Ryanair Strike implications re Cancellations NO INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS POSTS

devnull

Mebuntu wrote: »

Interesting to see they now have "airline partners-in-disruption"

May well be mutual agreements

I eagerly await to see what, if any, UK airlines follow suit or, better put, are forced to follow suit.

CAA response:
https://www.caa.co.uk/News/CAA-response-to-Ryanair-consumer-commitments/

I wouldn't get my hopes up judging by that, quite bullish about forcing Ryanair to 'capitulate' after their previous letter but pretty defensive of themselves and no word about investigating BA.

k123456

Quote:
Originally Posted by billy few mates View Post
I then took out my copy of EU 261 and my mobile phone set to voice record I asked to be rerouted on another carrier as per my rights under EU 261 and if she wasn't able to do this I would book the flight myself and claim it back and asked her to provide me with something in writing to confirm that I was not entitled to be rerouted on another carrier.
A quick phone call to someone further up the chain and I was on my way with the other carrier (and even given a €12 refreshment voucher).
It's important that people are aware of their rights, it's also important that businesses we put our trust in don't try to mislead us when it comes to exercising those rights...

Bob24 wrote: »

Fair play to you for getting them to provide what you were entitled to, I would have liked to see the face of the customer service rep. :-) Having said that there is obviously a problem with the regulation if passengers have to do this in order to get it. Not everyone will be as prepared as you are, and to be fair nor should they be expected to as every person can't perfectly know and cary the regulation which relates to every single business they deal with (not just airlines).

Most front line staff, in any company wont be aware of cust rights (detailed)
What happened when you quoted 261 was the person you were dealing with , they made a call further up the chain. When things get escalated further up the chain, the escalation person has the knowledge of 261 for example, or if they dont, they can make a call to someone to has

There have been times when I have been given the brush off by front line staff, and had to escalate to CEO or MD level (Hertz and FR two recent examples)

I do wonder sometimes about recording phone or verbal conversations and the legality of same , although I guess in a public place, this is "allowed" Maybe someone here can clarify

Another approach to the front line staff , is to explain that you will escalate to MD CEO etc.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

L1011

Mebuntu wrote: »

I eagerly await to see what, if any, UK airlines follow suit or, better put, are forced to follow suit.

Most of them already have partners they preferentially rebook on. Ryanair never have before but its not a new idea.

Bob24

k123456 wrote: »

Another approach to the front line staff , is to explain that you will escalate to MD CEO etc.

If you do that you have to be credible though.

If it is not something urgent and there is a clear escalation path it might work.

But in the exemple above, in practice if you’re at a transfer desk and need to be rebooked within an hour on a different airline, how are you gonna escalate to the CEO of the company and have them send orders to front line staff on time to get yourself rebooked? (unless you know them personally or something)

In that case spelling out the regulation and recording the conversation is probably the only way as the staff knows if they screw up you will have a proof you clearly and reasonably requested to be treated according to the regulation and they refused (which will personally involve them and cause them trouble of you raise a complaint further down the line).

Bob24

L1011 wrote: »

Most of them already have partners they preferentially rebook on. Ryanair never have before but its not a new idea.

Yeah usually they’ll give priority to airlines which are part of the same alliance. I guess for Ryanair it is not as straight forward as due to their business model they are not part of any alliance, but still it makes sense to have prefered partners if they can struck deals which save both airline money.

L1011

Bob24 wrote: »

Yeah usually they’ll give priority to airlines which are part of the same alliance. I guess for Ryanair it is not as straight forward as due to their business model they are not part of any alliance, but still it makes sense to have prefered partners if they can struck deals which save both airline money.

Alliance always comes first, then anyone you've interline deals with usually. I had this experience with the Lufty strike last year - call centre op playing dumb that SAS was the only option - and at that got me there all of three hours earlier than the next scheduled LH flight (which was also cancelled in the end).

Pushed the fact that I could see KLM and Finnair availability; it appears the KL one was a speculative overbooking that could only be booked by a web customer not on GDS and I got put on AY. They somehow transferred my paid baggage to the other pax on the PNR causing as bit of checkin confusion at that.

As an aside on that, AF/KL seem to be very bad for offering seats for insane money after a flight is actually full - leaving enough overhead to pay the comp if they have to bump someone. Told AF that there was zero chance I could make a connection in CDG with baggage this summer and that there was seats for sale on their website for earlier flights and was told they were entirely full but I could pay the web fare if I wanted, with the 'we'll bump a lower payer' bit being implied. Took my chances, made the flight but my bag didn't and AF bought me a new set of jocks

devnull

L1011 wrote: »

Alliance always comes first, then anyone you've interline deals with usually. I had this experience with the Lufty strike last year - call centre op playing dumb that SAS was the only option - and at that got me there all of three hours earlier than the next scheduled LH flight (which was also cancelled in the end).

I had issues with a diversion in the past where I arrived over 24 hours late to my destination and nothing was provided to us and people were made to wait for 5 hours at the diversionary airport and then take a 11 hour bus ride to their original destination in the middle of winter and were refused train tickets which would have been much quicker and refused overnight accommodation so people would have been up for a day and a half straight almost with no option.

We were told a whole load of stuff about it being an act of god, something that reasonably could not be forecast and that they had to divert over 600km away because no other airports were open that were closer and a whole load of other stuff why they didn't have to help us or compensate us and writing to them did nothing do actually address that but the moment I involved the CAR they changed their attitude pretty quickly!

But it shouldn't be like that, the airlines need to be doing this off their own back which clearly they are not at the moment and that is something regulators need to work on, being pro-active and making sure Ryanair and all other airlines are complying all of the time, not simply waiting for these big events and acting but putting in place procedures to stop the practice of unfair treatment towards customers totally.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

joeysoap

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's really part of the fare anyway. I don't distinguish any part of the fare, including taxes, from any other part.

Bob24

joeysoap wrote: »

Fred Swanson wrote: »

I can see the EU 261 levy increasing to cover all these costs.

It's really part of the fare anyway. I don't distinguish any part of the fare, including taxes, from any other part.

Yes exactly, and listing a separate EU 261 levy would be fairly misleading as 1) this is not an amount levied by the EU 2) I don’t believe any airline would have an independant audit in place to confirm that every cent collected as part of this “levy” is indeed spent to provide EU 261 related assistance to passengers.

L1011

The 261 splitout is to give a PR advantage, "our fares are higher because of those damned kids the EU". ditto the wheelchair one they either did or do split at some airports. Rather than accepting the costs of business as being just that.

Its all part of the act of claiming that they should be treated like bus companies as goes cancellations, delays etc. Bus companies don't often do 2000km trans-national trips; usually don't do weekly or twice weekly or anything like that irregular trips and so on.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

devnull

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

They used to break everything down, PRM Levy, EU261, Airport Tax and actual fare, but haven't done that for a long while.

billy few mates

k123456 wrote: »

Quote:
Originally Posted by billy few mates View Post
I then took out my copy of EU 261 and my mobile phone set to voice record I asked to be rerouted on another carrier as per my rights under EU 261 and if she wasn't able to do this I would book the flight myself and claim it back and asked her to provide me with something in writing to confirm that I was not entitled to be rerouted on another carrier.
A quick phone call to someone further up the chain and I was on my way with the other carrier (and even given a €12 refreshment voucher).
It's important that people are aware of their rights, it's also important that businesses we put our trust in don't try to mislead us when it comes to exercising those rights...





Most front line staff, in any company wont be aware of cust rights (detailed)
What happened when you quoted 261 was the person you were dealing with , they made a call further up the chain. When things get escalated further up the chain, the escalation person has the knowledge of 261 for example, or if they dont, they can make a call to someone to has

There have been times when I have been given the brush off by front line staff, and had to escalate to CEO or MD level (Hertz and FR two recent examples)

I do wonder sometimes about recording phone or verbal conversations and the legality of same , although I guess in a public place, this is "allowed" Maybe someone here can clarify

Another approach to the front line staff , is to explain that you will escalate to MD CEO etc.

Ignorance of the regulations is no excuse in this instance, part of the regulation actually states that airlines must display signs at check in desks informing people of their rights in the event of a disruption and must be able to produce a document detailing those rights.

Airlines are obliged to display a notice at their check-in counters stating:

"If you are denied boarding or if your flight is cancelled or delayed for at least two hours, ask at the check-in counter or boarding gate for the text stating your rights, particularly with regard to compensation and assistance."
Additionally, when an airline cancels a flight, denies a person boarding, or incurs a delay exceeding two hours to a flight, it is obliged to provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out their rights under the regulation, and the contact details of the national body tasked with enforcing the regulation.

If they can't (or won't) produce this document on request you've already won, you just need to document the fact that they've failed to comply with the regulations and take it up with the relevant authorities afterwards. The frontline staff know only too well what you're entitled to but they're not going to volunteer that information unless you specifically request it.

Bob24

devnull wrote: »

They used to break everything down, PRM Levy, EU261, Airport Tax and actual fare, but haven't done that for a long while.

Actually if my understanding of what it is is correct, airport tax makes a lot more sense to me than EU261 as an itemised charge, because it is an actual separate levy whose exact amount charged to the passenger is indeed then paid to an airport authority (any I think in some cases if you don't end-ed boarding a non-cancellable booking you can claim the airport tax back even if your fare itself is non-refundable, so it can be useful to know how much it was?).

devnull

billy few mates wrote: »

If they can't (or won't) produce this document on request you've already won, you just need to document the fact that they've failed to comply with the regulations and take it up with the relevant authorities afterwards.

Good luck with that.

Even if you turn around and say that they didn't produce the document on request the airline will just deny it and at the end of the day it's your word against theirs and very difficult to prove unfortunately.

devnull

Bob24 wrote: »

Actually if my understanding of what it is is correct, airport tax makes a lot more sense to me than EU261 as an itemised charge, because it is an actual separate levy whose exact amount charged to the passenger is indeed then paid to an airport authority (any I think in some cases if you don't end-ed boarding a non-cancellable booking you can claim the airport tax back even if your fare itself is non-refundable, so it can be useful to know how much it was?).

I have one example here from 6 years ago

Fare: 22.49 EUR
Online Check-In: 6.00 EUR
EU261 Levy: 2.00 EUR
Taxes and Fees 27.40 EUR
Aviation Insurance/PRM Levy 6.49 EUR
Total Price: 64.38 EUR

The online check in stuff really was a con!

jimmycrackcorm

L1011 wrote:

Its all part of the act of claiming that they should be treated like bus companies as goes cancellations, delays etc. Bus companies don't often do 2000km trans-national trips; usually don't do weekly or twice weekly or anything like that irregular trips and so on.

Agreed. But to put things in perspective, only a few weeks ago people were up in arms about being put in random seating positions.

We do need protection for this but not for so much to have to pay bigger flight prices because people are upset about which seat they get allocated.

joeysoap

devnull wrote: »

The online check in stuff really was a con!

As is the current 'booking fee'

billy few mates

devnull wrote: »

Good luck with that.

Even if you turn around and say that they didn't produce the document on request the airline will just deny it and at the end of the day it's your word against theirs and very difficult to prove unfortunately.

Hence the use of the voice recorder on my phone, I asked the customer service agent by name to acknowledge my rights...

If you're travelling with someone you could ask them to video you asking or if you feel you're being palmed off you could simply send an email at the time to the CEO, the Customer Service Department and everybody else you can think of stating that the 'named' customer service agent is denying you your rights under current legislation so you have no choice but to take the matter into your own hands and make alternative arrangements but will be claiming for these expenses afterwards. The email will serve as a time record, everything else will be verifiable (named customer Service agent, missed connection etc), if the company doesn't refund your expenses you have enough evidence to take to the regulator to prove they acted in breach of the regulations.
Thanks to the latest intervention of the UK CAA in this matter, passengers will be more aware of their rights, if the airline doesn't acknowledge these rights the next step is to take it to the regulator who will force the airline to respond.

Nobody can deny the intervention of the CAA has brought some clarity to this situation and that can only be viewed as a good thing.

joeysoap

I Looked the CAR reply and it giives examples if what compensation can be climed for delays etc and the amount depends on the length of journey. Short haul is less than 1500k, medium haul is 1500-3500k and long haul over this. They then proceed to give examples of short haul, medium haul and long haul routes. Among the short haul examples is Dublin - Milan. Well over 1500k.

• Short haul
o Dublin – Brussels
o Shannon - Brussels
o Dublin – Milan
o Cork - Paris

etselbbuns

joeysoap wrote: »

.. Short haul is less than 1500k, medium haul is 1500-3500k and long haul over this. They then proceed to give examples of short haul, medium haul and long haul routes.
Among the short haul examples is Dublin - Milan. Well over 1500k. • Short haul
o Dublin – Brussels o Shannon - Brussels o Dublin – Milan o Cork - Paris

Dub-Mxp is 1382km which is <1500km

LXFlyer

etselbbuns wrote: »

Dub-Mxp is 1382km which is >1500km

It's actually < (less than) 1500km.

joeysoap

I thought it was longer, googled it and the first answer was i898 Kms. Just checked again and that's by road!!!

I an Totally wrong and happy to corrected.

Apologies for the post

Bob24

Just came across this radio interview with a Ryanair pilot, not sure whether it was posted before: http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/furious-ryanair-pilot-calls-lbc-on-working/

He confirms management indeed made a mass out of holiday allocation, and that pilots are leaving fast (according to him it will get worse at the beginning of next year). He also explains some of the frustrations with how contracts work and says that what he calls MOL's "divide and conquer" strategy to separate staff and play different groups against each other is not working as it used to.

I assume that guy will be in trouble as his voice can probably be recognised and some of what he says are direct attacks on MOL's management.

Peter Flynt

Bob24 wrote: »

Just came across this radio interview with a Ryanair pilot, not sure whether it was posted before: http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/furious-ryanair-pilot-calls-lbc-on-working/

He confirms management indeed made a mass out of holiday allocation, and that pilots are leaving fast (according to him it will get worse at the beginning of next year). He also explains some of the frustrations with how contracts work and says that what he calls MOL's "divide and conquer" strategy to separate staff and play different groups against each other is not working as it used to.

I assume that guy will be in trouble as his voice can probably be recognised and some of what he says are direct attacks on MOL's management.

Why would he be in trouble if he's telling the truth?

The one facing trouble is O'Leary.
Has he sacked anyone yet?

Nah. . . Didn't think so.

Bob24

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Why would he be in trouble if he's telling the truth?

The one facing trouble is O'Leary.
Has he sacked anyone yet?

Nah. . . Didn't think so.

Regardless being of true or not, very few companies like their employees making public comments about their operations in a way which portrays them in a negative manner and when the message is not not pre-approved by management. This is especially true of Ryanair, and since there are no unions and employees are all on short term contracts and scattered around different bases it is very easy for management to quietly go after one particular person with very little leverage for that employee to protect themselves.

And actually yes Ryanair/MOL have already sacked a pilot for comments made in the media at least once in the past (there might be other cases, not everything goes public), so I don't see why they wouldn't do it again: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/aug/15/ryanair-sacks-pilot-channel-4-dispatches

Wanderer78

Peter Flynt wrote:

The one facing trouble is O'Leary. Has he sacked anyone yet?

One can be 'managed out the door'! O'Leary is just fine, hes not in trouble

Peter Flynt

Bob24 wrote: »

And actually yes Ryanair/MOL have already sacked a pilot for comments made in the media . . .

And who has O'Leary sacked for the current ongoing debacle?

Seems he has no problems calling for others to be sacked for gross incompetence but has real difficulties in applying this to himself and senior management at Ryanair.

As regards sacking a pilot for telling the truth. . . Well that wouldn't surprise me.