Ryanair secrets?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue here appears relatively simple. The culture within the airline in question, appears to be harsh. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has flown them. They treat their paying passengers like a low commodity, why should the staff be treated any differently?
The documentary was thin, but the crux, regardless of the periphery 'noise', was the culture.
What I fail to fathom, and have always failed to fathom, is why? MOL has built a very successful business, has won hands down in the LOCO stakes, is very obviously an astute business person, so why the almost disdainful way the customers are treated, and perceived, and we now know, allegedly, the staff?
Can the whole team not just be a bit 'nicer', slacken up a bit, and continue on their success.
It beats me..
The documentary was thin, but the crux, regardless of the periphery 'noise', was the culture.
What I fail to fathom, and have always failed to fathom, is why? MOL has built a very successful business, has won hands down in the LOCO stakes, is very obviously an astute business person, so why the almost disdainful way the customers are treated, and perceived, and we now know, allegedly, the staff?
Can the whole team not just be a bit 'nicer', slacken up a bit, and continue on their success.
It beats me..
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Found this with Google.
I simply copy what RTE wrote:
Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O'Leary has been sharply criticised by a High Court judge for what he described as lying in a letter to Transport Minister Noel Dempsey.
Mr Justice Peter Kelly said Mr O’Leary was lucky not to be found in contempt of court for what he described as ‘a serious state of affairs’.
Judge criticises Michael O'Leary for lying - RTÉ News
I simply copy what RTE wrote:
Ryanair Chief Executive Michael O'Leary has been sharply criticised by a High Court judge for what he described as lying in a letter to Transport Minister Noel Dempsey.
Mr Justice Peter Kelly said Mr O’Leary was lucky not to be found in contempt of court for what he described as ‘a serious state of affairs’.
Judge criticises Michael O'Leary for lying - RTÉ News
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh, yes:
While I am on my soap box, I should point out that all of this is a symptom of the naughties* political structure in the UK and the US.
For some reason, the Western world became enthralled with spin, smoke and mirror politics in the naughties, and seemed to lap it up. Anyone with a grain of sense could see this as political spin (blatant lies, actually), but the populous seemed oblivious and lapped it up. "We don't need exports", I heard a UK politician cry. "I have ended boom and bust cycles", said the British prime minister. (What planet was that guy on?)
Unsurprisingly, out of this nouveau faux-political environment there emerged a number of companies who aped this style, including Easyjet and Ryanair. These were companies who just said they were marvelous and everyone believed them. They covered up poor employee relations, poor management decisions, poor safety records, poor safety cultures, poor everything - and replaced it all with smoke, spin and mirrors. As long as the Irish leprechaun played the fool, and the fat Cypriot gurned for the cameras, everything must be wonderful. And the media, the financiers and the CAA fell for the corporate tom-foolery, hook, line and sinker.
But everyone forgot that aviation is a serious business, with serious consequences. And the worst offender in all this was the CAA, who allowed 20 minute turnarounds at busy airports in any weather conditions. Were the CAA inspectors mad, or just looking for an easy life? Just how can one refuel, deice, ensure you are not overweight, get the performance calculation correct, and make sure you are correctly fueled for those pesky TSXXXs, BLSNs and BCFGs, and do all the checks in 20 minutes?
The CAA could have stopped this nonsense on day one, by slapping a minimum 35 minute turnaround time on flights. But no, they let report after report of Easy and Ryanair aircraft flying too fast, taxying too fast, hassling ATC to cut every corner enroute, hassling ATC to take off now or be number one in the queue - and still they did nothing.
Ryanair and Easyjet, flying too fast, cutting corners:
BBC NEWS | UK | Budget airlines' pilots 'cut corners'
BBC NEWS | UK | Ryanair denies pilots 'exhausted'
BBC NEWS | Business | Easyjet staff vote on strike
BBC NEWS | UK | Ryanair threatens to sack pilots
BBC News - Ryanair jet's 'rushed landing a serious incident'
Faced with these problems, O'Leary merely threatened to sack more pilots (see the links above). But the problem was not with the pilots, it lay with the impossible schedules and turnarounds they were being forced to achieve. So now Ryan and Easy pilots were between a rock and a hard place, because they could no longer rush, but had to maintain the same schedule or face the wrath of O'Leary. And still the CAA did nothing, when a minimum 35 minute turnaround would have solved many of these issues. So the culpable organisation at the root of all these problems, is not O'Leary or the fat Cypriot, but the CAA. Just what are they doing? Why do they repeatedly fail to do the job they are employed to do - maintain safety?
What is the problem here? Are the CAA afraid of O'Leary? Are they so fat, lethargic and comfortable in their plush London (or Gatwick) offices,** they cannot get off their arses to see what is happening in the real world?*** Do they have their commercial hat on, more often than their safety hat? Are they simply no longer fit for purpose? (I can never get a sensible answer out of them on licencing issues, as if they are all youth-opportunities workers nowadays.)
Whatever the problem, the government need to stick a rocket up the arse of the CAA's head honcho.
* 2000 to 2009.
** You will note that CAA employees are not strip-searched twice a day, every day, so what do they care about security? You will note that CAA employees do not have their food, drinks and cosmetics taken from them every day, so what do they care about security? You will note that CAA employees have a lovely subsidized restaurant, so what do they care about Ryanair pilots having to bring their own food, tea bags, coffee sachets, sugar and water bottles (that are stolen by security). It is about time, the CAA got off their fat arses and saw what happened in the industry they serve and control.
*** In a recent BBC interview, the dopey bird at the head of the CAA safety group said that only one pilot had fallen asleep while on duty in the last 10 years. And she sincerely believed this, and looked perplexed when challenged by the BBC reporter. Can you imagine any organisation quite so out of touch with the job they are supposed to be doing? What was that you said? "Westminster?" Yeah ok, I think Westminster being out of touch is a bit like Roman roads - it goes without saying....
While I am on my soap box, I should point out that all of this is a symptom of the naughties* political structure in the UK and the US.
For some reason, the Western world became enthralled with spin, smoke and mirror politics in the naughties, and seemed to lap it up. Anyone with a grain of sense could see this as political spin (blatant lies, actually), but the populous seemed oblivious and lapped it up. "We don't need exports", I heard a UK politician cry. "I have ended boom and bust cycles", said the British prime minister. (What planet was that guy on?)
Unsurprisingly, out of this nouveau faux-political environment there emerged a number of companies who aped this style, including Easyjet and Ryanair. These were companies who just said they were marvelous and everyone believed them. They covered up poor employee relations, poor management decisions, poor safety records, poor safety cultures, poor everything - and replaced it all with smoke, spin and mirrors. As long as the Irish leprechaun played the fool, and the fat Cypriot gurned for the cameras, everything must be wonderful. And the media, the financiers and the CAA fell for the corporate tom-foolery, hook, line and sinker.
But everyone forgot that aviation is a serious business, with serious consequences. And the worst offender in all this was the CAA, who allowed 20 minute turnarounds at busy airports in any weather conditions. Were the CAA inspectors mad, or just looking for an easy life? Just how can one refuel, deice, ensure you are not overweight, get the performance calculation correct, and make sure you are correctly fueled for those pesky TSXXXs, BLSNs and BCFGs, and do all the checks in 20 minutes?
The CAA could have stopped this nonsense on day one, by slapping a minimum 35 minute turnaround time on flights. But no, they let report after report of Easy and Ryanair aircraft flying too fast, taxying too fast, hassling ATC to cut every corner enroute, hassling ATC to take off now or be number one in the queue - and still they did nothing.
Ryanair and Easyjet, flying too fast, cutting corners:
BBC NEWS | UK | Budget airlines' pilots 'cut corners'
BBC NEWS | UK | Ryanair denies pilots 'exhausted'
BBC NEWS | Business | Easyjet staff vote on strike
BBC NEWS | UK | Ryanair threatens to sack pilots
BBC News - Ryanair jet's 'rushed landing a serious incident'
Faced with these problems, O'Leary merely threatened to sack more pilots (see the links above). But the problem was not with the pilots, it lay with the impossible schedules and turnarounds they were being forced to achieve. So now Ryan and Easy pilots were between a rock and a hard place, because they could no longer rush, but had to maintain the same schedule or face the wrath of O'Leary. And still the CAA did nothing, when a minimum 35 minute turnaround would have solved many of these issues. So the culpable organisation at the root of all these problems, is not O'Leary or the fat Cypriot, but the CAA. Just what are they doing? Why do they repeatedly fail to do the job they are employed to do - maintain safety?
What is the problem here? Are the CAA afraid of O'Leary? Are they so fat, lethargic and comfortable in their plush London (or Gatwick) offices,** they cannot get off their arses to see what is happening in the real world?*** Do they have their commercial hat on, more often than their safety hat? Are they simply no longer fit for purpose? (I can never get a sensible answer out of them on licencing issues, as if they are all youth-opportunities workers nowadays.)
Whatever the problem, the government need to stick a rocket up the arse of the CAA's head honcho.
* 2000 to 2009.
** You will note that CAA employees are not strip-searched twice a day, every day, so what do they care about security? You will note that CAA employees do not have their food, drinks and cosmetics taken from them every day, so what do they care about security? You will note that CAA employees have a lovely subsidized restaurant, so what do they care about Ryanair pilots having to bring their own food, tea bags, coffee sachets, sugar and water bottles (that are stolen by security). It is about time, the CAA got off their fat arses and saw what happened in the industry they serve and control.
*** In a recent BBC interview, the dopey bird at the head of the CAA safety group said that only one pilot had fallen asleep while on duty in the last 10 years. And she sincerely believed this, and looked perplexed when challenged by the BBC reporter. Can you imagine any organisation quite so out of touch with the job they are supposed to be doing? What was that you said? "Westminster?" Yeah ok, I think Westminster being out of touch is a bit like Roman roads - it goes without saying....
Last edited by silverstrata; 13th Aug 2013 at 21:28.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Planet Claire
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silver
Well said!
If FR wish to behave like their fellow Countrymen do- I was thinking of those nice Irish folk who often come round offering to 'do your driveway'- then maybe someone should have a word in their ear?
But would it be our much-loved CAA? After all, FR are not exactly British, are they?
Well said!
If FR wish to behave like their fellow Countrymen do- I was thinking of those nice Irish folk who often come round offering to 'do your driveway'- then maybe someone should have a word in their ear?
But would it be our much-loved CAA? After all, FR are not exactly British, are they?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, quite predictably, Ryanair has issued legal proceeding against Channel 4
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by silverstrata & AtomKraft
As long as the Irish leprechaun played the fool, and the fat Cypriot gurned for the cameras
If FR wish to behave like their fellow Countrymen do- I was thinking of those nice Irish folk who often come round offering to 'do your driveway'
If FR wish to behave like their fellow Countrymen do- I was thinking of those nice Irish folk who often come round offering to 'do your driveway'
Is your real problem here the fact that those leprechauns and fat Greeks have knocked good old Royal Britannias fleet of Speedbirds off their perch?
Originally Posted by silverstrata
Ryanair pilots please note, I have done this myself on three occasions - calculated precisely the exact fuel to the FAF (which was just enough) and thus not declared an emergency, and landed with the required 150 kg below final fuel (burn from FAF to landing). However, if someone had barged in front of me with a Mayday call, who had more fuel than I had, I would not have been impressed.
CAT.OP.MPA.280 In-flight fuel management — aeroplanes
(b) 3. The commander shall declare an emergency when the calculated usable fuel on landing, at the nearest adequate aerodrome where a safe landing can be performed, is less than final reserve fuel.
Bearing in mind that only one of the Ryanair aircraft eventually landed below their minimum reserves at Valencia.
I sincerely hope those 3 landings were on MS Flight Simulator.
Last edited by grafity; 14th Aug 2013 at 02:05.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unsurprisingly, out of this nouveau faux-political environment there emerged a number of companies who aped this style, including Easyjet and Ryanair. These were companies who just said they were marvelous and everyone believed them. They covered up poor employee relations, poor management decisions, poor safety records, poor safety cultures, poor everything - and replaced it all with smoke, spin and mirrors. As long as the Irish leprechaun played the fool, and the fat Cypriot gurned for the cameras, everything must be wonderful. And the media, the financiers and the CAA fell for the corporate tom-foolery, hook, line and sinker.
But everyone forgot that aviation is a serious business, with serious consequences.
Just how can one refuel, deice, ensure you are not overweight, get the performance calculation correct, and make sure you are correctly fueled for those pesky TSXXXs, BLSNs and BCFGs, and do all the checks in 20 minutes?
...Easy and Ryanair aircraft flying too fast, taxying too fast, hassling ATC to cut every corner enroute, hassling ATC to take off now or be number one in the queue - and still they did nothing.
Ryanair and Easyjet, flying too fast, cutting corners:
BBC NEWS | UK | Budget airlines' pilots 'cut corners'
BBC NEWS | UK | Ryanair denies pilots 'exhausted'
BBC NEWS | Business | Easyjet staff vote on strike
BBC NEWS | UK | Ryanair threatens to sack pilots
BBC News - Ryanair jet's 'rushed landing a serious incident'
Faced with these problems, O'Leary merely threatened to sack more pilots (see the links above). But the problem was not with the pilots, it lay with the impossible schedules and turnarounds they were being forced to achieve. So now Ryan and Easy pilots were between a rock and a hard place...
when a minimum 35 minute turnaround would have solved many of these issues.
Don't forget that MOL's game plan from the get-go was to apply the SWA business model to a European airline.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Erehwon
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said earlier, nothing changes . . . Much.
MOL. Has had his 'reputation' for enough years that few employees can plead ignorance. Don't like the terms, don't sign the (any) contract.
All this energy expended and Joe Public has probably already forgotten about it.
MOL. Has had his 'reputation' for enough years that few employees can plead ignorance. Don't like the terms, don't sign the (any) contract.
All this energy expended and Joe Public has probably already forgotten about it.
Silver..
Ezy today will operate 1478 sectors of which 97% are turnarounds of 30 mins or more. In fact most Spanish airports now have 35 min turnarounds.
We don't do 20 min turnarounds
The CAA have no juristriction over Ryanair. It's the IAA
Being a superior aviation authority I'd thought you'd know this.
I've operated for ezy for 6 years on 30 min turnarounds without a single incident or problem. You see it's all about setting your mind to it. Refuelling is easy. A fuel uplift is decided in the cruise based on most up to date weather and pilot obs. Procedures in place to enable fuelling whilst embarking and disembarking and strictly adhered to. Weight as balance is computerised and takes approx 4 mins from loadsheet arrival. The system is designed to be safe with any 2 independent errors.
Cabin is cleaned by crew who have it down to a fine art.
If 30 min takes 35 mins then it does. Never be questioned as to a delay.
Ezy have an impressive safety record.
Spit
Ezy today will operate 1478 sectors of which 97% are turnarounds of 30 mins or more. In fact most Spanish airports now have 35 min turnarounds.
We don't do 20 min turnarounds
The CAA have no juristriction over Ryanair. It's the IAA
Being a superior aviation authority I'd thought you'd know this.
I've operated for ezy for 6 years on 30 min turnarounds without a single incident or problem. You see it's all about setting your mind to it. Refuelling is easy. A fuel uplift is decided in the cruise based on most up to date weather and pilot obs. Procedures in place to enable fuelling whilst embarking and disembarking and strictly adhered to. Weight as balance is computerised and takes approx 4 mins from loadsheet arrival. The system is designed to be safe with any 2 independent errors.
Cabin is cleaned by crew who have it down to a fine art.
If 30 min takes 35 mins then it does. Never be questioned as to a delay.
Ezy have an impressive safety record.
Spit
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Put out to graze
Age: 64
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Bearcat:
Are they rehashed? Has RYR the reviewed its fuel policies for aircraft flying into some busy airports during poor weather conditions as recommended by the IAA report into the MAD/VLC mess?
Channel 4 suggests it hasnt.
Total farce of a programme rehashing events from the past that have been gone through here and other forums ad nauseum.
Channel 4 suggests it hasnt.
Last edited by kick the tires; 14th Aug 2013 at 07:56.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not surprised Mr. O'Leary is suing and I would suggest he stands a good chance of winning.
Any television programme with either Ryanair or Scientology as its subject is checked and then checked again by their lawyers, as both are notorious for their use of threats of legal action to suppress any negative publicity.
Channel Four would have made sure that the programme was legally, absolutely watertight, prior to transmission.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: up north
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did I miss something, but (given that the prog was aimed at the average TV watcher) did it actually explain what the motivations or advantages would be to FR in carrying lower levels of fuel (but still legal). ?
Users of this forum might understand this (or consider it to be bleeding obvious), but it would need pointing out in words of one syllable with a clear connection established between fuel-loads and operating costs for the message to have any real impact on the average viewer.
Users of this forum might understand this (or consider it to be bleeding obvious), but it would need pointing out in words of one syllable with a clear connection established between fuel-loads and operating costs for the message to have any real impact on the average viewer.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
did it actually explain what the motivations or advantages would be to FR in carrying lower levels of fuel
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dublin
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Supreme Court ruled in favour of Ryanair regarding the ability of trade unions to gain a foot hold in private companies.
Having gone down the legal route and failed, the group now has regular bedtime tantrums which their friends in Channel 4 report ad nauseam.
A defamation case is one Ryanair will win. In the programme aired to the public, Channel 4 probably considered they could use the results as fact and that they would be protected by hiding behind the likes of good faith or the reasonable belief that they were true.
Time will tell and in the meantime any movement in stock price offers us investors an opportunity.
Having gone down the legal route and failed, the group now has regular bedtime tantrums which their friends in Channel 4 report ad nauseam.
A defamation case is one Ryanair will win. In the programme aired to the public, Channel 4 probably considered they could use the results as fact and that they would be protected by hiding behind the likes of good faith or the reasonable belief that they were true.
Time will tell and in the meantime any movement in stock price offers us investors an opportunity.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Channel 4 probably considered they could use the results as fact and that they would be protected by hiding behind the likes of good faith or the reasonable belief that they were true.
Without evidence to the contrary, a court will take the view that 90% of the pilots surveyed did give that response. Whether those pilots were telling the truth or not is irrelevant. If Channel Four believe the survey took place and that the views expressed by the pilots were those reported, then legally they are on firm ground.
Ryanair would only have a case if they could prove that Channel Four knew that the survey was untruthful yet still reported it in some attempt to defame or discredit them.
As I said earlier, there is no way this programme would have gone out without it being completely cleared by the channel's lawyers.
Would hate to the tea lady in the board room today. MOL would have gone ape.
AAAHH the tea lady, sadly long gone even at speedbird houses?
can you imagine her memoires lol
you cannot even charge your phone or lap top at Ryanair towers, as it costs them too much leccy bill and you have to steal pens form your n/s hotel...
as an aside back to Sept 1999 the massive TS over the BCN control area on that night that the Britannia 757 crashed at Gerona...
we flew out on a BA 757 from BCN at the same time of the accident and was the last a/c to go off before that airport was closed until the TS passed, and then Gerona was closed due to the BY757.
was anyone flying into BCN that night and remembers it and were there any fuel emergencies back then?
can you imagine her memoires lol
you cannot even charge your phone or lap top at Ryanair towers, as it costs them too much leccy bill and you have to steal pens form your n/s hotel...
as an aside back to Sept 1999 the massive TS over the BCN control area on that night that the Britannia 757 crashed at Gerona...
we flew out on a BA 757 from BCN at the same time of the accident and was the last a/c to go off before that airport was closed until the TS passed, and then Gerona was closed due to the BY757.
was anyone flying into BCN that night and remembers it and were there any fuel emergencies back then?
Last edited by rog747; 14th Aug 2013 at 10:20.
silverstrata
Slow response I know but it took me a while to pick myself back up off the floor. My abs still ache from laughing so hard.
The notion that any CAA would have the authority to legislate a minimum turnaround time "just because" is hilarious. I have personally watched 30 minute turnarounds as a flight deck observer with another operator and have found them to be well executed, safe and professionally handled. Unfortunate as it may be, the making of new rules, particularly those which restrict operations, is largely done in response to a tragedy. There is absolutely zero evidence that shorter turnaround times has led to a narrowly averted tragedy, never mind an actual one. Including that notion in your rant makes the rest of your rant difficult to take seriously. I'm no great fan of the way I've been treated as a RYR customer in the past, and I may think MOL is a bit of a nutter, but let's try to stick to issues which are relevant to the discussion.
The notion that any CAA would have the authority to legislate a minimum turnaround time "just because" is hilarious. I have personally watched 30 minute turnarounds as a flight deck observer with another operator and have found them to be well executed, safe and professionally handled. Unfortunate as it may be, the making of new rules, particularly those which restrict operations, is largely done in response to a tragedy. There is absolutely zero evidence that shorter turnaround times has led to a narrowly averted tragedy, never mind an actual one. Including that notion in your rant makes the rest of your rant difficult to take seriously. I'm no great fan of the way I've been treated as a RYR customer in the past, and I may think MOL is a bit of a nutter, but let's try to stick to issues which are relevant to the discussion.
Last edited by J.O.; 14th Aug 2013 at 18:21.
rog747 Ref that night in 1999 at BCN and GRO - not sure whether emergency was declared but I do recall that the BY a/c had missed an approach to RW 02 at GRO (due no visual contact) and then flew the ILS to RW 20 when it came to grief. BCN was in TS so they couldn't divert there and couldn't go anywhere else due minimal extra fuel loaded although TS forecast.
Funny you should mention this since it was in my mind after the Ch 4 Dispatches programme on Ryanair.
The essential point is extra fuel gives you more options - useful if TS about!
Rather than the cost of fuel (although that is a factor) it's the fact that if you take extra fuel you are heavier and therefore burning more fuel. From an accounting point of view this may only be 50 kgs on an individual flight but over the year on lots of flights that's a lot of dosh!
But what seems to have been lost here is that surely you want to get pax to their chosen destination?' Leave the Commanders to take sensible decisions re carriage of extra fuel.
Flight plan fuel on many flights is totally appropriate but if the TAF is TEMPO big TS surely it makes economic sense to take an extra one hours holding! If the field is socked in with TS when you get there you hold until the TS is passed which if the forecast is correct (since TEMPO is a change of less than one hour) will be within your extra hours holding?!
You then land at your chosen destination! Surely more economic than having to divert with ramifications for landing/handling fees, delays, crew hours etc?
Funny you should mention this since it was in my mind after the Ch 4 Dispatches programme on Ryanair.
The essential point is extra fuel gives you more options - useful if TS about!
Rather than the cost of fuel (although that is a factor) it's the fact that if you take extra fuel you are heavier and therefore burning more fuel. From an accounting point of view this may only be 50 kgs on an individual flight but over the year on lots of flights that's a lot of dosh!
But what seems to have been lost here is that surely you want to get pax to their chosen destination?' Leave the Commanders to take sensible decisions re carriage of extra fuel.
Flight plan fuel on many flights is totally appropriate but if the TAF is TEMPO big TS surely it makes economic sense to take an extra one hours holding! If the field is socked in with TS when you get there you hold until the TS is passed which if the forecast is correct (since TEMPO is a change of less than one hour) will be within your extra hours holding?!
You then land at your chosen destination! Surely more economic than having to divert with ramifications for landing/handling fees, delays, crew hours etc?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Age: 59
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Along comes another 'Ryanair horror story'....same old spin put on same old flimsy 'evidence'.Same old journalism - lazy and fickle.Same old discussion on here:
'how bad it made Ryanair look' compared to ALL other airlines'.
'how I never fly with them because they are so bad' brigade.
'how MOL treats the staff like dogs etc.
'how Im in the 'know' with Ryanair crew and we all hate 'the culture'.
and still the airline flies 90m plus around Europe.....
I think their is a distaste for the success of this 'Irish' outfit among many of the contributors here due to inbred racism/jealousy or plain idiosy.
Has the longed for Ryanair slump happened yet?
'how bad it made Ryanair look' compared to ALL other airlines'.
'how I never fly with them because they are so bad' brigade.
'how MOL treats the staff like dogs etc.
'how Im in the 'know' with Ryanair crew and we all hate 'the culture'.
and still the airline flies 90m plus around Europe.....
I think their is a distaste for the success of this 'Irish' outfit among many of the contributors here due to inbred racism/jealousy or plain idiosy.
Has the longed for Ryanair slump happened yet?