Watchdog: Ryanair deplaned disabled pax
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Watchdog: Ryanair deplaned disabled pax
I hope the program doesn't crucify the crew for the incident, since it looks more like a back office snafu.
Ryanair is attacked for ejecting blind passengers
The Independent 10/13
Ryanair, the no-frills airline, is under fire from disability campaigners for ejecting nine blind and partially sighted passengers from a plane just minutes before take-off.
The passengers, who were travelling to Italy for a walking holiday, had completed check-in procedures and were sitting on the plane at Stansted when the pilot announced they would have to vacate their seats. They were then "marched" off and escorted back to the airport lounge.
Some waited six hours for another flight while others were forced to sleep on the airport floor overnight. One of the party was so distressed by the incident - to be featured on BBC's Watchdog programme next week - she abandoned her holiday.
Ryanair explained it could not take the customers because it already had three "disabled" people on board (unconnected to the party) and it stipulates no more than four "disabled" people on each flight. However, the organiser of the trip, Katherine Hurst said she rang Ryanair eight months before she travelled to check there would be no problems.
More here
I/C
Ryanair is attacked for ejecting blind passengers
The Independent 10/13
Ryanair, the no-frills airline, is under fire from disability campaigners for ejecting nine blind and partially sighted passengers from a plane just minutes before take-off.
The passengers, who were travelling to Italy for a walking holiday, had completed check-in procedures and were sitting on the plane at Stansted when the pilot announced they would have to vacate their seats. They were then "marched" off and escorted back to the airport lounge.
Some waited six hours for another flight while others were forced to sleep on the airport floor overnight. One of the party was so distressed by the incident - to be featured on BBC's Watchdog programme next week - she abandoned her holiday.
Ryanair explained it could not take the customers because it already had three "disabled" people on board (unconnected to the party) and it stipulates no more than four "disabled" people on each flight. However, the organiser of the trip, Katherine Hurst said she rang Ryanair eight months before she travelled to check there would be no problems.
More here
I/C
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever was behind this particular case but normally airline procedures (approved by Authority) stipulate how many pax of each "type" (other than "normal" pax) could be onboard of particular aircraft type. At our outfit we have a certain limitation on number of pax with disabilities, number of unaccompanied minors, number of police-escorted criminals etc. This is all about emergency evacuation.
I remember the case when we have been doing a charter to carry 40 blind people to some kind of conference for blind people and in order to carry them we have applied for one-off exemption to Authorities and got a written consent from our insurance company.
I remember the case when we have been doing a charter to carry 40 blind people to some kind of conference for blind people and in order to carry them we have applied for one-off exemption to Authorities and got a written consent from our insurance company.
If the crew have followed SOPs (and it sounds like they did) then no criticism at all. But if they were already sat in the aircraft when the situation was discovered by the crew, I wonder what the handling agent was doing .......
It's one thing to be unable to board passengers, because that can happen for a range of reasons, it's another to then make disabled passengers sleep on the airport floor.
Regarding "back office snafu", do Ryanair have any back office operations staff at all ? My own experience (FR flight cancelled due to snow) was that getting a refund required calling a phone number which was never, ever answered - oh, and we had most certainly NOT paid only £10 for the ticket.
It's one thing to be unable to board passengers, because that can happen for a range of reasons, it's another to then make disabled passengers sleep on the airport floor.
Regarding "back office snafu", do Ryanair have any back office operations staff at all ? My own experience (FR flight cancelled due to snow) was that getting a refund required calling a phone number which was never, ever answered - oh, and we had most certainly NOT paid only £10 for the ticket.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More bad press for Ryanair?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/4337162.stm
As SLF I think the cabin crew were quite correct.
As SLF I think the cabin crew were quite correct.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a Captain I have to agree as well its very unfortunate but people with disabilities do need help as much as they may think them selves independant,especially in the totally unfamiliar enviroment of an aircraft cabion. As much as I'd dearly love to bash Ryanair in this instance I believe they were right.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: LGW
Posts: 387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't know the full story here. we don't know how many 'able' people were travelling with the group. And where did they get the maximum 4 disabled pax from? they should be able to carry 10% of the seating capacity of the aircraft.
How many people travel on holiday on charter airlines and are disabled?????? I would hardly call blind a disability. If they can cross a busy road and find their own house again then they are a marvel in my eyes ( excuse the pun) . I think Ryanair were out of order here. Would be interesting to hear the opinions and regulations from other airline staff
How many people travel on holiday on charter airlines and are disabled?????? I would hardly call blind a disability. If they can cross a busy road and find their own house again then they are a marvel in my eyes ( excuse the pun) . I think Ryanair were out of order here. Would be interesting to hear the opinions and regulations from other airline staff
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Ghent
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The terms and conditions on the Ryanair web site state:
Looks like it went wrong when the booking was made...
For safety reasons Ryanair can only carry a maximum of four disabled/reduced mobility passengers on any flight.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem appears to be with the booking centre... The group leader called to check if there were any restrictions. She was asked if the group needed assistance. She said they did not because the party included sighted carers and was told to go ahead and book.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the exception of Jettesen, the theme of this thread is all about covering the backsides of those working on the plane. No-one expresses sympathy for the humiliated passengers and their ruined holiday. Once again (as I see this in many threads) we forget that without the passengers we are nothing. I look forward to some invective as to how I have missed the point, missed the issue blah blah blah. Whatever, this IS bad press for Ryannair whatever the internal operating policies of the airline. We ought to acknowledge that, at least.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we don't know how many 'able' people were travelling with the group
As much as I enjoy having a dig at ryanairs antics, I'd have to agree that they did nothing wrong.
Pax always go off on a rant about "not being given any information" when things go wrong with their flight, well it works both ways. Facts such as 9 blind or partially sighted pax should be offered when booking a flight, saying "no one asked" is not good enough. To simply answer "No" when asked if assistance is required is not good enough.
Unfortunate, but hopefully lessons have been learned.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO, a blind person would be able to hear CC commands, and feel their way to an exit, with the best of the sighted people, particularly if the cabin is full of smoke.
From the information given, Ryanair fulfilled their Ts&Cs, but perhaps should have handled the incident more discretely at the "front-end".
Blind friends of mine are very proud of their independence, and would be mortified to think people consider them as "disabled"
From the information given, Ryanair fulfilled their Ts&Cs, but perhaps should have handled the incident more discretely at the "front-end".
Blind friends of mine are very proud of their independence, and would be mortified to think people consider them as "disabled"
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strepsils, regarding
AND
So what is wrong here?
a) Mrs. Hurst is lying (or has a bad memory)
b) the spokesmen is lying
c) Mrs. Hurst isn't lying, but didn't book right away on 20 January and didn't pass the info again when booking
d) as a non-native English speaker I am missing something ^^
EDIT: e) of course the article writer could be wrong, seems that was too simple to come to mind
Facts such as 9 blind or partially sighted pax should be offered when booking a flight
Katherine Hurst, from Norwich, said she had called Ryanair on 20 January to check that there were no travel restrictions placed on the group.
The spokesman said the party were asked to travel on a later flight because they did not notify the airline of the disabilities at the time of booking
a) Mrs. Hurst is lying (or has a bad memory)
b) the spokesmen is lying
c) Mrs. Hurst isn't lying, but didn't book right away on 20 January and didn't pass the info again when booking
d) as a non-native English speaker I am missing something ^^
EDIT: e) of course the article writer could be wrong, seems that was too simple to come to mind
Last edited by the_hawk; 13th Oct 2005 at 14:58.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Report on the matter in The Independent quoted one of the group quoting the Captain as saying "how would you manage in a cabin full of smoke? ". She seems to have missed the obvious answer - "an awful lot better than you!".
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Age: 60
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has also been pointed out by other airlines that this 'safety' decision appears to be purely arbitary. BMi stated that they would never offload people in these circumstances, and BA do not have a maximum limit for disabled people.
What relevance now Ryanair's 'safety' excuse ... or is it just that, an excuse not a reason?
What relevance now Ryanair's 'safety' excuse ... or is it just that, an excuse not a reason?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My employer advises an upper limit on disabled pax of 10%: I was under the impression that this was a CAA figure, but stand to be corrected. On a 737-800, this would result in 18 disabled pax as the upper limit.
I can understand why FR did what they did - It is more difficult to understand why their limit for disabled pax is so low.
I can understand why FR did what they did - It is more difficult to understand why their limit for disabled pax is so low.
Guest
Posts: n/a
TS
Possibly because they don't wish to slow their turn around times, which are crucial to their business model. 18 wheelchair movements on/off would take time and other disabled people get scoped into the same category.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ryanair operates a business with clear T&Cs and applies them firmly.
MichaelKnight, you don't seem to understand that Ryanair is a business that is based on selling a high volume of seats at low prices.
Ergo high degrees of customer service and care do not appear in the model and Michael O'Leary, in the interviews I have witnessed, prefers to deal with these issues at an aggregated level, not an individual level.
I am not a Ryanair apologist, but you do get what you pay for.
sugden
I fear that your hypothesis is wrong and that there is little bad publicity for Ryanair.
They\'re cheap and many of the people who travel with them will continure to do so, on a price based decision, regardless of the publicity. So this incident just gives the Ryanair brand some free exposure.
The lesson is very clear. Don\'t book on a loco if you need full service and Caveat Emptor.
Possibly because they don't wish to slow their turn around times, which are crucial to their business model. 18 wheelchair movements on/off would take time and other disabled people get scoped into the same category.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ryanair operates a business with clear T&Cs and applies them firmly.
MichaelKnight, you don't seem to understand that Ryanair is a business that is based on selling a high volume of seats at low prices.
Ergo high degrees of customer service and care do not appear in the model and Michael O'Leary, in the interviews I have witnessed, prefers to deal with these issues at an aggregated level, not an individual level.
I am not a Ryanair apologist, but you do get what you pay for.
sugden
Whatever, this IS bad press for Ryannair whatever the internal operating policies of the airline. We ought to acknowledge that, at least.
They\'re cheap and many of the people who travel with them will continure to do so, on a price based decision, regardless of the publicity. So this incident just gives the Ryanair brand some free exposure.
The lesson is very clear. Don\'t book on a loco if you need full service and Caveat Emptor.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the_hawk :
My impression of events from reading the story was that when Ryanair asked if any assistance was required, Mrs Hurst simply said "No", rather than explaining the exact nature of the group. That is simply the impression I got and may not be correct.
I'm not suggesting anyone was lying or trying to deceive, rather that only limited information was offered. Blind people may not think of themselves as disabled, but to all practical intents and purposes they are, and it is vital that Airlines, ferry companies etc are aware of this as it does have an effect on safety issues.
Quite simply, it is yet another reminder to actually read the terms and conditions when you buy/book something, rather than just ticking the box and assuming all will be well.
My impression of events from reading the story was that when Ryanair asked if any assistance was required, Mrs Hurst simply said "No", rather than explaining the exact nature of the group. That is simply the impression I got and may not be correct.
I'm not suggesting anyone was lying or trying to deceive, rather that only limited information was offered. Blind people may not think of themselves as disabled, but to all practical intents and purposes they are, and it is vital that Airlines, ferry companies etc are aware of this as it does have an effect on safety issues.
Quite simply, it is yet another reminder to actually read the terms and conditions when you buy/book something, rather than just ticking the box and assuming all will be well.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: East of Runway 21
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I say to passengers, it is better for us to have TOO MUCH information about disabled/pax requiring assistance than not enough.
Unfortunately in this case it seems to be misunderstanding on both sides. Mrs Hurst, being acquainted with the parties involved, may well be of the opinion that they are perfectly able to find their way around etc (as most blind people are). But in the context of the airline they are 'disabled'. Perhaps on being asked if they were 'disabled' her interpretation of disabled differed from theirs. It's the classic 'hear-back' - you hear what you want to hear.
If the rules say only four per aircraft then it is sad for those offloaded but rules are rules. I do think though that the pax could have been treated with a bit more compassion and sympathy (if the article is accurate). Sleeping on the floor is unacceptable if the airline has offloaded them for reasons beyond the pax's control. Regardless of whther it was Ryanair who stuffed the booking or the carer, I would be trying my darnedest to prevent my pax from having to sleep on a floor.
As to evacuation, true that blind people would likely be able to find their way around in a smoky cabin, but add to that everyone else also trying to get out, panic, fire etc, and also in the event of a crash the cabin layout is going to be somewhat rearranged!!! Not to mention the issue of whether an exit is safe to use, and falling off slides etc...
I think though that this will make them review their procedure... they'd be crazy not to!!
I must admit I have had problems with pax who make bookings over the internet and negelct to read the part about pax requiring assistance to notify the call centre prior to flying with us (and not a half hour before!!) The amount who show up who have just been in hospital and not even asked for a Fit to Fly is staggering!!! Of course it's all OUR fault...
what I'm saying here is that the airlines do the best they can with the information px give them. If you are in ANY way unsure, ASK!!!! It can't hurt and could very well save you the situation mentioned in the original post...
Unfortunately in this case it seems to be misunderstanding on both sides. Mrs Hurst, being acquainted with the parties involved, may well be of the opinion that they are perfectly able to find their way around etc (as most blind people are). But in the context of the airline they are 'disabled'. Perhaps on being asked if they were 'disabled' her interpretation of disabled differed from theirs. It's the classic 'hear-back' - you hear what you want to hear.
If the rules say only four per aircraft then it is sad for those offloaded but rules are rules. I do think though that the pax could have been treated with a bit more compassion and sympathy (if the article is accurate). Sleeping on the floor is unacceptable if the airline has offloaded them for reasons beyond the pax's control. Regardless of whther it was Ryanair who stuffed the booking or the carer, I would be trying my darnedest to prevent my pax from having to sleep on a floor.
As to evacuation, true that blind people would likely be able to find their way around in a smoky cabin, but add to that everyone else also trying to get out, panic, fire etc, and also in the event of a crash the cabin layout is going to be somewhat rearranged!!! Not to mention the issue of whether an exit is safe to use, and falling off slides etc...
I think though that this will make them review their procedure... they'd be crazy not to!!
I must admit I have had problems with pax who make bookings over the internet and negelct to read the part about pax requiring assistance to notify the call centre prior to flying with us (and not a half hour before!!) The amount who show up who have just been in hospital and not even asked for a Fit to Fly is staggering!!! Of course it's all OUR fault...
what I'm saying here is that the airlines do the best they can with the information px give them. If you are in ANY way unsure, ASK!!!! It can't hurt and could very well save you the situation mentioned in the original post...
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What?
posted 14th October 2005 09:03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TS
Possibly because they don't wish to slow their turn around times, which are crucial to their business model. 18 wheelchair movements on/off would take time and other disabled people get scoped into the same category.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ryanair operates a business with clear T&Cs and applies them firmly.
MichaelKnight, you don't seem to understand that Ryanair is a business that is based on selling a high volume of seats at low prices.
Ergo high degrees of customer service and care do not appear in the model and Michael O'Leary, in the interviews I have witnessed, prefers to deal with these issues at an aggregated level, not an individual level.
I am not a Ryanair apologist (Bullsh!t your not), but you do get what you pay for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT?
Ryanair operates a business, so that excusses all conduct by a rude and offensive airline, much like your disregard for disabled people. So the moral of the story is if you are dissabled DO NOT FLY RYANAIR--EVER!.
You board passengers and then remove of the aircraft. Sit them in an airport loung for six hours, what vile way to treat members of society.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TS
Possibly because they don't wish to slow their turn around times, which are crucial to their business model. 18 wheelchair movements on/off would take time and other disabled people get scoped into the same category.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Ryanair operates a business with clear T&Cs and applies them firmly.
MichaelKnight, you don't seem to understand that Ryanair is a business that is based on selling a high volume of seats at low prices.
Ergo high degrees of customer service and care do not appear in the model and Michael O'Leary, in the interviews I have witnessed, prefers to deal with these issues at an aggregated level, not an individual level.
I am not a Ryanair apologist (Bullsh!t your not), but you do get what you pay for.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT?
Ryanair operates a business, so that excusses all conduct by a rude and offensive airline, much like your disregard for disabled people. So the moral of the story is if you are dissabled DO NOT FLY RYANAIR--EVER!.
You board passengers and then remove of the aircraft. Sit them in an airport loung for six hours, what vile way to treat members of society.