Ryanair/Channel 4 dispatches Programme
Join Date: May 2005
Location: varies..a lot
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a question here....how many Ryanair bashers on this forum actually work or have worked for said company? It's easy to slate a company using facts and figures quoted in newspapers/tv programs and looking all clever and important but yet having never worked for that company. It may well be that some of the posts here are from genuine sources who have had real problems in their dealings with the company as employees, but it's highly likely that some simply like to bitch about things they know nothing about, because they read it in the tabloids.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: varies..a lot
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aloue, I don't get it, there is no difference in mood in my first and second post, the reason I took ( ever so slight ) offense to what you wrote and describing it as condescending and flippant was that you chose to refer to my post as a gem, like it was some priceless/hilarious and completely innacurate comment. I clearly state that I was not working for the company and that I only was saying what present employees have told me, not ALL employees, just the few that I know, and they indeed have NO complaints at the moment. So forgive me if I appeared to get a little tetchy, you are absolutely right, all posts are open to scrutiny and I shall do my best to make my posts as clear as possible to avoid any misunderstandings.
Anyway, before someone slates me for the other post I just made, let me simply say I wish genuinely to find out if all these complaints I have been reading are from people who have ACTUALLY been involved?
Anyway, before someone slates me for the other post I just made, let me simply say I wish genuinely to find out if all these complaints I have been reading are from people who have ACTUALLY been involved?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Various
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
powdermonkey I did not intend my use of the word gem to be interpreted as "priceless/hilarious and completely innacurate comment". The word, which I withdraw, was more intended to underline the sharp distinction between what you reported and the reality that so many Ryanair pilots have to contend with. In that regard I still have a (personal) problem with the contrast between the volume of posts about Ryanair which repeatedly confirm the same messages about the realities of life in Ryanair but which some posters here seem to completely discount. I just have difficulty is reconciling the shear volume of negative evidence with the soothing "Ryanair is no different from other airlines" type of post. In summary, we just had a clash of perspectives, but seem to have mutually recovered.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: varies..a lot
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If only all PPruners could resolve their differences so amicably as you and I!
no worries Aloue.
Yes, the volume of complaints about one company is impressive and I do personally think that MOL is pushing things too hard, but that is a personal opinion based on what I see and read, NOT from experience, hence why I do not bash Ryanair, and also why I am willing to accept that not all is as gloomy as what one reads on Prune. I am a pilot in training and hope to qualify for a job before the end of 2006, and I rightly or wrongly believe that Ryanair is responsible in part for creating a very healthy job opportunities market for people such as myself. I may be wrong but again, I state this is opinion not experience, and I just question how many of the complaints we read about on PPrune and elsewhere are genuine and from injured parties, and how many come from people like reporters who are not in the airline industry, but know that anything touching the airlines in a negative way sells a lot of newspapers.
no worries Aloue.Yes, the volume of complaints about one company is impressive and I do personally think that MOL is pushing things too hard, but that is a personal opinion based on what I see and read, NOT from experience, hence why I do not bash Ryanair, and also why I am willing to accept that not all is as gloomy as what one reads on Prune. I am a pilot in training and hope to qualify for a job before the end of 2006, and I rightly or wrongly believe that Ryanair is responsible in part for creating a very healthy job opportunities market for people such as myself. I may be wrong but again, I state this is opinion not experience, and I just question how many of the complaints we read about on PPrune and elsewhere are genuine and from injured parties, and how many come from people like reporters who are not in the airline industry, but know that anything touching the airlines in a negative way sells a lot of newspapers.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: 340 and climbing
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A surprisingy large number of people here seem to have no or very limited knowledge of operating short haul, 737 inter-european.
Having just read the entire posted correspondence between MOL and the production company, many things jump out fro discussion.
Lets start with a very simple and straightforward one; 25 minute turnaround times.
How long does it take for a full pax load to disembark a 738?
How long does it take for a new load to come onboard, stuff away their carry on bags and sit down?
Deduct the above from the 25 minutes, how many minutes does that leave with cabin crew to do everything they are obliged to do. Obliged either by their company SOPs; clean away the rubbish not collected during the approach, tidy the aircraft and prepare the galleys for the new arrivals plus their tasks under the law like the cabin security check & the life vest check.
There simply isn't enough time.
As Sunfish so rightly says, all the manuals in the world won't help you when the company culture is not conducive.
In the case of MOL, I strongly suspect that he has all his paperwork regarding cabin SOPs in order. And when the crew are caught out not following the impossible-to-achieve SOPs, he does exactly what he is doing in this case, namely blaming the individual crew members for failing to do their task properly.
Thereby neatly circumventing having to raise his costs by allowing the crews enough time to do the things properly.
MOL knows that the underfunded and understaffed regulatory bodies wil mainly concentrate on the paperwork, and as long as that looks good they will be happy.
The odd time that his practices are shown to be faulty, he will blame his crews rather than his impossible SOPs.
Neat, clever and utterly dangerous.
Having just read the entire posted correspondence between MOL and the production company, many things jump out fro discussion.
Lets start with a very simple and straightforward one; 25 minute turnaround times.
How long does it take for a full pax load to disembark a 738?
How long does it take for a new load to come onboard, stuff away their carry on bags and sit down?
Deduct the above from the 25 minutes, how many minutes does that leave with cabin crew to do everything they are obliged to do. Obliged either by their company SOPs; clean away the rubbish not collected during the approach, tidy the aircraft and prepare the galleys for the new arrivals plus their tasks under the law like the cabin security check & the life vest check.
There simply isn't enough time.
As Sunfish so rightly says, all the manuals in the world won't help you when the company culture is not conducive.
In the case of MOL, I strongly suspect that he has all his paperwork regarding cabin SOPs in order. And when the crew are caught out not following the impossible-to-achieve SOPs, he does exactly what he is doing in this case, namely blaming the individual crew members for failing to do their task properly.
Thereby neatly circumventing having to raise his costs by allowing the crews enough time to do the things properly.
MOL knows that the underfunded and understaffed regulatory bodies wil mainly concentrate on the paperwork, and as long as that looks good they will be happy.
The odd time that his practices are shown to be faulty, he will blame his crews rather than his impossible SOPs.
Neat, clever and utterly dangerous.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to Jetlegs post Ryanair state in their letters that they respect a pilots right to not fly if they are fatigued. So the present court case where a pilot was suspended for not flying two extra sectors because he was fatigued is a figment of our imagination then?
They can not give out drinks because the bar is sealed on the ground and can not be opened? That is for alcoholic drinks. What about soft drinks, or even bottled water?
Their answers are just too glib. Those of us who fly the 737 on shorthaul low cost turnrounds know that the answers might fool someone who doesn't know but are just an embarassment to those who do know.
For sure other low cost airlines (e.g. easyJet) also have short turnrounds and passenger problems, you only have to watch their tv programme, but Ryanair really take the p*ss.
They can not give out drinks because the bar is sealed on the ground and can not be opened? That is for alcoholic drinks. What about soft drinks, or even bottled water?
Their answers are just too glib. Those of us who fly the 737 on shorthaul low cost turnrounds know that the answers might fool someone who doesn't know but are just an embarassment to those who do know.
For sure other low cost airlines (e.g. easyJet) also have short turnrounds and passenger problems, you only have to watch their tv programme, but Ryanair really take the p*ss.
Manchesters Most Wanted PPRuNer
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a very, very frequent traveller with Ryanair and I've just finished reading through the downloadable letters on their site regarding this matter. I have to say, it all seems a little overblown to me and the replies given by Ryanair seem to make perfect sense - with an obvious hint of spin.
It certainly hasn't worried or discouraged me, in any way, as a regular passenger with RYR.
I think though that, one the programme goes out, "Joe Public" may be alarmed a little bit, probably thanks in no small part to a clever editing process.
I remember, not too long ago, a similar programme reporting supposed security lapses at EGCC. That went out with a damp squib too and I think this may well do the same.
It certainly hasn't worried or discouraged me, in any way, as a regular passenger with RYR.
I think though that, one the programme goes out, "Joe Public" may be alarmed a little bit, probably thanks in no small part to a clever editing process.
I remember, not too long ago, a similar programme reporting supposed security lapses at EGCC. That went out with a damp squib too and I think this may well do the same.
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought....
I recognise that programmes like "Watchdog" etc have done a lot of good in the past, shining a little light into dark corners. Accept that.
I also recognise that until we see the programme on Monday, we are all speaking from a position of conjecture.
BUT. What if, for argument's sake, the programme makes an accusation against Ryanair, of commercially damaging proportions, which turns out to be completely untrue? Is that situation that far-fetched, given that it is being made by lay people in the media?
Will MO'L get anything other than a 30s read statement in three months time, at the tail end of an unrelated programme, saying that "yeah, we're really sorry, it was all untrue. And if you lost your job because we frightened all your passengers away, we're really sorry about that too."
With power comes responsibility. Perhaps the programme makers should consider that.
I recognise that programmes like "Watchdog" etc have done a lot of good in the past, shining a little light into dark corners. Accept that.
I also recognise that until we see the programme on Monday, we are all speaking from a position of conjecture.
BUT. What if, for argument's sake, the programme makes an accusation against Ryanair, of commercially damaging proportions, which turns out to be completely untrue? Is that situation that far-fetched, given that it is being made by lay people in the media?
Will MO'L get anything other than a 30s read statement in three months time, at the tail end of an unrelated programme, saying that "yeah, we're really sorry, it was all untrue. And if you lost your job because we frightened all your passengers away, we're really sorry about that too."
With power comes responsibility. Perhaps the programme makers should consider that.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: varies..a lot
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's all wait and see, however, what I am curious about is what the two "CC" in training were asked to look for during their time at Ryanair.
If the object of the exercise was to find fault and scandal, talk to disgruntled employees and basically dredge up anything negative, well that is exactly what will be served up. Judging by the tone of what is advertised, that seems to be exactly what the producers are looking for.....that's easy to do!
If this was a program about the day in the life of a trainee CC and as result of making a genuine program, shocking standards were discovered, then yes, the report would have value and would be more credible. The same program could be made about everything that is positive in Ryanair, and edit it in such a way that no bad facts are released. My point is, it's all about the mindset of the producer, if you want to create a negative image, you'll achieve it.
If the object of the exercise was to find fault and scandal, talk to disgruntled employees and basically dredge up anything negative, well that is exactly what will be served up. Judging by the tone of what is advertised, that seems to be exactly what the producers are looking for.....that's easy to do!
If this was a program about the day in the life of a trainee CC and as result of making a genuine program, shocking standards were discovered, then yes, the report would have value and would be more credible. The same program could be made about everything that is positive in Ryanair, and edit it in such a way that no bad facts are released. My point is, it's all about the mindset of the producer, if you want to create a negative image, you'll achieve it.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TwinAisle you clearly don't know much about Ryanair. MOL will sue if he gets even half a chance. I have no doubt that C4 has already been threatened with legal action, as has been virtually everybody who has ever planned to publish an article critical of Ryanair, or who has opened a website critical of Ryanair, etc., etc. The most recent case was the magazine that published an article containing information about an under-reported and under-investigated Ryanair incident - they too were threatened. Ryanair never hesitates to go to court if it believes it to be in its interest. (I should mention that nobody seems to have noticed that this means that C4 is very unlikely to make any claims for which it does not have evidence).
Scourge of Bad Airline Management!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Global Nomad
Age: 55
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GGV - No, you are right, I am not a Ryanair expert, just an interested bystander. But surely, if MO'L will
surely the half chance he needs is for the programme makers to make an untrue statement? In which case, perhaps they deserve to be sued?
As for
this may be true. But how many times have you seen a statement of the type I outlined in my previous posting, where the programme maker has screwed up, but has only to apologise at some later date?
Is that really fair?
sue if he gets even half a chance
As for
C4 is very unlikely to make any claims for which it does not have evidence
Is that really fair?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TwinAisle, to twist what you have said into a different orientation:
Only with Ryanair there never is an apology (this from the best employer in the universe of best paid paid pilots in Europe who only work an average of 18 hours a week and who enjoy the best rosters, always get their leave, get rapid promotions, etc. etc.). And that's avoiding the more disgraceful statements about individual pilots over the years.
Balance (like fairness) is a two-way business.
How many times have you seen a misleading Ryanair statement that coloured perceptions and was never effectively refuted, even after the damage had been done.
Balance (like fairness) is a two-way business.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Up there somewhere
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by egbt
Would it not be a good idea to actually watch the program before making up your mind?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: EU
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the most insightful posts I have ever read on this forum recently asked, from a safety point of view, if the aviation industry was actually ready for the low fares airlines (in general). For generations, the commercial aviation industry was policed by a model that we were familiar with. State run airlines, employing hand picked war heroes as crew, and money no object. Well folks, today the skies are now full of guys and gals who fulfilled their dream very differently. They didn’t have to clamber into a hawk or a hurricane but still had to endure the “old farts” from the old schools. The musty old warriors have to go somewhere and the reality is that they have ended up in the administration of the current system. They are in the local aviation authorities as executives or testers or examiners or AAIB’ers etc. but one thing is sure, they are totally out of there depth. They have no qualifications what so ever to police and govern the new environment, and what’s more they have no comprehension of what it takes to run a modern day commercial aviation business. They need to clamber to a dictionary to look up what a four-sector day means. A good dictionary will enlighten them that its not a three day, all expenses paid lay over at three different locations but a very tiring and trying days work. The fastest growing technological revolution to hit the modern age has left behind the very people that police it so the only alternative for most of them is to bitch about it. That they have such a ready made audience on these pages leaves me to conclude that most of you remember the good old days. Well let me tell you folks, while we havent been to war, we have had to work extremely hard to get here so push over and stop complaining.
So in short, my point being.....
Dispatches or any other programme is always going to target a sucessful model such as Ryanair because it has nothing to benchmark it against. It also has nothing to lose. It dosent tell you that many of its employees travell by Ryanair every week to get to its locations. Oh no that wouldnt be good journo. However, just remember, in Ryanairs history nobody has ever died - NOBODY (repete after me all the competition who can boast that fact - oops.. forgot that not many of you can, can you. Certainly not any of you in service for over 20 years, ..??? Pls do comment
So in short, my point being.....
Dispatches or any other programme is always going to target a sucessful model such as Ryanair because it has nothing to benchmark it against. It also has nothing to lose. It dosent tell you that many of its employees travell by Ryanair every week to get to its locations. Oh no that wouldnt be good journo. However, just remember, in Ryanairs history nobody has ever died - NOBODY (repete after me all the competition who can boast that fact - oops.. forgot that not many of you can, can you. Certainly not any of you in service for over 20 years, ..??? Pls do comment
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have personally witnessed passengers disembarking forward doors as passengers embark rear doors; would love to know what rules are being worked to? Are they not now reaping their harvest! I am not being critical of individuals, as I know like myself, they are under pressure to make it work; I more blame the company cultures that are purveying the industry as a whole whilst preaching the "safety is paramount". If this was the case, why do we end up working a 60 hour week combined with unsocial hours.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More Ch 4 ****e
Originally Posted by Penguin2000
I've seen the advert, i've read the letters on the Ryanair website and to cut a long story short i think its a bunch of old CODSWOLLOP!!
Any excuse to get a story and make money!!
As for pilots being over worked erhh where did they get that!! My other half is a pilot and it feels like hes never at work!!
Any excuse to get a story and make money!!
As for pilots being over worked erhh where did they get that!! My other half is a pilot and it feels like hes never at work!!
I've done the same and I agree with you Penguin2000 - and others of similar leanings.
Karen Edwards and her band of twisters should be sued!
So Ryanair is a tight-ass operation, but it's within the law.
Some of Karen Edwards choice of words (item 7) like, "critical" boarding checks are just pathetic........... stir up alarmist lies why don't you.
Item 15 - If CC fall asleep whilst airborne it's highly unlikely it is due to the complexity of their in-flight duties! Examine their 'rest' habits for the previous few days might tell all and approach the truth.
Item 16 - shows the lamentable grasp that Karen Edwards has of the subject.
Item 18 - a "potential" DIV. Get real Ms Edwards. How about a "potential" stab at getting to the truth of how you make your money through stirring up tripe and falsehoods?
Item 19 - 3 hrs delayed.... phhhw..... chicken feed. Some clever dick trying to tell the Captain the score; crap happens and the skipper appears to have done all he could - breaking the seals does not enter the equation.
Item 20 - you pay for what you get....... what car do you drive Ms Edwards? I suppose she can afford to fly, the company pays. When it does not, then her big buck salary will cough up.
I'm not a great fan of Ryanair, but when I see yet another example of deception being played out for some sick gain, by the deplorable Ch4, on the say so of a couple of undercover 'bent' reporters then I object to this deciet. If Ch4 want crap on their airtime, then busy being amongst the MEP's in BRU.
Sue
Ch4 Mr MOLTG
http://www.ryanair.com/site/promos/d...6-01-23%5D.pdf
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: EU
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QED. You are using traditional methods to judge a new industry.
Here is a quote from the WHO
"Using published data as a base, the World Health Organisation estimates that there are over a million deaths as a result of road crashes."
So why arent we stopping the production of all auto vehicles as I speak?? Please tell me why. Oh but no - an alumium tube with 80 plus consenting adults must be immediately interfered with and regulated - I dont get it
Here is a quote from the WHO
"Using published data as a base, the World Health Organisation estimates that there are over a million deaths as a result of road crashes."
So why arent we stopping the production of all auto vehicles as I speak?? Please tell me why. Oh but no - an alumium tube with 80 plus consenting adults must be immediately interfered with and regulated - I dont get it
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London, New York, Paris, Munich
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do we need to see the programme?
and
It's all in their letter to MOL. We know what they are going to say, and it's not very much. If they throw anything else into the programme, they haven't told Ryanair, and according to them would have breached their 'statutory obligations to fairly summarise their evidence' (not that I can see any evidence in their letters, lots of accusations though).
That's the interesting part for me, the fact that they appear to be having a go at an airline when they should really be examining their own conduct.
Come on, the GPS isn't working and they claim it's a safety issue.
And anyway, it's a rumour network.
The matters of concern uncovered by Ms Smith and Ms Nash during their time secretly filming while working for Ryanair, and on which we would like to give you the opportunity to comment, are as follows
Our statutory obligations require us to fairly summarise our evidence in order to seek an appropriate response
That's the interesting part for me, the fact that they appear to be having a go at an airline when they should really be examining their own conduct.
Come on, the GPS isn't working and they claim it's a safety issue.
And anyway, it's a rumour network.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bermondesya you ask a question
but it's not a real question because your mind is obviously made up. I think you are here for other purposes than to comment in a "fair and balanced" way - kinda like Fox News. Maybe you should wait and see (not that it looks will make any difference to your opinion) before telling us anymore of what you think. I presume we will be having lot's of "I told you so" stuff from you after you have seen it.
Why do we need to see the programme?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Andover, Hampshire, UK
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This kind of program is just so unwelcome. Typically Channel IV will barely let Ryanair get a message in sideways. Despite their assurance, I'm sure Channel IV will edit/reword or otherwise do something with Ryanair's statement. If they were genuinely unsafe, the IAA or the CAA would have jumped all over them by now. There are far more worrying airlines out there.
Graeme
Graeme