anymore and act like puppets whose strings are controlled by MOL? In my opinion a person with 150K+ debt with no financial and/or job certainties and no backup by any Pilot Association could easily become such a puppet....

Wake up!!

[Microburst2002]

I have heard of the repressive atmosphere in RYR when you can be sacked so easily for things such as declining to continue a flight for flight duty considerations or fatigue or for excessive fuel uplift...

What happens to a pilot who diverts early to the alternate for fuel reasons? will he be called to a meeting, sacked, degraded, or punished in any way or nothing at all?

The answer to this question is the key to judge the RYR policy as safe or unsafe.

[1stspotter]

What I do not understand is why there are not much more evidence by Ryanair pilots describing their working situation/ t&c on the internet. I read a lot of nasty stories told by cabin crews on internet.

It is because there are afraid Ryanair will trace their IP-numbers by requesting it from the forum owner and hosting company?
I am sure experiences can be described without Ryanair being able to indentify flightnumbers, names etc.

There are many ways to publish information on the internet so your message cannot be traced. https://www.torproject.org/

It is too sad, bizarre and unexceptable pilots have to use these tools to tell their story. It looks like East Germany in the Cold War days. Or North Korea.

[dlcmdrx]

For anyone that is still doubting the pressure culture in RYR:

Infamous 2005 Ryanair Ciampino 'Serious Incident' - Report finally out (http://www.politics.ie/forum/transport/73165-infamous-2005-ryanair-ciampino-serious-incident-report-finally-out.html)

If a commander after loosing a son is still fearing of loosing his job if he reports sick for depression then there is a huge problem.

And the sad thing is not that the nonpilots support this sad culture... is that there are still pilots in some kind of corporate bubble defending this crap.

In Southwest after the last taxiway slip some things have started to surface out from that company, and one of them is the way they pay their pilots which make them be ina rush rush state of mind.

The situation is not as criticial as in ryr but definitely shows that certain politics and bean counter approaches can affect safety wether you like it or not.

[jcjeant]

Ridiculous accusations about Ryanair
Ryanair has exploded in recent years, allowing more access to air and it does not please everyone, so they try to hurt by betrayal and manipulation.
Ryanair explodes its turnover and has an exemplary record in terms of flight safety while others have debts and send aircraft in the ground
Ryanair has the highest rate of customer satisfaction compared with the other airlines

[BEagle]

Ryanair has the highest rate of customer satisfaction compared with the other airlines

Hardly. In a recent Which? magazine survey, they came 16th out of 16 short haul airlines, with a customer score of a mere 34%.

[A and C]

I have never said that I think the way Ryanair treat their pilots is good in terms of the general bullying atmosphere inside the company, I have supported the right to remunerate the pilots in any legal way that they choose, if that is by contracting then so be it. I know that you disagree with me on the contracting issue but until the EU gets a common policy on the issue people will take advantage of the most favorable state to operate in.

The airline that I work for has one of the best safety cultures that I have had the pleasure to work in, for me this is a normal working atmosphere but for the Southern European cabin crew it is a positive culture shock, they tell me that they get far more respect with us than they got when working for local operators.

BEagal

Thank you for that I was just about to quote the same report, it is clear to me that price alone is the reason for traveling with Ryanair and so they make a fortune from moving around the great unwashed of Europe who know no better than to look at the headline price and by the time they get to the checkout have forgotten what the extras added up to !

[Thunderbirdsix]

Bet this news will make all the Ryanair haters on this board mad its unreal the amount of people on this forum that hate Ryanair wonder if its beause its Irish. Personally I am very proud of them and they way they turned the Aviation industry on its head to allow cheap flights to everyone that were unable to afford them before Ryanair started.

04.12.12
Ryanair To Grow 400,000 Pax & 400 Jobs In Scotland In 2013

6 NEW ROUTES, 1.8M PASSENGERS (1,800 JOBS) AT EDINBURGH

2 NEW ROUTES, 1.4M PASSENGERS (1,400 JOBS) AT PRESTWICK

Ryanair, Europe’s only ultra-low cost airline, today (4 Dec) announced significant summer 2013 growth in Scotland, with 38 routes (6 new) at Edinburgh and 27 routes (2 new) at Glasgow Prestwick, which will deliver a combined total of over 3m passengers and sustain over 3,000* “on site jobs” at both Edinburgh and Glasgow Prestwick airports.

Ryanair cut its winter 2012 schedule at Edinburgh following the breakdown of cost negotiations with the previous owners of Edinburgh, the BAA. After reaching agreement with Edinburgh Airport’s new owners, Global Infrastructure Partners, Ryanair will now grow again at Edinburgh as follows:


38 routes (up 11%).
6 new routes to/from Bologna, Beziers, Cagliari, Corfu, Katowice & Santander
Increased frequencies on 5 other routes
From 232 to 246 weekly flights (up 5%).
From 1.6m to 1.8m pax p.a (up 11%).
1,800* jobs at Edinburgh Airport.

Ryanair will also grow at Glasgow Prestwick as follows:


27 routes (up 7%).
2 new routes to/from Rzeszow & Warsaw Modlin
Increased frequencies on 4 other routes
From 86 to 95 weekly flights (up 10%).
From 1.2m to 1.4m pax p.a (up 6%).
1,400* jobs at Edinburgh Airport.

[fireflybob]

Thunderbirdsix, have you ever worked for Ryanair?

[Thunderbirdsix]

Thunderbirdsix, have you ever worked for Ryanair?


No never worked for them but know two pilots and two cabin crew working for them who are very happy there , have flown with them lots of times never had a bad flight or met a cabin crew member in a so called bad mood, I have always felt very safe with Ryanair and always will in my personal opinion the are no 1.

Nuff said

[Aldente]

1800 jobs at Edinburgh?

WTF ?????

Surely no one believes this sh*t !

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Personally I am very proud of them and they way they turned the Aviation industry on its head to allow cheap flights to everyone that were unable to afford them before Ryanair started.

Yes, I much prefer carrying the chavy, pissed, ignorant, uneducated sponger to Ibiza than the well dressed, polite, educated, well mannered couple on their once in a lifetime holiday.

[A and C]

All that tells us is that you are happy to endure a very low standard of service based on a small cash saving over the opposition.

Having traveled Ryanair once or twice I have never found them good value for money unless you fly in the low season.

In the middle of the summer holidays when all the costs of getting to Stansted from the other side of London for a flight to Perpignan for three people were taken into account it was cheaper do the flight in my Robin DR400.......... And quicker door to door.

The real success story about Ryanair is not the product but the way they sell it.

[Herod]

Yes, I much prefer carrying the chavy, pissed, ignorant, uneducated sponger to Ibiza than the well dressed, polite, educated, well mannered couple on their once in a lifetime holiday.

Since you never actually have any direct contact with them, does it make any difference? When I'm flying from Stansted to Gothenberg with Ryan I'm not unwashed, chavvy, pissed or ignorant. I'm taking the flight from my nearest airport to the one nearest to where I want to go. Enough said.

[PH-Chucky]

@Thunderbirdsix

There's nothing wrong with making your product cheap by eliminating free food/drinks, selling lotterytickets and fee's for using website/creditcard/bagage. If that's what people want, than Ryanair has done a great job in changing the product of flying. No bad word about that part of the story!!

But it's not about that, it's about how Ryanair is changing it's relationship with its personnel in a very drastic way by eliminating all employers responsibilities and giving its crews no financial and/or job assurance.... It's not what the pilots want, but what the company wants because it's currently their turn in a world that's overcrowded with job-seeking pilots who are willing to sell their mother to find any job in a cockpit...

Are you accepting that employers are taking advantage of this situation by letting its personnel bend forward with their pants on their knees? It's a matter of time before these employees can kiss their own ass goodbye... :yuk:

If you know people who are happy working for Ryanair, than it's because they are probably on old contracts with good T&C's and work from the base they prefer. Certainly not the youngsters who are into 150K+ debts and are maybe flying only 500hr a year on a disgraceful hourly pay and traveling from hotel to hotel doing SBY's on their own expenses....

But your friends are probably those who are only looking forward sitting in a lighthouse and sadly overlooking the situation that takes place very nearby with the freshmen they fly with on a daily base....

[nathanroberts2K8]

Know a pilot that works for RRY, I hope for his sake that the various rumours
and or reported incidents are not something passengers should be overrly alarmed at.

I don't personally see an issue with extra fuel onboard with extra scruitiny post flight on the fuel consumption used as a pose to "here, this is your fuel, use it wisely" - not so prudent if an emergency situation or bad weather develops. All fuel will be used regardless if its in the pump or it is in the aircraft.

Just my unqualified thoughts.

[golfyankeesierra]

doing SBY's on their own expenses....
I hope you are exaggerating. Sitting standby without pay?
I've read a lot about Ryanair, but surely this is not true?

[172_driver]

I hope you are exaggerating. Sitting standby without pay?
I've read a lot about Ryanair, but surely this is not true?


Oh it's true… for contractors (the majority of pilots). Kinda crap when 4 out of 5 working days are STBY too during low season.

[Squawk-7600]

If that's what people want, than Ryanair has done a great job in changing the product of flying.

While that line is often spewed forth by those in the PR department, as if it is solely responsible for reducing airfares in Europe. The reality is that Ryanair was not in fact the first "low-cost" airline in the world. Deregulation and restructuring of the airline industry within Europe some years ago arguably had far greater effect on airfares than any single company.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Since you never actually have any direct contact with them, does it make any difference? When I'm flying from Stansted to Gothenberg with Ryan I'm not unwashed, chavvy, pissed or ignorant. I'm taking the flight from my nearest airport to the one nearest to where I want to go. Enough said.

If they are insulting or aggressive towards my crew and offended other passengers I like to tell them face to face that they aren't travelling and to let them know why. So I do have direct contact with them. Try flying from anywhere in the UK to somewhere in Spain, I recommend Ibiza, and you'll see.

Nobody has ever had to have words with Mabel and George for being too polite have they?

Enough said?

[criss]

One idea for all these RYR threads. At the beginning of a post, state your level of experience regarding RYR. Would be interesting to see. Just guessing most of the posters are writing about their imaginations, not reality.

3 RYR a/c declared mayday over fuel - dreadful. Just remind me, how many flights day have per day.

[Microburst2002]

Important cuestion about ryr and fuel policy
I have heard of the repressive atmosphere in RYR when you can be sacked so easily for things such as declining to continue a flight for flight duty considerations or fatigue or for excessive fuel uplift...

What happens to a pilot who diverts early to the alternate for fuel reasons? will he be called to a meeting, sacked, degraded, or punished in any way or nothing at all?

The answer to this question is the key to judge the RYR policy as safe or unsafe.

Because RYR says basically that they prefer you to divert occasionally than carrying extra fuel that in the end you don't use it in every flight. But this is only acceptable is there is no pressure on captains when it comes to a diversion decision, specially if you make the decision early, as it should be done as compared with conventional airlines since RYR airplanes have less fuel. I mean, with just the minimum fuel you don't have time for holdings. You have to make the decision right away and it should be a good decision.

So: are they under pressure to land at destination or not?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Of course they are. That's their job, it's the reason airlines exist. To get people to their destination of choice. If there's no pressure to do so what would be the point of even existing?

You'd have millions of aircraft swanning all over Europe completely aimlessly. Well the aim would be to find a runway, any runway will do, because we don't have to go anywhere in particular.

[Aldente]

English subtitled version now available on KRO website and before everyone jumps in and starts to say what they would or wouldn't do, as an ex Ryanair Captain myself, I can strongly empathise with everything that's been said.

It's one thing viewing this as an outsider but quite another to be working there yourself.

Reporter - Mayday Mayday Part 2 - English version (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2013/afleveringen/03-01-2013/extras/mayday_mayday_part_2_-_english_version)

[pilotsince99]

Just saw a similar German documentary:

Die teuren Tricks der Billigflieger (http://www.wdr.de/mediathek/html/regional/2012/11/19/koennes-kaempft.xml)

This is all in German and the beginning is sort of what we know, but if you scroll to 33.07, it shows a letter send from a base captain to one of the pilots about being in the lowest ranking with regards to fuel uplift. I guess this where we should start to get worried with pressure being put on captains, not to be in the lowest 10%.

Someone in Ryanair could perhaps explain if these letters are being send out on a monthly basis or not, because there will always be winners and losers.What if weather has been very bad the week you had to work, you can automatically expect one?

[BOAC]

To rewind a post or two - what is all this about standby with no pay? Are we talking home or airport? If home, I have NEVER been paid for that.

[737Jock]

You didn't get any basic salary BOAC?

Cause these guys don't, they could have an entire month of stby's and get zero added to their bankaccount. I assume u would have received your basic salary if such a thing were to happen in your company.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

BOAC, I think the difference is they only get paid per flying hour, ergo, they don't get paid for anything else - home standby or airport etc..

While those with a proper contract get paid the same basic salary regardless.

[BEagle]

Aldente, thanks for that link.

I cannot understand why anyone with even the merest shred of self-respect would fly on that airline, whether as a flight crew, cabin crew or passenger.

[McBruce]

Not even through a basic?

The fuel letters go out on a monthly basis to the bottom percent. Fuel leagues are published for all to see.

Pressure to work is only apparent in winter months when weather disruptions are a real probability combined with a roster that only had you doing 10-30 hours.

What these programmes try to emphasise is true, the fuel policy on paper is safe and legal and that can't be argued with but in RYR it's the bs with intimidation, bullying and excessive amounts of pressure which are more difficult to capture and document. Anyone remember the Skavsta incident when a FR skipper lost his son and feared for his job if he called in sick? Resulted in a very unstable approach and landing with flaps 10 if I remember correctly with all the epgws warnings going off or The FO who committed suicide which RYR played a part in? The sacking of a colleague for mentioning a union, under safety grounds.... These are some public cases that received some awareness but there's a huge amount that don't.

We received a memo a few weeks ago about which delay code we should use for oversized cabin bags being offloaded for the hold, very common practise this time of the year. Subsequently we take a 5-10 minute delay each time, no manoeuvring room on a 25min turnaround. Our memo basically states to blame the cabin crew. We already know any delay mentioned that's the cabins fault, they go through the kangaroo disciplinary procedures. it leads to colleagues begging for these delay codes not to appear. This to me is more undue pressure. They know it will prevent delays being written down for this very reason. This is just one additional stress attached to a simple procedure that results in begging from the cabin if you use it. There are many more like them. Make no mistake about it, you will get called and spoken to like a child, each time creates a pressure to avoid the bs.

[JimNich]

Beagle

I think you may have just described quite a large proportion of the UK travelling public, Ryanair or not.

Sorry to be so 'glass half empty', but some of them are just vile. :*

[1stspotter]

I cannot understand why anyone with even the merest shred of self-respect would fly on that airline, whether as a flight crew, cabin crew or passenger.

Very simple answer:
Some do not have much choice.

If your dream has been for ages to become a commercial pilot, your flight school tells you not everything about chances getting you a job, and spent 150-200K on the study, you have to make some money to pay the bank the interest and pay back the loan.
Any crew member wants to live, pay rent or mortgage etc etc etc . And need food.

Then there are not many jobs available for pilots. If you are very lucky KLM, BA or any legacy airline offers you a job.
Otherwise you might end up starting you own LTD based in Ireland and will fly on contract and being paid by the flown hours.

And your dept will increase because your typerating needs to be paid back as well. Double trapped into the claws of the airline.
I can image the fear of crews not to whistle blow to the press or co-workers.

Airlines are in charge at the moment. Some with less ethics with and a strong wish for the highest possible profit for the stakeholder abuse the current situation.

[BOAC]

I was 'salaried' and therefore paid basic whether I flew or not. It was not clear from the earlier posts that ONLY contract pilots were being discussed. Even on a salary, a month of standby's made a big dent in income.

In my last employment I was 'effectively' a contract pilot and therefore was not paid for home standby. Those events were thankfully rare and never more than few hours on the odd day.

[737Jock]

Pilotsince99 wrote:
it shows a letter send from a base captain to one of the pilots about being in the lowest ranking with regards to fuel uplift.

Very interesting, I took the time to look it up. This is what the readable part of the letter says:
Dear ...

The fuel burn tables for january 11 are now available. These tables contain data derived from all the flights completed by each Captain during the month January 11 and are therefore comprehensive and worthy of review.

I have taken the opportunity to correspond with the top and bottem in this base
to highlight overall performance. On this occasion you are in the bottem 10%.

You will be aware through that we have fully documented policy on fuel uplift
......

Then there is a statement from the letter, which was translated into german.

Ich möchte Sie ermuttigen, Ihre Einstellung gegenüber unseren aktuellen betrieblichen Richtlienen (...) zu überprüfen.

Which loosely translates into: "I would like to encourage you, to check/test your attitude against our current operational directions"

And from a memo:

Tons + Trip?

The most unacceptable excuse for last:"I like to land with 3 tons so I take trip + 3 tons"
This is not ryanair policy, this is completely unacceptable, and is not what you are remunerated to do.

Thank you

US Senator Daniel Moynihan said "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 punctually".

[1stspotter]

This is an overview of documented Ryanair incidents which could be blamed to the crew:
Most likely not complete. I cannot judge how this number of incidents relates to other airlines. Ryanair operates a lot of flights. However, statistics do not count, safety and peoples lives do.

Interesting is that:
-some incidents were not reported by the crew but discovered much later because of analyse of radar tracks.
-In at least one incident Ryanair press releases seems to downgrade the situation. Ryanair PR reported in Memmingen 'Caution Terrain' did not alarm the crew while the official report mentioned 'Caution Terrain' did alarm!

Ryanair B738 at Eindhoven on Oct 11th 2012, took off from wrong intersection and without clearance
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Eindhoven on Oct 11th 2012, took off from wrong intersection and without clearance (http://avherald.com/h?article=459f9d27&opt=0)


Serious Incident involving Boeing B737-800 Near Memmingen on 23 September 2012.
Ryanair B738 at Memmingen on Sep 23rd 2012, descended below minimum safe height
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Memmingen on Sep 23rd 2012, descended below minimum safe height (http://www.avherald.com/h?article=459fa8f6&opt=0)
http://www.bfu-web.de/DE/Publikationen/Bulletins/2012/Bulletin2012-09.pdf?__blob=publicationFile (starting at page 65)


Incident: Ryanair B738 at London on Feb 7th 2012, descended below profile
Incident: Ryanair B738 at London on Feb 7th 2012, descended below profile (http://avherald.com/h?article=44bb8888/0000&opt=0)

Accident: Ryanair B738 and American B763 at Barcelona on Apr 14th 2011, both aircraft departed despite ground collision and passenger complaints
Accident: Ryanair B738 and American B763 at Barcelona on Apr 14th 2011, both aircraft departed despite ground collision and passenger complaints (http://avherald.com/h?article=45363621&opt=0)

Incident: Ryanair B738 at Alicante on Jan 6th 2011, landed without clearance
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Alicante on Jan 6th 2011, landed without clearance (http://avherald.com/h?article=437de80e&opt=0)

Ryanair emergency landing due to low fuel (FR-8384 from London Stanstead to Alicante, Spain , May 14 2010)
Ryanair emergency landing due to low fuel | I Hate Ryanair (http://www.ihateryanair.org/ryanair-emergency-landing-due-to-low-fuel/)
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Alicante and Valencia on May 14th 2010, fuel emergency (http://avherald.com/h?article=42bf38c3&opt=0)


Report: Ryanair B738 at Rome on Sep 7th 2005, loss of situational awareness and terrain clearance
Report: Ryanair B738 at Rome on Sep 7th 2005, loss of situational awareness and terrain clearance (http://avherald.com/h?article=41a5f274&opt=0)


RyanAir B737 at Skavsta 21st July 2004, hot and high approach, flaps overspeed, safe landing without report
http://www.aaiu.ie/upload/general/6946-0.pdf
Final Report: RyanAir B737 at Skavsta 21st July 2004, hot and high approach, flaps overspeed, safe landing without report (http://avherald.com/h?article=3d8c079e&opt=0)

These are the on internet documented landings with request for priority from the Ryanair crew:

December 7, 2012
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Budapest on Dec 7th 2012, priority landing after tower became inoperative
Incident: Ryanair B738 at Budapest on Dec 7th 2012, priority landing after tower became inoperative (http://avherald.com/h?article=45a2df69)

September 4, 2012
Flight FR2048, a Boeing 737-800 flying from Leeds Bradford airport in Britain to Lanzarote
Ryanair denies new 'low fuel' landing - Yahoo! Singapore Finance (http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/ryanair-denies-low-fuel-landing-182735640.html)

[BOAC]

Hello SC - did your reading glasses allow you to see my second paragraph (or indeed the whole post?):ugh:

[McBruce]

8 out of 10 pilots in RYR are contractors. That number increases slightly by time as all new joiners from cadets to DEC are contractors only. Some employment contracts have been given out but we're only talking about a handful.

[BOAC]

I think it has to be said that the people who are 'driving T&C down' are those accepting these contracts - yes, I DO appreciate why they are, but things will not change this way.

How many of those complaining about 'unpaid' standby's knew about them when they signed the contract?

[McBruce]

How many old timers within the industry sat back and done nothing while in control, when this industry invited the idea of change? Now they blame the single entity that has no control or power that is a byproduct of that change....

Yes it's everyone else's fault except yourself.

[Herod]

I recall many years ago speaking to a turboprop FO who was going to a job on the 1-11, and was prepared to may the cost of his conversion. That was unheard of in the industry at the time. I tried to dissuade him from taking that route, but his reply was to the effect "If I don't, somebody else will, and that's another jet job I won't get". Don't blame the older pilots. We couldn't stop the starry-eyed youngsters who would do anything to get a seat at the front.

[BOAC]

a) I'm not 'blaming' anyone, merely pointing out the facts.
b) "How many old timers within the industry sat back and done nothing while in control, when this industry invited the idea of change?" When was this 'invite' and what was it?

It is certainly not my fault. I negotiated a pretty good and flexible 'contract deal' which suited both me and the company 'down to the ground' and did not change anyone else's T&Cs.

[Bergholt]

BOAC

There may well be some unpaid stand-by's but what matters most is the net income over a 12-month period. If that is being eroded due to an increase in unpaid stand-by's then one would be justified in feeling aggrieved.

[BOAC]

Absolutely, but as I said
"How many of those complaining about 'unpaid' standby's knew about them when they signed the contract?". If things have got 'worse' since then, then yes, be 'grumpy'. If not, it was their choice

No-one please misunderstand me - I do not approve of the RY emphasis on contract pilots, but they are not alone. I also feel sympathy for those finding employment difficult. I did not, I was lucky and I know it.

However, I do see the RY situation as akin to seagulls swarming around a rubbish tip. I would have taken it short-term if necessary and bugged out when I could. I assume that is one of the few advantages of a contract job..

[Aldente]

I would have taken it short-term if necessary and bugged out when I could

Which is what a large number of Ryanair pilots will do. The stressful working conditions at Ryanair makes the job unsustainable for a long term career. There's not many pilots in their 50's (or 40's for that matter!) in the company.

Ryanair couldn't care less though. As long as they have enough bums to put on seats - they have no interest in making it the sort of company where pilots might want to plan a long term career.

[windytoo]

BOAC, it might be slightly easier doing a few home standbys for no money when you are contracting for "fun" and living on your 100K a year pension, than trying to pay the bills with no income.
Please forgive me if I'm wrong, but your moniker seems to imply that the main part of your career has been completed in a different era.

[BOAC]

Please forgive me if I'm wrong, - yes, you are and you are forgiven. No connection with BOAC or £100k sadly.

[PH-Chucky]

Ryanair decides where you are based, so that could be somewhere far away from where your family lives. It happens to more pilots because there's not always an airport in your backyard with your employer's aircraft sitting on the tarmac waiting for you to show up...

But as being said, Ryanair pilots (contracters) only get paid when they fly. So if they are send to some sh*th*le for some SBY's, than they won't get a penny... But in the meantime they are expected to pay for all their expenses. So you end up in a self-paid hotelroom waiting for a call. To only good thing is that pilots are allowed to travel for free on Ryanair flights when wearing a uniform.

I do not work for Ryanair but I do fly low-cost and I don't get paid when doing SBY's for my company. However, I live 15 minutes away from my preferred base and can maintain a social live while waiting for a call. Furthermore our union only allows us to do 3 SBY's a month, so that means on other days I should be planned for duty or otherwise get OFF. And if they need pilots (SBY's) at another base, they pay the shortest possible proceeding (extra payment), hotel and 54 euro per day for food and drinks. And furthermore I get a basic salary that is comparable with legacy's... My company appreciates its pilots and we are all very highly motivated to give our company it's profit its deserves!!

As you might imagine we are very 'expensive' for our low-cost company. But that's only because they compare our T&C's with Ryanair's.... But if you compare it with the TOTAL COST of our operation, our salaries are hardly noticeable. I arrived in this luxury situation because my previous colleagues (who are almost retiring) were in a union and fought hard to maintain their T&C's.

But the problem in this world of marginal profits is that in the end our competitors are 'cheaper' because their pilots are willing to bend more forward than others....

So yes, it is in EVERYBODY's interest to stop these deteriorating T&C's at Ryanair and other companies. Not because a lousy union from the middle ages says so, no because all pilots are affected by this situation....

[Squawk-7600]

But if you compare it with the TOTAL COST of our operation, our salaries are hardly noticeable.

Give this man a cigar! Like the constant quacking on about how much additional fuel uplift costs the company, this is another area where the BS flows freely. For a LCC, the technical crew costs, as a percentage of overall cost of operating, are around 2%. Yes TWO percent! If some of the disgraceful business practices that have allegedly emerged were immediately eliminated, the additional cost per ticket would be a few pence. Something to keep in mind next time the inevitable "you need to become more efficient" memo is spewed out.

[laurent_avion]

Good evening,
It is all about egoism and ignorance.
Nobody cares about what is going on, and this in every society sector.
Pilots do not realize how bad is it for us all, when one accepts to pay for his type rating, or to sign a terrible contact.
Passengers do not realize, and don't even try to know, what they are paying for....
Authorities are being driven by industry lobby, and so are the governments.
That is why the world is as it is today.... Every citizen an every professional fighting one against the other, while shareholders are making very big profits.... In the case of this airline 530 million euros... That is a lot of money, being taken out of the employees, customers, and citizens...
Perhaps this is the time to change this system...

[Squawk-7600]

Cost of staff in Ryanair...

An overall labour figure of 10% is around expectations. The figures I quoted above were for technical crew ie pilots.

[Squawk-7600]

Enjoy the view
Indeed. However cabin crew + flight crew, who are ALL affected by the (your quote) 'disgraceful business practices' and the 'you need to become more efficient' inevitable memo still represent 90% of the workforce!

That is slightly 'more' than 2% of the operating costs.

If you wish to quote something I said, please do so correctly. In fact this is what I said.

If some of the disgraceful business practices that have allegedly emerged ... Alleged not by me I'll add.

The comments were regarding pilot salaries and PH-Chucky made a very good point about this, I put an actual figure to it. These are the facts, in a legacy carrier the technical crew (ie pilot) costs are around 4% of total operating costs, this varies of course somewhat between carriers, but will be around that figure, plus or minus a percent or two. Nevertheless, a very lean LCC can get that down to around half a legacy carrier's costs by using some of the tactics discussed by others here. In other words, 'Chucky is absolutely right, the technical crew costs, as a percentage of overall operating costs, are much less that what some people may possibly imagine. While it will clearly be a blow to some overinflated egos here, we really are small cogs in the grand scheme of things, at least when it comes to costs.

[BEagle]

In similar vein,

You can fly First Class with a legacy carrier and you can buy designer clothes.

You can fly Economy Class with a legacy carrier and you can buy good clothing from a high street retailer.

You can fly sub-Economy with a loco and you can buy cheap clothing 'bargains' at a car boot sale.

None of which is illegal. But at what cost to those working in some sweat shop was your car boot sale T-shirt produced? If something seems too good to be true, then it probably is. When it costs more to park at the airport than it does to fly, someone somewhere must be suffering as a result. But the greed of many of the UK's loutish air travellers shows that they don't care a damn - just so long as the price is low. Because the children of the "I want it now, I don't care how" generation simply have no conscience.

[Aldente]

Meanwhile back on topic (the claims made by Ryanair pilots in two Dutch TV documentaries) does it not ring alarm bells when a clearly identifiable non anonymous or disguised bona fide ex-Ryanair Captain publicly makes comments along the lines of "unless things change, there's going to be an accident due to the corporate culture and extra pressure and stress NOT FOUND IN OTHER AIRLINES HE's WORKED FOR" ????

Ryanair seem to be conveniently avoiding any mention of him in any of their responses!

[BOAC]

Al - "Ryanair seem to be conveniently avoiding any mention of him in any of their responses!" - can you link to these 'responses'?

[Sober Lark]

Every large employer can have disgruntled employees but an employer that offers all employees encouragement, trust and honesty shouldn't have too many. One or two fictitious employees running to the media just doesn't breed credibility. It implies the information given may not be correct or was made up.

[sleeper]

BOAC:
http://nl.sitestat.com/klo/kro/s?journalistiek.reporterinternational.20130103_reactie_ryana ir_deel_2_pdf&category=reporterinternational&po_sitetype=plus&po_source=fixed&ns_channel=nieuws_informatie&ns_webdir=reporterinternational&po_merk=video.nederland2&kro_domein=journalistiek&kro_programma=&ns_type=clickout&ns_url=http://content.omroep.nl/kro/documents/reporter/20130103_reactie_ryanair_deel_2.pdf

and

http://nl.sitestat.com/klo/kro/s?journalistiek.reporterinternational.20130103_reactie_ryana ir_deel_2_pdf&category=reporterinternational&po_sitetype=plus&po_source=fixed&ns_channel=nieuws_informatie&ns_webdir=reporterinternational&po_merk=video.nederland2&kro_domein=journalistiek&kro_programma=&ns_type=clickout&ns_url=http://content.omroep.nl/kro/documents/reporter/20130103_reactie_ryanair_deel_2.pdf

This from the website of the makers
Reporter - Mayday Mayday deel 2 (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2013/afleveringen/03-01-2013)

[1stspotter]

At January 6 2013 The Sunday Times has apologised to Ryanair and agreed to pay substantial damages, which at the airline’s request, will be paid to the charity The Jack & Jill Children’s Foundation. The apology followed an incorrect report about breaches of safety rules (Times).

The report published September 23 can be read here :
https://www.usca.es/uploads/userfiles/files/Resumenes_de_prensa/2012/10/05/SundayTimes-05102012-Ryanair.pdf

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/travel/Your_Travel/Travel_News/article1187917.ece

An article (headlined “Ryanair accused of 1,201 safety violations”, Travel, September 23, 2012) stated that, according to a leaked report from the Spanish air safety agency (AESA), Ryanair planes broke safety rules 1,201 times in Spanish airspace in the first six months of 2012. We now accept that this was incorrect; there was no such report and Ryanair did not commit 1,201 breaches of safety rules.

In the same article we also reported three emergency landings that arose due to bad weather diversions from Madrid to Valencia on July 26, 2012. The article described these flights as having insufficient fuel to remain in holding patterns and reported claims that Ryanair was routinely abusing the mayday protocol to jump landing queues. We accept that all these allegations were untrue and apologise to Ryanair for the damage caused by this article.

The rest of the artile is only available for subscribers of Sunday Times.

[Aldente]

With regard to the Sunday Times, Ryanair and "the truth", I noticed in one of its press releases regarding the Dutch documentary, Ryanair clearly states they have 1700 contract pilots, yet a couple of months ago in an interview with the Irish Sunday Times:-

Asked how Ryanair pilots were employed, O’Leary said: “The majority are direct employees and a minority are contractors.”

No further questions m'lud.

[Thunderbirdsix]

They now have 305 Boeing 737/800 aircraft I guess they have a lot of direct employed pilots, jez but ye guys will do anything to bash Ryanair even when the papers get it wrong you go looking for something else to knock in the company , :ugh:

[fitliker]

Any company with that many contract employess is vulnerable to competative poaching of the contacted.
Unless the contract is written by the Deil.

[1stspotter]

Ryanair seems to disagree with many media.
See this message on Air Scoop | The European Low-Cost Carriers Specialists (http://www.air-scoop.com/)

Ryanair Limited has contacted us to dispute the validity of several statements that appear in Air Scoop’s 2011 report on Ryanair’s business model. In Ryanair’s opinion, these statements are either unsubstantiated and/ or false. We value external input on our work as we strive to produce fair, informative and well-documented research documents.

Air-scoop had made a very interesting paper with lots of details on Ryanair.
It is 56 pages, has info on for example the business structures (shows holdings and Ltd's). Must read for those interested to get some more info on the business model.

It can be downloaded for free at above site.

[BOAC]

I gave up after 20 minutes. As I have said before, my fluent Dutch is well out of date. Can anyone explain the so-called fuel league tables please? They make no sense to me.

What I saw of the programme represents everything that is bad about so-called 'investigative journalism' - disguised voices, three apparent pilots sitting silhouetted in front of a film screen with their hats on!! Why?? To make them look 'real'? 'Ian Sumner' I believe the only pilot to be identified. What do we know of his 'career' with Ryan? Any 'grudges'?

So the Sunday Times has once again learned to get its facts right before telling stories.

Were the tax advantages of 'contracting' as a pilot covered in the programme? Tax deductable expenses ie board and lodging, food, travel, training/testing costs and licence/medical renewals. Probably mobile phone and internet costs. A few others too. Choice of 'where' your fees are paid?

The 'rebuttals' from McNamara linked by 'sleeper' have not been challenged here - are they correct?

No, I do not like MOL and his ways. However, if people wish to see him 'down' they need to sharpen up and that sort of TV programme will NOT do it..

[1stspotter]

BOAC:
The english subtitled version of the programme can be watched online here.
Reporter - Mayday Mayday Part 2 - English version (http://reporter.kro.nl/seizoenen/2013/afleveringen/03-01-2013/extras/mayday_mayday_part_2_-_english_version)

No mention of the tax advantages of being a contractor with a Ltd in Ireland.
The main news of the second episode was the confession of one or two pilots that they did fly while not feeling fit to fly (being sick or too tired).

Also did not see any hard evidence like memo's, printscreens of internal websites proving pressure etc.

[BOAC]

Thanks, 1st spotter - you are doing a great job.

[Squawk-7600]

You will be allocated an Irish company together with three unknown colleagues. The expenses you mention; most of them are not approved. You are a director of your company, but you have no mandate to make decisions.

KiloVictor could you please explain more fully this arrangement?

[BOAC]

KV - I had wrongly assumed the contracts were placed by one of the aircrew contract companies eg Brookfield, not an 'Irish company'. A strange system. The contract pilots I have worked with were employed differently.

[Herod]

I flew with Ian Sumner many times in a previous airline. He should be taken seriously. However, I have had no contact with him for a while, so don't know his position vis-a-vis Ryanair.

[Puck2]

Okay I just like to know, who sign out the aircraft? The captain, I think...or does the company sign out? Or are the catains getting fired....for this or other reasons.

[1stspotter]

Dutch TV programma KRO Brandpunt smells blood and keeps on broadcasting new items about the safety of Ryanair.

Tonight a new item on Ryanair (the third). They had an interview with Benno Baksteen. He was a Boeing 747 captain at KLM and chairman of the VNV (union of dutch pilots). He now is a consultant/ chairman for an organization advising on safety. Benno Baksteen has been invited in the past as expert in many news programmes discussing safety and accidents on aviation.

Beside the interview no new facts. Just a repeat of parts of the previous two programmes. Also again the same mistake. The programme mentions 17 aircraft diverted from Madrid at 26 July. Only three called mayday, all FR aircraft. Baksteen btw mentioned the Lan Chile mayday.

He was quite shocked about what he learned from the two episodes (in which anonymous Ryanair pilots told their story).

A few quotes of Mr. Baksteen:
-the practise of Ryanair flying with minimal fuel will eventually be fatal
-a crash will happen eventually.
-if the Lan Chile A340 would block the single runway at VLC things could have become very nasty for the two FR aircraft still on their way to their alternate VLC.
-Ryanair too much put the emphasis on reducing costs which is a threat for flightsafety
-a mayday call because of low fuel is very rare. It did not happen once in his career as a pilot
-the 30 minutes reserve fuel is for emergencies only. It should never happen that this reserve is used.
-the fuel league is no good. Calling pilots to the Ryanair HQ is intimidation. It has an affect on descisions of the captain in future situation on fuel planning
-Baksteen would rather (if he had a choice) fly HV, KL or EZ than FR

[bargrall]

Sandilands at Plane Talking reports:

In the UK The Sunday Times has published an apology to the low fare high fee airline Ryanair for false allegations made about its fuel policy and alleged safety breaches in Spanish airspace.

Ryanair damages and apologies begin | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2013/01/07/ryanair-apologies-and-damages-payouts-begin/)

[BEagle]

Baksteen would rather (if he had a choice) fly HV, KL or EZ than FR


I would rather walk than fly FR!

[BOAC]

Ah 'Benno Brick':

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

-a crash will happen eventually. - possibly - so? Probably not for fuel. Even KLM crash.

-Ryanair too much put the emphasis on reducing costs which is a possible threat for flightsafety - cannot disagree (with the italics added). Most major airlines, including BA and KLM have the same goal.

-a mayday call because of low fuel is very rare. It did not happen once in his career - Does he mean NEVER or not to him?

-the 30 minutes reserve fuel is for emergencies only. It should never happen that this reserve is used. - all crews strive not too, but that is what it is there for, Captain.

-the fuel league is no good. Calling pilots to the Ryanair HQ is intimidation. It has an affect on descisions of the captain in future situation on fuel planning - I agree in principle (does he mean Dublin?) but kind of depends how p!!ssed off the crews are and how 'profligate' they have been. Sooner or later someone will need a 'disciplinary'. It probably happens in all airlines. BA certainly had a 'fuel league table' in the early 2000's.

-Baksteen would rather (if he had a choice) fly HV, KL or EZ than FR- not a problem. I suspect he has that choice.

[1stspotter]

With regard to the Sunday Times, Ryanair and "the truth", I noticed in one of its press releases regarding the Dutch documentary, Ryanair clearly states they have 1700 contract pilots, yet a couple of months ago in an interview with the Irish Sunday Times:-

Quote:
Asked how Ryanair pilots were employed, O’Leary said: “The majority are direct employees and a minority are contractors.”

The video at the stating page of REPA (not a union but secure platform for Ryanair pilots to discuss) clearly shows a percentage 70+ for contractor pilots and 30 % - for pilots with a Ryanair contract.
I guess it is safe to assume REPA knows the situation. The website REPA has 1600 members.

If the press wants to investigate Ryanair they should do more their best and try to find dissimilarities between official Ryanair press statements/MOL statemens and irrefutable facts.

[SD.]

I think the investigation into the fuel is a non-runner. It goes against my usual stance with FR, but we can take as much fuel as we like - as long as there is a reason and you can justify the extra fuel.

However, the "Mayday Mayday - low fuel" headline has attracted enough attention to bring more important facts to the general public. The alleged bullying, intimidation, divide & conquer techniques employed from the board room down are now in the public domain.

[Zipster]

Not too many advantages being a contractor nowadays really, yes you can deduct some expenses but all in all you are worse off having no real job security and other disadvantages that come with it. Unclear social security and tax status is one thing. The contractor v company relationship is also highly regulated via the contract, i hear the only way they do business. So instead we better use "contractor" instead, it is far more appropriate.