Ryanair faces inquiry as toilets on aircraft were used as seats
Still behind the curtain
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Toilets & Jump seats
First of all from what I can gather after reading all these six pages of very informative material, I don't think that Ryan Air's management has anything to do with that the captain did. I don't suppose the captain radioed HQ for permission to carry these so-called "swowaways", and if he did and permission was granted, then he should be absolved.
Second point. I don't know about recently, but about 10 years ago our favorite airline, Aeroflot, still adhered to the policy of strap-hangers for those passengers who could not run fast enough from the gate to the plane and find a seat.
Working in a Russian world as a foreign journalist, I was on plenty internal flights that used to carry not only passengers, but also their intimate belongings -- like chickens, pigs, goats and sheep, in addition to the TV sets and stereos in packaged cartons scattered along the isle. You wouldn't dare check the item, because someone would likely steal it at chek-in or before luggage retreival.
If someone cares to correct me, fine. I was thrown out of the Soviet Union and haven't been back, but from what I understand, the internal flight system has not changed much.
Second point. I don't know about recently, but about 10 years ago our favorite airline, Aeroflot, still adhered to the policy of strap-hangers for those passengers who could not run fast enough from the gate to the plane and find a seat.
Working in a Russian world as a foreign journalist, I was on plenty internal flights that used to carry not only passengers, but also their intimate belongings -- like chickens, pigs, goats and sheep, in addition to the TV sets and stereos in packaged cartons scattered along the isle. You wouldn't dare check the item, because someone would likely steal it at chek-in or before luggage retreival.
If someone cares to correct me, fine. I was thrown out of the Soviet Union and haven't been back, but from what I understand, the internal flight system has not changed much.
Humus Motor
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: A little place called Samsonite
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saskatoon, I think you may have misunderstood the role of the CAA in the operation of any airline not holding a UK AOC. They have no authority to inspect or legislate, unless acting on behalf of the Department for Transport, when carrying out a 'Safety Assessment of Foreign Airlines' at the DFT's request. The responsibility for overseeing the safety regulation of any airline rests entirely with the Aviation Authority of the given airline's State of registry. Provided that said Authority is satisfied that the airline complies with JAR OPs etc etc - then that's it.
People often remark 'what are the CAA doing about it?' - Well, the answer is that they have no authority, and are not empowered, to act. No doubt all sorts of 'conversations' go on between the authorities, but that's another matter.
People often remark 'what are the CAA doing about it?' - Well, the answer is that they have no authority, and are not empowered, to act. No doubt all sorts of 'conversations' go on between the authorities, but that's another matter.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this "news report", PPRuNe evens gets a mention. 
Off-duty crew sacked after sitting in toilet on packed flight
By Kevin Done, Aerospace Correspondent
Published: July 24 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: July 24 2004 5:00
Ryanair may be searching for new ways of cutting costs and increasing revenues, but it moved swiftly to flush away rumours flying around the aviation industry that its latest wheeze was to have passengers seated in the aircraft toilets to add capacity.
It issued a statement yesterday confirming that two passengers - off-duty cabin crew returning to Ireland from a week's leave - travelled back on its flight FR7039 from Barcelona-Girona to Dublin last weekend in the rear toilets, because the flight was full.
The airline said the employees did so - in breach of the carrier's boarding and operating procedures - with the approval of the captain, a senior pilot with more than 30 years' flying experience.
The captain had tendered his resignation with immediate effect and the two cabin crew, who had refused to resign, had been dismissed for gross misconduct.
The Irish Aviation Authority, which regulates all Irish-registered aircraft, said it was conducting its own investigation after being alerted to the incident by a member of the public.
"We take this very seriously because of the safety implications," it said.
Ryanair said that it had conducted its own investigation for the past five days, and had co-operated fully with the IAA.
It said it operated "to the highest international standards" and any breaches would "be dealt with with the utmost speed and gravity".
As news of the incident spread in the airline community including across pprune.org, the website of the Professional Pilots Rumour Network, opinions varied among contributors on the gravity of the incident.
One suggested that the normal stampede to board a Ryanair flight would take on a new urgency with the command: "Quick with the boarding now, else you'll be sitting in the bog."
However, another contributor said: "Ryanair should be hammered for this. It is a gross breach of all international safety regulations and something akin to behaviour that existed in remote parts of Africa 20 years ago."
Ryanair's own recent ideas for cutting costs include aiming within a couple of years to ban passengers from checking in hold baggage with travellers to be restricted tocarry-on baggage only - it recently raised the maximum cabin baggage allowance - as a way of reducing costs at airports.
One contributor to the pprune.org website suggested that it could also provide a solution for excess passengers. "There will be plenty of room in the holds of Ryanair aircraft soon . .
Off-duty crew sacked after sitting in toilet on packed flight
By Kevin Done, Aerospace Correspondent
Published: July 24 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: July 24 2004 5:00
Ryanair may be searching for new ways of cutting costs and increasing revenues, but it moved swiftly to flush away rumours flying around the aviation industry that its latest wheeze was to have passengers seated in the aircraft toilets to add capacity.
It issued a statement yesterday confirming that two passengers - off-duty cabin crew returning to Ireland from a week's leave - travelled back on its flight FR7039 from Barcelona-Girona to Dublin last weekend in the rear toilets, because the flight was full.
The airline said the employees did so - in breach of the carrier's boarding and operating procedures - with the approval of the captain, a senior pilot with more than 30 years' flying experience.
The captain had tendered his resignation with immediate effect and the two cabin crew, who had refused to resign, had been dismissed for gross misconduct.
The Irish Aviation Authority, which regulates all Irish-registered aircraft, said it was conducting its own investigation after being alerted to the incident by a member of the public.
"We take this very seriously because of the safety implications," it said.
Ryanair said that it had conducted its own investigation for the past five days, and had co-operated fully with the IAA.
It said it operated "to the highest international standards" and any breaches would "be dealt with with the utmost speed and gravity".
As news of the incident spread in the airline community including across pprune.org, the website of the Professional Pilots Rumour Network, opinions varied among contributors on the gravity of the incident.
One suggested that the normal stampede to board a Ryanair flight would take on a new urgency with the command: "Quick with the boarding now, else you'll be sitting in the bog."
However, another contributor said: "Ryanair should be hammered for this. It is a gross breach of all international safety regulations and something akin to behaviour that existed in remote parts of Africa 20 years ago."
Ryanair's own recent ideas for cutting costs include aiming within a couple of years to ban passengers from checking in hold baggage with travellers to be restricted tocarry-on baggage only - it recently raised the maximum cabin baggage allowance - as a way of reducing costs at airports.
One contributor to the pprune.org website suggested that it could also provide a solution for excess passengers. "There will be plenty of room in the holds of Ryanair aircraft soon . .
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: guernsey
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even The Times is reporting this - brilliant headline 'Budget Aircrew go from jump seats to dump seats'.....and The Independent has a piece on MOL's scrap with BAA over Stansted....including some choice quotes from himself:
This isn't an airline, it's like a drug baron's business.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there was a question on another page, I think from DX Wombat, about taking off duty crew, etc. So, here a short view for those readers who aren't in the business or don't know about these things.
Off-duty crew and/or family members fly, either free or with reduced rates, as so-called "stand-by" passengers. They wait at the gate and hope that, when all regular passengers are aboard, there will be some extra seats available (sometimes due to pax not showing up, for whatever reasons). These waiting people will then, usually according to seniority or status, be alloted these free seats. If the flight is completely full, then extra jump- or crew-seats may, at the discretion of the captain, be alloted these folk. These seats are all equipped with proper seat belts so it's really no problem. Of course, the "head-count" and weight must also fit. I flew as a stand-by years ago and there were many empty seats, even though there were still stand-bys waiting that weren't allowed on. The reason: so much cargo that the weight limit had to be considered!!
I'm amazed that such a senior captain would have done this... as mentioned enough already, it was against all regulations to allow this and the risk wasn't worth it. Another point about safety: in case of an accident, no one would have expected someone in there.
The outcome of all this should be quite interesting... and more difficult in the future for stand-bys to be taken along. So again, this incident may have far reaching consequences for all.
Westy
Off-duty crew and/or family members fly, either free or with reduced rates, as so-called "stand-by" passengers. They wait at the gate and hope that, when all regular passengers are aboard, there will be some extra seats available (sometimes due to pax not showing up, for whatever reasons). These waiting people will then, usually according to seniority or status, be alloted these free seats. If the flight is completely full, then extra jump- or crew-seats may, at the discretion of the captain, be alloted these folk. These seats are all equipped with proper seat belts so it's really no problem. Of course, the "head-count" and weight must also fit. I flew as a stand-by years ago and there were many empty seats, even though there were still stand-bys waiting that weren't allowed on. The reason: so much cargo that the weight limit had to be considered!!
I'm amazed that such a senior captain would have done this... as mentioned enough already, it was against all regulations to allow this and the risk wasn't worth it. Another point about safety: in case of an accident, no one would have expected someone in there.
The outcome of all this should be quite interesting... and more difficult in the future for stand-bys to be taken along. So again, this incident may have far reaching consequences for all.
Westy
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: EMA
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apart from the obvious danger to life spoken of earlier in the thread ,I wonder what the insurance company would say to a claim should an accident have occurred?
unrestrained pax
overloaded
incorrect loadsheet
flying outside of jar ops / ANO
crew complicit in deceit
they usually find any excuse not to pay up, here they would have a choice!
unrestrained pax
overloaded
incorrect loadsheet
flying outside of jar ops / ANO
crew complicit in deceit
they usually find any excuse not to pay up, here they would have a choice!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't bear thinking about. I heard from a source that the Spanish Police have been making investigations into this incident by interviewing handling staff at Girona Airport.
(Purely for my own interest, can anyone confirm whether the aircraft was a B732 or B738? Does FR still have 732's in service?)
(Purely for my own interest, can anyone confirm whether the aircraft was a B732 or B738? Does FR still have 732's in service?)
aka Capt PPRuNe
Join Date: May 1995
Location: UK
Posts: 4,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, I don't know which bit about NO abuse and insults some of you didn't understand but I'll reiterate it here for those of you with IQ's that are deficient due to DNA inheritence from the shallow end of the gene pool:
Also, as a warning to the Ryanair bashing brigade... You need to realise that this thread, and many others, are about technical and/or safety issues that apply equally to most JAA airlines and not just Ryanair. Ie. they are of interest to professional pilots and the day to day running of the airline is not of concern here. In light of that knowledge, I ask that those with a mental impediment that somehow causes them to burst a blood vessel and start typing out their venom contaminated rhetoric of anything that is remotely to do with any business that Mr O'Leary is involved with, please consider that this is about an operational issue. If you feel that hand wringing, knicker wetting, eye rolling, teeth gnashing etc. at the mention of Ryanair because you don't agree with their destination naming policy, their passenger handling methods or whatever, then please do me and most others a favour and vent your spleens in the appropriate Pax & SLF, Spotters Balcony or Airlines, Airports & Routes forums. 
Over the last few months it has become increasingly obvious that many members are unable to make their points in their posts without resorting to abuse. Also, the amount of swearing from some individuals is becoming intolerable.
Considering the diversity of the PPRuNe readership and the many areas of debate that there are in aviation, it is not acceptable that so many people feel they can try and degrade this website with their abuse and foul mouthed verbiage. Not only is it a sign of 'losing the plot' but it does nothing to enhance the debate and only serves to inflame the base instincts and behaviour in other respondents.
I am serving notice that from now on, I will not accept abusive language from anyone, no matter how emotionally sensitive the topic may be. Members who considers themselves eligible to post on the Professional Pilots RUmour NEtwork shall maintain a level of decorum that excludes swearing and abuse. If anyone is not happy with this restriction then they are free to go elsewhere with their problem.
PPRuNe will not become just another bulletin board where a few selfish and ignorant individuals feel they can say what they want without a care for the consequences. Anyone trying to 'flame' or incite others by resorting to foul language or personal abuse will have their membership suspended. Their posts will either be deleted or edited to remove offensive language or abuse.
The time has come for members of the Professional Pilots RUmour NEtwork to show a little bit of professionalism and act accordingly.
Considering the diversity of the PPRuNe readership and the many areas of debate that there are in aviation, it is not acceptable that so many people feel they can try and degrade this website with their abuse and foul mouthed verbiage. Not only is it a sign of 'losing the plot' but it does nothing to enhance the debate and only serves to inflame the base instincts and behaviour in other respondents.
I am serving notice that from now on, I will not accept abusive language from anyone, no matter how emotionally sensitive the topic may be. Members who considers themselves eligible to post on the Professional Pilots RUmour NEtwork shall maintain a level of decorum that excludes swearing and abuse. If anyone is not happy with this restriction then they are free to go elsewhere with their problem.
PPRuNe will not become just another bulletin board where a few selfish and ignorant individuals feel they can say what they want without a care for the consequences. Anyone trying to 'flame' or incite others by resorting to foul language or personal abuse will have their membership suspended. Their posts will either be deleted or edited to remove offensive language or abuse.
The time has come for members of the Professional Pilots RUmour NEtwork to show a little bit of professionalism and act accordingly.
Toilet Seats
I don't think I can remember reading so much self-righteous tripe on this
web site for a long time.
It really resembles schooldays and "teachers pets". Lots of prissy little ne'er-do-wells without an ounce of gumption between them.
> "We wouldn't allow that now" <
> "what does he think he was doing"<
What he was doing was to exercise a Captain's (old-fashioned?) prerogative to help out a fellow company employee.
Sure he was breaking the rules. Do you think for one minute he didn't realize that?
Some will remember in the days of the Dak, Seven seas, Viscount even 111 when Captains were actually allowed to be totally responsible for their aircraft.
An extra passenger or two would be well within the tolerance of the loadsheet. After takeoff, they would be instructed to stay out of the way and to use the now-unoccupied cabin staff jump seats fot the rest of the flight i.e.strapped in. It used to be called "ghosting".
Usually it was only resorted to in order to help someone who'd already been away on duty for 5-6 days, the flight deck jump seat was occupied by a fare-paying passenger and he/she had been "bumped" off a couple of flights already.
So, when enough became enough,the Captain used his considerable judgment to enable a staff member to at least get home for his/her "days off".
Do you seriously think he would knowingly endanger his aircraft and his pax ??
As used to be allowed before the days of political correctness, he was weighing up all the factors, as he did every day, and making a calculated decision.
In this situation,
a) the f/d jumpseat not insured for a fare-paying pax.i.e. should be staff only ;the Company were preventing an employee from enjoying their contracted days off at home.
b) in the event of an EMC, there was an extra fully qualified staff member available in the cabin.
Talking about f/p pax. on the jumpseat, BTW, a great Skipper I used to fly with, used to say :-
"Why should I have to have a punter on my jumpseat?
I don't sit on his desk when he's working. Why should he
-well sit on mine !!"
Sleeve.
web site for a long time.
It really resembles schooldays and "teachers pets". Lots of prissy little ne'er-do-wells without an ounce of gumption between them.
> "We wouldn't allow that now" <
> "what does he think he was doing"<
What he was doing was to exercise a Captain's (old-fashioned?) prerogative to help out a fellow company employee.
Sure he was breaking the rules. Do you think for one minute he didn't realize that?
Some will remember in the days of the Dak, Seven seas, Viscount even 111 when Captains were actually allowed to be totally responsible for their aircraft.
An extra passenger or two would be well within the tolerance of the loadsheet. After takeoff, they would be instructed to stay out of the way and to use the now-unoccupied cabin staff jump seats fot the rest of the flight i.e.strapped in. It used to be called "ghosting".
Usually it was only resorted to in order to help someone who'd already been away on duty for 5-6 days, the flight deck jump seat was occupied by a fare-paying passenger and he/she had been "bumped" off a couple of flights already.
So, when enough became enough,the Captain used his considerable judgment to enable a staff member to at least get home for his/her "days off".
Do you seriously think he would knowingly endanger his aircraft and his pax ??
As used to be allowed before the days of political correctness, he was weighing up all the factors, as he did every day, and making a calculated decision.
In this situation,
a) the f/d jumpseat not insured for a fare-paying pax.i.e. should be staff only ;the Company were preventing an employee from enjoying their contracted days off at home.
b) in the event of an EMC, there was an extra fully qualified staff member available in the cabin.
Talking about f/p pax. on the jumpseat, BTW, a great Skipper I used to fly with, used to say :-
"Why should I have to have a punter on my jumpseat?
I don't sit on his desk when he's working. Why should he
-well sit on mine !!"Sleeve.
So, when enough became enough,the Captain used his considerable judgment to enable a staff member to at least get home for his/her "days off".
Do you seriously think he would knowingly endanger his aircraft and his pax ??
Do you seriously think he would knowingly endanger his aircraft and his pax ??
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ask the tower !
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite all the bashing and slagging that Danny mentions, the fact of the matter remains; what this CREW did is ILLEGAL and that should be the end of the story. It really doesn't matter who's to blame and who is not. It's done now and the CREW have paid the penalty.
Think maybe it's time for this thread to be offloaded.......
Think maybe it's time for this thread to be offloaded.......
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How did a small albeit illegal incident turn in to 7 pages of FR Bashing?. I dont particulary like this outfit myself but some Ppruners really pull out all the stops. Are you all ex FR staff or how exactly did you develop this Ryanair Bashing Syndrome?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Frimley, Surrey.
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“who hasn't driven their car or riden(sic) his bike at 100mph along the M4?” Well not me for a start, and I mean the dangerous offence, not that particular motorway. My guess is that the expression “cutting corners” comes from the driving world where cutting across a corner can save you time or effort. Of course, on occasion, something comes the opposite direction on that corner, and shows you the real cost of cutting corners.
Let’s face it, someone at some point cleared this overcapacity. Presumably the CC would have had little choice but to cooperate once that decision had been made. My presumption is that the CC don’t have the ability/authority to let onboard any “extras”.
I couldn’t care whether this was Ryanair or whoever - according to the RTE articles, the staff weren’t stranded, they had been “on leave”, and according to a poster above, were under no immediate pressure to return.
Concerning the “bashing”, I think it’s mostly a case of LCC bashing. When I’ve dared to mention good things about LCCs in my threads or posts, it’s not long before a basher emerges to have a pop.
Let’s face it, someone at some point cleared this overcapacity. Presumably the CC would have had little choice but to cooperate once that decision had been made. My presumption is that the CC don’t have the ability/authority to let onboard any “extras”.
I couldn’t care whether this was Ryanair or whoever - according to the RTE articles, the staff weren’t stranded, they had been “on leave”, and according to a poster above, were under no immediate pressure to return.
Concerning the “bashing”, I think it’s mostly a case of LCC bashing. When I’ve dared to mention good things about LCCs in my threads or posts, it’s not long before a basher emerges to have a pop.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While accepting the admonitions not to engage in Ryanair bashing over this matter, may I just point out that it would be unwise to assume that the particular nature of the said airline’s unique corporate way of doing things will not be discovered to have played a role in this event.
For example, just to titillate you all, it looks like there almost certainly was a telephone call from a “passenger” at the outstation to someone in an office and that a call was made in return to someone else at the outstation. What role, if any, this played we will have to wait and see. But remember, while captains take responsibility, airlines differ in who has “power” over access to jumpseats, or who can block access or encourage access or whatever. For example consider the tensions that might one day be caused by Ryanair’s practice of sometimes issuing standby tickets to pilots travelling to a simulator checkride, while simultaneously making it clear that the pilot is expected to be there on time. (The trick is to “make things clear”, without putting it in a form that will cause the management a problem. If there is anyone left out there who has not worked out that this is a Ryanair trademark …. well… ).
I am not aiming here to diminish the role of the captain. But breaking the rules always takes place in a context. In the case of Ryanair, we have a very particular context – this is not Ryanair bashing, it is a statement of fact.
It is, of course, pissing in the wind to suggest that people involved in a rumour network would wish to go through the tedium of actually waiting for all the facts before spinning their theories, outrage and perfectionistic notions of how others should behave.
However, having some years ago taxied behind an aeroplane with an appreciable covering of snow on the wings, its crew having been advised of same by three other aircraft and ATC before it took off, I am inclined to have a different view of what is a terminally serious safety issue than some contributors to this forum.
For example, just to titillate you all, it looks like there almost certainly was a telephone call from a “passenger” at the outstation to someone in an office and that a call was made in return to someone else at the outstation. What role, if any, this played we will have to wait and see. But remember, while captains take responsibility, airlines differ in who has “power” over access to jumpseats, or who can block access or encourage access or whatever. For example consider the tensions that might one day be caused by Ryanair’s practice of sometimes issuing standby tickets to pilots travelling to a simulator checkride, while simultaneously making it clear that the pilot is expected to be there on time. (The trick is to “make things clear”, without putting it in a form that will cause the management a problem. If there is anyone left out there who has not worked out that this is a Ryanair trademark …. well… ).
I am not aiming here to diminish the role of the captain. But breaking the rules always takes place in a context. In the case of Ryanair, we have a very particular context – this is not Ryanair bashing, it is a statement of fact.
It is, of course, pissing in the wind to suggest that people involved in a rumour network would wish to go through the tedium of actually waiting for all the facts before spinning their theories, outrage and perfectionistic notions of how others should behave.
However, having some years ago taxied behind an aeroplane with an appreciable covering of snow on the wings, its crew having been advised of same by three other aircraft and ATC before it took off, I am inclined to have a different view of what is a terminally serious safety issue than some contributors to this forum.
Correct me Ryanair pilots if I am wrong but I believe that O Leary
has banned Captains from giving jumpseats to staff on Spanish flights to make the staff pay something for the flights.
This may be a factor. Where jump seats empty on this flight?
has banned Captains from giving jumpseats to staff on Spanish flights to make the staff pay something for the flights.
This may be a factor. Where jump seats empty on this flight?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Thames Valley, UK
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I would rather be in the toilet in an abnormal landing...
no baggage to fall on your head, no flying seats to dismame you,
a nice bulhead to protect you and a nice handle to hold on to
cant see what all the fuss is about, unless of course, it's insurance problems
no baggage to fall on your head, no flying seats to dismame you,
a nice bulhead to protect you and a nice handle to hold on to
cant see what all the fuss is about, unless of course, it's insurance problems
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is definitely NOT a Ryanair bashing thread, so relax MOL. For once. Even though the resultant publicity is a bit on the negative side.
The large number of posts is probably due to the fact that many of us are just amazed that, in this day and age, such a flagrant breach of ANRs is not seen for what it is. The captain made a huge error of judgement and paid the price. So what ?
I venture to suggest that a large-scale collusion between all the crew must have taken place. Surely they all knew about it ? That’s where the problem might have started.
Sleeve, I think you might have missed the point. It is not a good idea to break the rules, even if some military outfits might think so. No particular arm in mind of course, perish the thought.
oTd
The large number of posts is probably due to the fact that many of us are just amazed that, in this day and age, such a flagrant breach of ANRs is not seen for what it is. The captain made a huge error of judgement and paid the price. So what ?
I venture to suggest that a large-scale collusion between all the crew must have taken place. Surely they all knew about it ? That’s where the problem might have started.
Sleeve, I think you might have missed the point. It is not a good idea to break the rules, even if some military outfits might think so. No particular arm in mind of course, perish the thought.
oTd