Ryanair Strike implications re Cancellations NO INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS POSTS

chair28

duskyjoe wrote: »

An observation......was out with a few die hard FR pax tonite......all booked the green team to the canary isles.

Sorry for my ignorance but what does FR stand for?

Jamie2k9

chair28 wrote: »

Sorry for my ignorance but what does FR stand for?

Ryanair.

Comhrá

chair28 wrote: »

Sorry for my ignorance but what does FR stand for?

Airlines have IATA 2 and 3 letter codes.

eg.

FR = Ryanair

EI = Aer Lingus

http://www.iata.org/publications/Pages/code-search.aspx

Brennus335

devnull wrote: »

Pretty strong stuff but they appear to be being very heavy handed here some of those demands I've seen in relation to how passengers are treated have not been met by various other airlines in the past when I've had problems trying to get the same treatment.

For example booking on other airlines, I've had that refused twice in the past, booking on trains, I've also had that refused on ohter occasions and some of my friends and former colleagues in the UK have also had similar issues with other airlines. Nobody was interested in dealing with that though.

I'm wondering if I should retrospectively now raise a case with the UK registered airlines CC'ing the CAA and demanding that they now compensate me, for the airlines failure to comply with legislation about re-routing and the CAA's lack of enforcement in the past on other airlines?

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

devnull - that sounds like whataboutery.

Us Ulstermen are famous for the whataboutery, but even I have to laugh at that one. This lad is giving the shinners a run for their money in the spin stakes.

I have visions of it turning into that North Korean propaganda news reader, where they're right and everybody else is just out to get them.

Gaoth Laidir

Sorry if it's been mentioned before but why is there now no info on the list of cancelled flights from now up to the end of October? Their website only shows those changes from Novvember 1st. Are the cancellations up to then....cancelled?

__..__

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Sorry if it's been mentioned before but why is there now no info on the list of cancelled flights from now up to the end of October? Their website only shows those changes from Novvember 1st. Are the cancellations up to then....cancelled?

Probably because the list is no longer THE list.
There are going to be more bigger lists is what it looks like.
This think isn't finished by a long way.
If you thought your Ryanair booking was safe because it wasn't on that list and it was all over.
Well think again.
Any flight booked with Ryanair is at risk.

Bob24

__..__ wrote: »

This think isn't finished by a long way.
If you thought your Ryanair booking was safe because it wasn't on that list and it was all over.
Well think again.
Any flight booked with Ryanair is at risk.

Yeah at this stage I think no one except Ryanair’s management has clarity on how bad the pilot shortage and its impact on flights are (and even them only have a short term view as relashionships with pilots are obviously tense and they could lose more with no way to predict how many).

They initially communicated in a way implying that the full scope of the impact fairly clearly defined and published. But this clearly turned out to be false so by now it’s just guesswork and no one clearly knows whether there will be a large number of new cancellations.

Storm 10

Some Pilot from a European organisation missed who he represents giving the IAA a going over on RTE radio now saying they should have seen this coming but done nothing to stop it happening

Living Off The Splash

Ryanair treats all it's "return flights" as two separate bookings.

Can you get two lots of compensation for each portion of the flight?

devnull

__..__ wrote: »

Probably because the list is no longer THE list.
There are going to be more bigger lists is what it looks like.
This think isn't finished by a long way.
If you thought your Ryanair booking was safe because it wasn't on that list and it was all over.
Well think again.
Any flight booked with Ryanair is at risk.

Classic scaremongering there, personally I reckon they have everything sorted now but time will tell and for sure the UK media will be playing games and trying to play up the most minor things as they have done to date by dragging it out and the ridicolous treatment that Kenny Jacobs got.

Brennus335 wrote: »

Us Ulstermen are famous for the whataboutery, but even I have to laugh at that one. This lad is giving the shinners a run for their money in the spin stakes..

So let me get this straight, if Ryanair don't give full and proper details on EU261 on pages on their website in relation to cancellations, then the CAA are right to throw the book at them because they are not complying with their obligations.

However if Wizz or other airlines don't even mention EU261, routing on other airlines, land based transport providers, expenses and compensation then that's okay and not a problem and we should just turn a blind eye to it because they're not Ryanair?

I'm all for consumer rights, but it has to be enforced across the board and all rules need to apply to all operators all of the time, because if the CAA want to come down hard on one operator then I expect it to do the same on all operators who are doing exactly the same.

Storm 10 wrote: »

Some Pilot from a European organisation missed who he represents giving the IAA a going over on RTE radio now saying they should have seen this coming but done nothing to stop it happening

With all due respect, employees of other airlines and unions linked to these airlines have a vested interest in this, I wouldn't rely on the word of Ryanair staff to describe issues within Aer Lingus just like I wouldn't rely on Aer Lingus staff to describe issues within Ryanair because in both cases the staff would not be objective as they have their own stake in the game so to speak.

irishmoss

They may well have everything sorted but only for the short term. They haven't fixed the pilot shortage and they can't really engage with the pilots because their business model will be turned on it's head.

Brennus335

devnull wrote: »

So let me get this straight, if Ryanair don't give full and proper details on EU261 on pages on their website in relation to cancellations, then the CAA are right to throw the book at them because they are not complying with their obligations.

However if Wizz or other airlines don't even mention EU261, routing on other airlines, land based transport providers, expenses and compensation then that's okay and not a problem and we should just turn a blind eye to it because they're not Ryanair?.

Whataboutery:
a) Protesting at hypocrisy; responding to criticism by accusing one's opponent of similar or worse faults.
b) Protesting at inconsistency; refusing to act in one instance unless similar action is taken in other similar instances.

If you'd have stopped after the first paragraph, that would've been a good post.
But once again, you flow straight into classic whataboutery with the second paragraph.

This thread is about Ryanair. If you want to discuss inequities in the application of rules towards Wizz, then feel free to start a separate thread about it.

pilly

Some people on here are definitely shareholders in Ryanair, it's actually funny now to read.

devnull

pilly wrote: »

Some people on here are definitely shareholders in Ryanair, it's actually funny now to read.

I don't have shares in Ryanair, if I did I would be a lot more richer than I actually am bearing in mind how the share price has rose over the last number of years.

All I want is a situation where consumers are protected no matter who that they are flying with at the end of the day, equal rules need to apply across the board in any industry otherwise the consumer loses out.

By the way, I thought that EU261 compensation clause applies to flights cancelled within 14 days of the flight, if so why are the CAA trying to enforce this clause and flights which have been cancelled more than 14 days in advance even though the clause does not cover them.

duskyjoe

Share price on a downward trajectory. Worst crisis commentators are saying in FR’s history. Let’s hope common sense dictates and this mess sorts its self out

Henry Ford III

duskyjoe wrote: »

Share price on a downward trajectory. Worst crisis commentators are saying in FR’s history. Let’s hope common sense dictates and this mess sorts its self out

I'll be taking a small punt later on. Looking like a good time to invest.

The business is sound (I hope) but they've made a mess of a few smallish things.

etselbbuns

Boycott them!

Bob24

devnull wrote: »

I don't have shares in Ryanair, if I did I would be a lot more richer than I actually am bearing in mind how the share price has rose over the last number of years.

All I want is a situation where consumers are protected no matter who that they are flying with at the end of the day, equal rules need to apply across the board in any industry otherwise the consumer loses out.

By the way, I thought that EU261 compensation clause applies to flights cancelled within 14 days of the flight, if so why are the CAA trying to enforce this clause and flights which have been cancelled more than 14 days in advance even though the clause does not cover them.

Again scale matters and the fact that currently 100000s of passengers have had flights cancelled by Ryanair with potential breach of consumer protection laws explains why the focus is on them. If it was another airline doing that the focus would be on that other airline, but none is currently in a similar situation. It of course doesn’t mean smaller infringements of the law should be ignored but it makes perfect sense to tackle large ones first and to see more media reports about them.

And specifically on the website, the role of the regulator is to make sure passengers get what they are entitled to. It might or might not involve changes to the website depending on how the airline communicates with passengers and offers access to compensation.
For exemple Aer Lingus has a flight cancellation yesterday:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/passengers-stranded-in-lanzarote-as-aer-lingus-cancels-flight-1.3237617

Their official feedback is: “The 100 guests who could not be accommodated on flights this evening have been provided with overnight hotel accommodation and are being rebooked onto flights with a range of other carriers tomorrow”.

So in that case they have already reached out to passengers AND offered them alternative routing with other carriers as well as hotel accomodarion when required (which Ryanair doesn’t do automatically). It is therefore irrelevant what they write on their website as passengers have already been given what they are entitled to.

Ryanair’s case is different because they push for claiming compensation through their website rather than other means, and are not necessarily being proactive about providing what people are entitled to if they don’t ask for it. So obviously in that case what is written on he website is more important to ensure consumer rights are protected.

Hence I do agree with other posters: to me just focusing on what is asked from Ryanair related to their website and saying “but it’s unfair: other airlines are not asked to do that same” seems like a very biased and incomplete view of what the role of a regulator is.

devnull

Bob24 wrote: »

Again the fact that currently 100000s of passengers have had flights cancelled by Ryanair explains why the focus is on them. If it was another airline doing that the focus would be on that other airline. It doesn’t mean smaller infringements of the law should be ignored but makes perfect sense to tackle large ones first and to see more media reports about them.

There is never any excuse for one rule for one and one for another, the level of info on the Wizz cancellation page is far worse than the info which was supplied on the Ryanair one in relation to EU261, but that page has been like that for a number of months looking at an archived version of it and a lot of cancellations in the UK in that time but it seems nobody has took action against that.

It's unfair to expect one company operating in a particular industry to adhere to the rules and pay out costly compensation and give full details on their website cancellations page whilst at the same time allowing a competitor of theirs to give even less details and not be forced to pay out compensation because it creates an uneven playing field.

That's before we go into the fact that some EU261 rights only come into force if the flight is less than 14 days away, but the CAA from what I understand appear to be trying to enforce Ryanair to give those rights to people who are flying over 14 days away since they talk about compensation for people in the second wave of cancellations, and EU261 is very clear that cash compensation need not be applied when the flight is cancelled over 14 days in advance.

Bob24

devnull wrote: »

There is never any excuse for one rule for one and one for another, the level of info on the Wizz cancellation page is far worse than the info which was supplied on the Ryanair one in relation to EU261, but that page has been like that for a number of months looking at an archived version of it and a lot of cancellations in the UK in that time but it seems nobody has took action against that.

It's unfair to expect one company operating in a particular industry to adhere to the rules and pay out costly compensation and give full details on their website cancellations page whilst at the same time allowing a competitor of theirs to give even less details and not be forced to pay out compensation because it creates an uneven playing field.

That's before we go into the fact that some EU261 rights only come into force if the flight is less than 14 days away, but the CAA from what I understand appear to be trying to enforce Ryanair to give those rights to people who are flying over 14 days away since they talk about compensation for people in the second wave of cancellations, and EU261 is very clear that cash compensation need not be applied when the flight is cancelled over 14 days in advance.

The rule is exactly the same for all airlines though and no one is givi excuses for other ones: provide the necessary information in case of cancellation and compensation when it is due. Read the second part of my post again with the Aer Lingus cancellation exemple, I explained clearly why that rule might or might not involve looking at the website depending on how the airline choose to operate related to cancellations.

Also keep in mind Ryanair has been caught acrivly providing incorrect information to customers (I.e. saying on the record they won’t rebook any passengers on other airlines). This is not the case of other airlines and is a valid reason for a regulator to request them to publish something to correct that (and again that same rule would obviously apply to another airlines if they had done the same thing).

devnull

Bob24 wrote: »

The rule is exactly the same for all airlines though and no one is givi excuses for others: provide the necessary information in case of cancellation and compensation when it is due. Read the second part of my post again with the Aer Lingus cancellation exemple, I explained clearly why that rule might or might not involve looking at the website depending on how the airline operates.

To my knowledge Aer Lingus have been complying with the regulations recently although they didn't a number of years ago when I had to drag them kicking and screaming to the Commission for Aviation Regulation to get even basic help that I was entitled to under EU261.

I can tell you through taking Wizz flights in the last couple of years everything is done through their website and they ask you to check their cancellations page which has the one paragraph saying you can rebook or get a refund and nothing else whatsoever, that's been the case on their website for months and clearly is not good enough for passengers. If you go back and see the link I posted you can see for yourself.

I will also repeat again, the EU261 legislation complies airlines to provide cash compensation to passengers who have flights cancelled within 14 days in addition to the other clauses contained within it, why are they (at least from my understanding of the letter) appearing to try and enforce Ryanair to give cash compensation to people who do not qualify for it under EU261 laws?

Mebuntu

Bob24 wrote: »

So in that case they have already reached out to passengers AND offered them alternative routing with other carriers as well as hotel accomodation

My reading of that article says that they were left to look after themselves and Aer Lingus did NOT arrange accommodation.

“People were told to go out and find accommodation for themselves and come back tomorrow for another flight,” she said.
“Aer Lingus did absolutely nothing, they told us to go to the information desk, when we got to the desk there was nobody there, we had to stand and wait. It was absolutely ridiculous the way we have been treated.”

Bob24

Mebuntu wrote: »

My reading of that article says that they were left to look after themselves and Aer Lingus did NOT arrange accommodation.

“People were told to go out and find accommodation for themselves and come back tomorrow for another flight,” she said.
“Aer Lingus did absolutely nothing, they told us to go to the information desk, when we got to the desk there was nobody there, we had to stand and wait. It was absolutely ridiculous the way we have been treated.”

That’s only one passenger quoted at the beginning. I absolutely believe it was a mess at first, but it seems like it was sorted later on in this he evening, unless you think Aer Lingus is blatantly lying in their summary of the incident also quoted in the article. They clearly say: “The 100 guests who could not be accommodated on flights this evening have been provided with overnight hotel accommodation and are being rebooked onto flights with a range of other carriers tomorrow”.

__..__

pilly wrote: »

Some people on here are definitely shareholders in Ryanair, it's actually funny now to read.

It's become a Ryanair apologist thread alright.
I didn't know Ryanair would have paid for so many shills. Wonder what the rate is.

Bob24

devnull wrote: »

I can tell you through taking Wizz flights in the last couple of years everything is done through their website and they ask you to check their cancellations page which has the one paragraph saying you can rebook or get a refund and nothing else whatsoever, that's been the case on their website for months and clearly is not good enough for passengers. If you go back and see the link I posted you can see for yourself.

I’ve never flown with them so I won’t talk about what I don’t know. But yes we absolutely agree enforcement should be the same if Wizz is not providing what people are entitled to. Where we might disagree is that I don’t see it as a reason to say the CAA is currently being to harsh on Ryanair.

The reality is Ryanair has probably managed to get away with not following the rules (maybe similarly to Wizz if what you describe is correct) for years as it was in the shadows and didn’t have major incidents. They now put themselves in the spotlight due to their own mistakes and can’t get away anymore as these mass cancellations have became too big an issue. We should all think regulator interventions to make sure people get what they are entitled to are great instead of finding excuses for Ryanair. And indeed push for other airlines which are still in the shadows be held to the same standards. This will impact the whole industry in the long term and set standards for what is OK or not so it would be silly to go for the lowest common denominator.

devnull wrote: »

I will also repeat again, the EU261 legislation complies airlines to provide cash compensation to passengers who have flights cancelled within 14 days in addition to the other clauses contained within it, why are they (at least from my understanding of the letter) appearing to try and enforce Ryanair to give cash compensation to people who do not qualify for it under EU261 laws?

None of use are legal experts but I am sure Ryanair have some and if that is the case it is a clear cut of the regulator going beyond its powers and Ryanair can just push back on that point with no fear as there is no legal basis to go after them.

Tenger

__..__ wrote: »

It's become a Ryanair apologist thread alright.
I didn't know Ryanair would have paid for so many shills. Wonder what the rate is.

I think you will find that there are posters on both sides of this debate.
2-4% is a small number, but 400,000 is a large number.
If you are affected then it is a problem, if you are just an observer then it's a sticky situation.
Let's see you adding to the debate rather than throwing out personal insults at opinions other than your own

devnull

Bob24 wrote: »

I’ve never flown with them so I won’t talk about what I don’t know. But yes we absolutely agree enforcement should be the same if Wizz is not providing what people are entitled to. Where we might disagree is that I don’t see it as a reason to say the CAA is currently being to harsh on Ryanair.

I do not think that the CAA is being harsh on Ryanair, I simply think that if you are going to have regulations you need to force them equally across the board and in a rigorous way to everyone. The fact that rigorous enforcement doesn't appear to have happened to date is probably a large part of why airlines feel they can get away with it.

I'll give you an example from my previous employer. There was a policy of no use of social media in work. One employee was on Facebook 5 hours a day and was in a position where most of the office couldn't see them but the boss could and nothing was done at all. One person seeing that others were taking the pee, used it for 5 minutes in a more visible desk and had discipinary action took against them.

Now the person who used it for 5 minutes broke the rules but only did so because they saw that everyone else was getting away with it and that stems from a lack of enforcement, if one persond does it others will follow, they could not claim that they are innocent, but punishing said person and giving them a warning whilst ignoring the wider issue does nothing to actually solve the underlaying problem which is a lack of enforcement of rules.

The reality is Ryanair has probably managed to get away with not following the rules (maybe similarly to Wizz if what you describe is correct) for years as it was in the shadows and didn’t have major incidents.

Of course and the fact that Ryanair have cancelled a lot of flights in one go has worked against them here and I can understand that, but it shouldn't take mass cancellations for the regulators to start enforcement, good regulation has to be ongoing and robust and not just going after the big guys and leaving the smaller guys to do what the want.

If that is the case it is a clear cut of the regulator going beyond its powers and Ryanair can just push back on that point with no fear as there is no legal basis to go after them.

Thing is on the face of it to the average member of joe public who is not clued up on EU261 they won't know the ins and outs of it and if the CAA are appearing to say (from what I can understand, correct me if I'm wrong) that Ryanair need to compensate those >14 day cancellations with the same compensation as those <14 days, it places Ryanair under pressure to do that otherwise no doubt rags like the Daily Mail will make a big song and dance about it.

Ryanair may well decide that they'll go along with it anyway just to make the storm die down quicker since as the CAA are going for the very confrontational approach it's likely that they would drag this out as well.

notharrypotter

devnull wrote: »

To my knowledge Aer Lingus have been complying with the regulations recently although they didn't a number of years ago when I had to drag them kicking and screaming to the IAA to get even basic help that I was entitled to under ?

Curious why IAA?
Surely Commission for Aviation Regulation deals with passenger rights?

billy few mates

irishmoss wrote: »

They may well have everything sorted but only for the short term. They haven't fixed the pilot shortage and they can't really engage with the pilots because their business model will be turned on it's head.

This...

devnull

notharrypotter wrote: »

Curious why IAA?
Surely Commission for Aviation Regulation deals with passenger rights?

Sorry - yes, you're right it was them.