More 'Good' Ryanair Publicity!

DOCARCH

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/video-of-woman-removed-from-ryanair-plane-prompts-calls-for-boycott-572613.html

Red Crow

Good. All she had to do was put it in her suitcase. Instead she caused a disruption. We all know the rules at this stage. If you don't like them then fly with someone else

Run_to_da_hills

This wouldn't have happened if she wore a Rufus Roo jacket.

http://travelblog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/12/how-to-fool-ryanair-baggage-controls-with-an-oversized-coat.html

kub

The Spanish media at the anti Ryanair drum again I see. I have my doubts that the Police would have gotten involved if it was a simple case of carry on luggage.
She must have upset security in some way.

JJLongford

This is the problem when you make air travel cheap and allow plebs on-board.

Back to the days of big air fares and on-board meals! That'll cull the raggle taggle from travelling. Make 'em get the boat and/or train!

scudzilla

JJLongford wrote: »

This is the problem when you make air travel cheap and allow plebs on-board.

Back to the days of big air fares and on-board meals! That'll cull the raggle taggle from travelling. Make 'em get the boat and/or train!

Ok, i laughed

green123

kub wrote: »

The Spanish media at the anti Ryanair drum again I see. I have my doubts that the Police would have gotten involved if it was a simple case of carry on luggage.
She must have upset security in some way.

from the link in the op

Ryanair has defended its actions by claiming the woman had become disruptive and had "pushed past" its gate agents without showing any ID or her boarding card.

Tenger

green123 wrote: »

....................Ryanair has defended its actions by claiming the woman had become disruptive and had "pushed past" its gate agents without showing any ID or her boarding card.

From what I ahve seen of Spanish handling agents I can't see her getting through the boarding gate, and how then was she even allowed to get physically onboard the aircraft.......the ground staff would have been right behind her as she 'ran down the steps'

Su Campu

Tenger wrote: »

From what I ahve seen of Spanish handling agents I can't see her getting through the boarding gate, and how then was she even allowed to get physically onboard the aircraft.......the ground staff would have been right behind her as she 'ran down the steps'

The ground staff can't just abandon their position like that with other passengers in the queue waiting to board. Radio security and let them deal with it.

DOCARCH

Tenger wrote: »

From what I ahve seen of Spanish handling agents I can't see her getting through the boarding gate, and how then was she even allowed to get physically onboard the aircraft.......the ground staff would have been right behind her as she 'ran down the steps'

I'd have to agree. She'd probably have been shot before she reached the aircraft if she had done what Ryanair claim she did! :P

I flew (with EI) from Barcelona on Tuesday and every single passengers hand luggage was checked (in terms of size) at the check in. Each and every passenger was made put their hand luggage in the metal craddle/size limit thing. If it was o.k. it was allowed - if it was too big it had to be checked in.

Why was her scroll or whatever it was not spotted before she got on the aircraft? I'd say FR cabin crew had some issue with it and/or maybe asked her to stow the thing somewhere else (away from her seat) - she probably had a strop and FR crew decided they did not want her on the flight or she was a considered her a risk.

I suppose it's important to bear in mind there are two sides to every story and truth somewhere in the middle.

muppet01

She has delayed the flight, in breach of (T and C's of the airline, which we dont have to like) and judging by her body language and that of the police officer is refusing to leave the aircraft.
Whats the issue ? she bought the ticket and ticked the box, case closed.Get off the plane and stop delaying the other 188 fare paying pax.

Tenger

muppet01 wrote: »

She has delayed the flight, in breach of (T and C's of the airline, which we dont have to like) and judging by her body language and that of the police officer is refusing to leave the aircraft.
Whats the issue ? she bought the ticket and ticked the box, case closed.Get off the plane and stop delaying the other 188 fare paying pax.

I'm not denying this point, but I don't believe she barged her way onto the aircraft.

It all goes back to the ticking of a box that ppl think doesn't apply to them. Ppl should know what the deal is when travelling with FR.

LeftBase

There's not way the police would have boarded had there not been an issue with her beyond those stated.

Anti-Ryanair sentiment is an issue of Spanish national pride now really. The Spanish media will scrape an barrel to get some dirt on Ryanair. Some of the stuff they have come out with in the past few months is very close to open libel.

Strumms

it is all pure speculation on our behalf, we don't know the full picture. However I would not jump to fall in line with the 'She barged passed security' line from FR, that stinks of serious BS This story is not unfamiliar from what I have seen on various occasions I have had the 'experience' of having to be a subject of their 'service' .

FR is a game, rules and regulations set up that so should you fail to adhere you get hit in the pocket and or demeaned. Customer service does not exist as far as that company is concerned they believe the customer is simply there to serve the company and dont step out of line. **** but successful business model. Next they will be treating a mobile phone as hand baggage. In any aspect of life any decent company or person will seek fairness above all, however not FR. Shut up and be happy with your cheap ticket is not an excuse for treating people like ****, you know what you are getting so deal with it isnt either. As for the muppet, really apt user name ! several of us here are airline professionals as I know in various aspects of the job and I can only suggest that those agreeing with FR as regards this case are not in our ranks of said profession and as it happens decent, reasonable, human beings, a scroll FFS, Im sure they were blitzing MTOW as a result of that item.

stoneill

I wouldn't want to be on a flight with someone as volatile as her.

T-K-O

You cant carry a book on the plane WTF

3rdDegree

stoneill wrote: »

I wouldn't want to be on a flight with someone as volatile as her.

Yes, she could explode at any moment!

knucklehead6

Strumms wrote: »

it is all pure speculation on our behalf, we don't know the full picture. However I would not jump to fall in line with the 'She barged passed security' line from FR, that stinks of serious BS This story is not unfamiliar from what I have seen on various occasions I have had the 'experience' of having to be a subject of their 'service' .

FR is a game, rules and regulations set up that so should you fail to adhere you get hit in the pocket and or demeaned. Customer service does not exist as far as that company is concerned they believe the customer is simply there to serve the company and dont step out of line. **** but successful business model. Next they will be treating a mobile phone as hand baggage. In any aspect of life any decent company or person will seek fairness above all, however not FR. Shut up and be happy with your cheap ticket is not an excuse for treating people like ****, you know what you are getting so deal with it isnt either. As for the muppet, really apt user name ! several of us here are airline professionals as I know in various aspects of the job and I can only suggest that those agreeing with FR as regards this case are not in our ranks of said profession and as it happens decent, reasonable, human beings, a scroll FFS, Im sure they were blitzing MTOW as a result of that item.

Ok... So to paraphrase, anyone who has agreed with Ryanairs actions are not decent human beings?

And only people who work in Aviation are allowed have an opinion here that is worth paying attention to?

Ryanair is not a game, it is a company, providing a service. In return for them providing that service the consumer must agree to the terms and conditions.

I have no doubt that there is a LOT more to this than meets the eye, and the cop boarding the aircraft to remove the woman is not an indication of something more, but quite simply the Pilot got on the radio to the tower and said "i have a woman not complying with instructions, creating an unsafe situation on my aircraft, and my slot is coming up. can you send someone down to get rid of her please."

Cienciano

If this is the best the spanish newspapers can come up with I think I'll continue flying with them. Well over 100 incident free cheap flights

rubberdiddies

It really is as simple as if you don't like their service then dot fly with them. Very very simple.

It amuses me to see people who don't fly with them, give out about them, particularly staff of other airlines. Sour grapes and all.

I choose to fly with them because in over 50 flights I can't remember ever being delayed. The staff have always been pleasant to me.

Then again, I follow the rules. I pack everything into the right size hand luggage. I print off my boarding card. I know what to expect. Even travelling with 2 young children and I've never had a problem.

We don't know for sure what happened in this particular case but its a captains right to have someone removed from an aircraft.

It's well known that some sections of Spanish government/media/citizens are completely anti ryanair, however id love to know how much their 25% unemployment rate would increase if Ryanair decided to pull all ther routes to Spain today.

Strumms

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Ok... So to paraphrase, anyone who has agreed with Ryanairs actions are not decent human beings?

And only people who work in Aviation are allowed have an opinion here that is worth paying attention to?

Ryanair is not a game, it is a company, providing a service. In return for them providing that service the consumer must agree to the terms and conditions.

I have no doubt that there is a LOT more to this than meets the eye, and the cop boarding the aircraft to remove the woman is not an indication of something more, but quite simply the Pilot got on the radio to the tower and said "i have a woman not complying with instructions, creating an unsafe situation on my aircraft, and my slot is coming up. can you send someone down to get rid of her please."

I have over xxx flights with Ryanair also most not through choice (work) which have been incident free apart from one not so serious issue but one that all the same was reflective of the same uncaring attitude towards customers.


As for working in aviation... most opinions are worth paying attention to however those grounded in the business with experience of providing a simular service all be it on a more humane level would hold more weight I would suspect ?!

Take a look at the last line you wrote. If you or anyone think that that is acceptable in any regard when dealing with 'human beings' in ANY walk of life than as regards decency, honesty and a way to treat customers in business than you certainly don't fall into any category of decency in my view. Questioning or calling out a company you have paid good money to, to provide you a service where you feel they have failed is not creating an unsafe situation but as a Ryanair apologist it sure would suit yours and their argument down to the ground. Would you have felt threatened by her ? did the staff ? Did her fellow passengers ? Get off the stage sunshine. The 'well you know the deal that they will treat you like a prick before you ticked the box' is NOT and never should be acceptable.

There are positive aspects to Ryanair and they have in parts made a positive contribution to aviation in many respects however on a human level and how they treat staff and customers alike at times is unpleasant, not necessary and if we as a society, customers, aviation people whatever decree that this is OK than sorry, we **** ourselves in the ass end of.

knucklehead6

Strumms wrote: »

I have over xxx flights with Ryanair also most not through choice (work) which have been incident free apart from one not so serious issue but one that all the same was reflective of the same uncaring attitude towards customers.

Any flights i have taken with Ryanair have been incident free, no customer issues at all. So we're both agreed on that score.

Strumms wrote: »

As for working in aviation... most opinions are worth paying attention to however those grounded in the business with experience of providing a simular service all be it on a more humane level would hold more weight I would suspect ?!

I disagree. Your issue seems to be with Ryanair, and the CUSTOMER service that they provide. Therefore anyone who works in a customer service capacity or industry has an opinion that would hold more weight.
Ryanair as an aviation company have an impeccable safety record, they've only had one hull loss, and that was without fatalities

Strumms wrote: »

Take a look at the last line you wrote. If you or anyone think that that is acceptable in any regard when dealing with 'human beings' in ANY walk of life than as regards decency, honesty and a way to treat customers in business than you certainly don't fall into any category of decency in my view.

Aside from a personal insult, (which i can live with) i'm really not too sure what you are trying to say here??

Strumms wrote: »

Questioning or calling out a company you have paid good money to, to provide you a service where you feel they have failed is not creating an unsafe situation but as a Ryanair apologist it sure would suit yours and their argument down to the ground. Would you have felt threatened by her ? did the staff ? Did her fellow passengers ? Get off the stage sunshine. The 'well you know the deal that they will treat you like a prick before you ticked the box' is NOT and never should be acceptable.

But we DON'T know what she did or said. All we see is someone standing up in the cabin of an airliner, refusing to cooperate with crew instructions.

Every week there are incidents reported on Aviation Herald that are classed as "Unruly Passenger", some which require the aircraft to divert. It is the captain and crews responsibility to get everyone to their destination safely. This woman was preventing them from doing that, by refusing to comply with crew instructions. Something that she agreed to do when purchasing her ticket.

If i go into hospital for an operation, i am agreeing to comply with the doctors instructions, for my own good. It is the same on board an airliner.

Strumms wrote: »

There are positive aspects to Ryanair and they have in parts made a positive contribution to aviation in many respects however on a human level and how they treat staff and customers alike at times is unpleasant, not necessary and if we as a society, customers, aviation people whatever decree that this is OK than sorry, we **** ourselves in the ass end of.

Again, your beef is with Ryanair, as a service provider. Anyone who works in a service industry has a valid opinion here.. as they deal with the public on a daily basis. And for every 100 decent friendly customers, there is one who has a sense of entitlement, that just because we are serving them, that they are somehow better than us.

dubdaymo

Strumms wrote: »

If you or anyone think that that is acceptable in any regard when dealing with 'human beings' in ANY walk of life than as regards decency, honesty and a way to treat customers in business than you certainly don't fall into any category of decency in my view.

We don't know (yet) exactly what the sequence of events was that led to this onboard scene as depicted in the video. Based on hearsay you make a good point but, in my view, if you disobey the rules or disregard instructions and make a scene on or about an aircraft you can't expect the crew to treat you with respect nor do you deserve it. I have seen a few incidents on board and have been disappointed that crew didn't act strongly with the offender.
Based on what I have seen in the video (but not necessarily the full story) if I had been on that flight I would have been delighted to see the back of her.

Strumms

knucklehead...


I am at a loss to understand what the safety record of Ryanair has to do with the subject at hand. Hull losses ? with respect that while laudable isnt exactly what is a the forefront of this debate.

Yes an issue with the Ryanair customer experience. I fly them from time to time as I do other airlines, work in the industry for 12 years my original customer background is in the customer service / ops side of things. I kind of use Easyjet a lot too. Low fare airlines both, service and attitude towards their fare paying customers, no comparison, Easyjet piss all over Ryanair from the moment you log on to book a flight to the moment you walk off an aircraft of theirs. They are just one of an example of airlines that prove you can operate a low cost no frills model while still giving good service, treating people as people and with respect not contempt.

As regards a personal insult. Jeez can you be that fragile ? By disagreeing and critiquing your skewed reasoning on a public opinion forum I am insulting you , good stuff.

As regards the AV herald reports... Unruly passangers causing a divert will be a 5 figure hit in many cases for an airline. We can use our imaginations and understand why these happen. Perhaps some pissed up lunatic wont put his seat belt on, using a mobile phone, causing a general disturbance or endangering crew and or passangers in some way. To suggest this was in the same league as any of that is sensationalist to say the least. Get a grip. It may have been necessary in the end to obtain assistance from the authorities to remove her no pax can hold an aircraft on the ground to ransom folks have to get going slots etc. however my concern is what the events of the lead up were to how the individual was motivated and and became agitated on the ground, from the little we know if common sence and flexibilty were used then I have no doubt that things could have been amicable. Small print and terms and conditions should still not be a tool to intimidate or harass people.

Customers with a sence of entitlement ? I hope so .. I know as I customer I sure do. I have a belief that I am entitled to be treated fairly, with respect, dignity, a human being as I am paying money to this company for a service and if it doesnt meet a standard then I am entitled to make an issue of it within reason. I dont pay any company for me to facilitate them, I pay for the opposite in fact. I all to well know the airline business and there ARE requirments of passangers which is well and good and grounded in common sence and the requirments of the business but dont use this as a gateway to bully foks with added blue tape designed to harass, trip up and make money.

knucklehead6

Strumms wrote: »

knucklehead...


I am at a loss to understand what the safety record of Ryanair has to do with the subject at hand. Hull losses ? with respect that while laudable isnt exactly what is a the forefront of this debate.

you were maintaining that only people who work in aviation have opinions worth paying attention to, as their aviation orientated experiences, mean they somehow have more value than the rest of the users on this board.
I used the fact that Ryanair have only had one hull loss incident shows that the aiviation/flying side of the business is pretty much above reproach.

Strumms wrote: »

Yes an issue with the Ryanair customer experience. I fly them from time to time as I do other airlines, work in the industry for 12 years my original customer background is in the customer service / ops side of things. I kind of use Easyjet a lot too. Low fare airlines both, service and attitude towards their fare paying customers, no comparison, Easyjet piss all over Ryanair from the moment you log on to book a flight to the moment you walk off an aircraft of theirs. They are just one of an example of airlines that prove you can operate a low cost no frills model while still giving good service, treating people as people and with respect not contempt.

Anytime i've been on a Ryanair flight, ive been treated with courtesy, respect and decency. I've never been treated with contempt, and for you to imply that that is the 'default' setting for all Ryanair employees is a touch much.

Strumms wrote: »

As regards a personal insult. Jeez can you be that fragile ? By disagreeing and critiquing your skewed reasoning on a public opinion forum I am insulting you , good stuff.

How is "you are not someone i regard as a decent human being because you might agree with the crew's actions here" skewed reasoning. And i did say i can live with it

Strumms wrote: »

As regards the AV herald reports... Unruly passangers causing a divert will be a 5 figure hit in many cases for an airline. We can use our imaginations and understand why these happen. Perhaps some pissed up lunatic wont put his seat belt on, using a mobile phone, causing a general disturbance or endangering crew and or passangers in some way. To suggest this was in the same league as any of that is sensationalist to say the least. Get a grip.

I never said it was in the same league, but the unruly passenger that caused the scene on this aircraft was not complying with crew instructions, the same as an unruly passenger causing a divert in the air. What if she had kicked off while they were in the air?

Strumms wrote: »

It may have been necessary in the end to obtain assistance from the authorities to remove her no pax can hold an aircraft on the ground to ransom folks have to get going slots etc. however my concern is what the events of the lead up were to how the individual was motivated and and became agitated on the ground, from the little we know if common sence and flexibilty were used then I have no doubt that things could have been amicable. Small print and terms and conditions should still not be a tool to intimidate or harass people.

Nor should someone's not paying attention to the small print and T's&C's be used as a tool to try to bluster and bully their way

Strumms wrote: »

Customers with a sence of entitlement ? I hope so .. I know as I customer I sure do. I have a belief that I am entitled to be treated fairly, with respect, dignity, a human being as I am paying money to this company for a service and if it doesnt meet a standard then I am entitled to make an issue of it within reason. I dont pay any company for me to facilitate them, I pay for the opposite in fact. I all to well know the airline business and there ARE requirments of passangers which is well and good and grounded in common sence and the requirments of the business but dont use this as a gateway to bully foks with added blue tape designed to harass, trip up and make money.

I will treat you with perfect respect and dignity, as a customer of mine.....once you treat me the same way. There are customers who regard the service provider as serfs, someone to bully and bluster, someone who should be SOOO grateful for you passing your hard earned money onto them that they should lick your shoes as soon as youenter the premises. The woman in this video strikes me as one of them.

Bessarion

dubdaymo wrote: »

We don't know (yet) exactly what the sequence of events was that led to this onboard scene as depicted in the video. Based on hearsay you make a good point but, in my view, if you disobey the rules or disregard instructions and make a scene on or about an aircraft you can't expect the crew to treat you with respect nor do you deserve it........

While I disagree with the culture of FR I have to agree with this point. You sign the T&C's when you book. FR are nothing if not upfront about their "1 item only cabin baggage" rule. And there has been a lot of media focus on incidents like this.

While personally looking at what she was holding I have sympathy for her I know that FR enforce a zero tolerance policy.
Disobeying requests/instructions from the cabin/flight crew is a violation of the T&C's. Hence FR are legally allowed to refuse to carry this pax.

faceman

I have often walked on an FR flight with my hand luggage and my kindle in hand.

This is bonkers. Surely there is more to this story.

tricky D

T-K-O wrote: »

You cant carry a book on the plane WTF

Dunno where this comes from. I carried a book and water bottle on with no problem recently and pretty much every other time flying with them. They were also in a front pocket of my luggage at first which meant it wouldn't fit the metal frame. It was their staff who actually advised me to just take them out and carry on.

Strumms

knucklehead6 wrote: »

you were maintaining that only people who work in aviation have opinions worth paying attention to, as their aviation orientated experiences, mean they somehow have more value than the rest of the users on this board.
I used the fact that Ryanair have only had one hull loss incident shows that the aiviation/flying side of the business is pretty much above reproach.



Anytime i've been on a Ryanair flight, ive been treated with courtesy, respect and decency. I've never been treated with contempt, and for you to imply that that is the 'default' setting for all Ryanair employees is a touch much.




How is "you are not someone i regard as a decent human being because you might agree with the crew's actions here" skewed reasoning. And i did say i can live with it



I never said it was in the same league, but the unruly passenger that caused the scene on this aircraft was not complying with crew instructions, the same as an unruly passenger causing a divert in the air. What if she had kicked off while they were in the air?



Nor should someone's not paying attention to the small print and T's&C's be used as a tool to try to bluster and bully their way



I will treat you with perfect respect and dignity, as a customer of mine.....once you treat me the same way. There are customers who regard the service provider as serfs, someone to bully and bluster, someone who should be SOOO grateful for you passing your hard earned money onto them that they should lick your shoes as soon as youenter the premises. The woman in this video strikes me as one of them.

There is more than a touch of the Mitt Romney's about your retort.

Firstly. I never 'maintained' that only people who work in aviation have opinions worth paying attention too. I never even suggested it, so please if you don't mind I prefer if you would go to the trouble of quoting me or interpreting my comments please dont misinterpret or make up something I havent said. The hull loss comments is still redundant as there is no issue with the aviation/flying side of things in this debate. It is not relevant in this context at all however since you feel it important as I do in the general scheme we can agree 100% on the fact.

I am happy that you have had good experience using FR, many people also have, I have many times. However this isnt always the case. My good experiences for the most part ie. when nothing went wrong was basic average service and no more. There are many horror stories re: FR I know so from friends who either work or travelled with them as well as what the general word of mouth.

re: the decency thing. Again if you are going to quote me as you did in your above post please quote what I actually said rather then what you think I meant.

It isnt the same as an unruly person kicking off in the air. Why ? Well fistly they were on the ground and I dont think it falls into the definition of kicking off. Thats pretty loose and vague language to apply to somone having a disagreement. What if she kicked off in the air ? What if somone else did. If 'WHAT IF' was a rule of thumb in this industry no aircraft would leave the gate.

I dont gather any sence that the pax was using the T&Cs for anything so I dont get that point.

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder. Dealing with the issue being discussed. Does the lady come accross to you that she has a sence of entitlement ? I think she has a sence of frustration that common sence could not be applied in the situation. yes some people are assholes. However you know that or should before you take any customer service job. There are tools available if given proper training, conflict resolution, understanding human factors etc.

knucklehead6

Strumms wrote: »

There is more than a touch of the Mitt Romney's about your retort.

Firstly. I never 'maintained' that only people who work in aviation have opinions worth paying attention too. I never even suggested it, so please if you don't mind I prefer if you would go to the trouble of quoting me or interpreting my comments please dont misinterpret or make up something I havent said. The hull loss comments is still redundant as there is no issue with the aviation/flying side of things in this debate. It is not relevant in this context at all however since you feel it important as I do in the general scheme we can agree 100% on the fact.

Mitt Romney??

Fair enough...lets go back to your first post on this thread.

Strumms wrote:

several of us here are airline professionals as I know in various aspects of the job and I can only suggest that those agreeing with FR as regards this case are not in our ranks of said profession

To me, that reads that anyone not in the ranks of said profession doesn't know what they are talking about. I, respectfully, disagree, as this is a customer service issue, and not strictly an aviation issue, and used the hull loss incident to demonstrate that their aviation side of things is actually pretty damn good. So thanks for acknowledging that you are wrong to contend that anyone not involved in aviation doesn't know what they are talking about.

Strumms wrote: »

I am happy that you have had good experience using FR, many people also have, I have many times. However this isnt always the case. My good experiences for the most part ie. when nothing went wrong was basic average service and no more. There are many horror stories re: FR I know so from friends who either work or travelled with them as well as what the general word of mouth.

It isn't always the case for a number of airlines, yet anything to do with ryanair seems to have a higher publicity quotient attached.

Strumms wrote: »

re: the decency thing. Again if you are going to quote me as you did in your above post please quote what I actually said rather then what you think I meant.

back to your first post...

Strumms wrote:

those agreeing with FR as regards this case are not in our ranks of said profession and as it happens decent, reasonable, human beings

That is exactly what you said. I agree with Ryanair here, so that implies that by your measure, i am not a decent human being. I think i can live with that slur on my character though.

Strumms wrote: »

It isnt the same as an unruly person kicking off in the air. Why ? Well fistly they were on the ground and I dont think it falls into the definition of kicking off. Thats pretty loose and vague language to apply to somone having a disagreement. What if she kicked off in the air ? What if somone else did. If 'WHAT IF' was a rule of thumb in this industry no aircraft would leave the gate.

Not complying with crew instructions is breaking the terms of your contract. I never said that this incident was as severe as it could have been if she had kicked off in the air. However, her actions do show a propensity TO kick off. That could have happened on the ground or in the air. The fact that a member of the civil authorities had to come on board the aircraft and escort her off shows that she was being disruptive, unreasonable, and could have been construed as a threat to the aircraft.

Strumms wrote: »

I dont gather any sence that the pax was using the T&Cs for anything so I dont get that point.

You seem to have a chip on your shoulder. Dealing with the issue being discussed. Does the lady come accross to you that she has a sence of entitlement ? I think she has a sence of frustration that common sence could not be applied in the situation. yes some people are assholes. However you know that or should before you take any customer service job. There are tools available if given proper training, conflict resolution, understanding human factors etc.

I don't have a chip on my shoulder at all, i just dislike people who refuse to accept that there are rules and regulations that apply to all of us, and particularly on something that goes drilling holes in the sky at 500+MPH

ballooba

Bessarion wrote: »

While I disagree with the culture of FR I have to agree with this point. You sign the T&C's when you book. FR are nothing if not upfront about their "1 item only cabin baggage" rule. And there has been a lot of media focus on incidents like this.

I notice in Ryanair's latest edition of their inflight magazine they reference the twit who got all the Facebook support from fellow twits because she failed to print her family's boarding passes and got hit with surcharges. All I can say is "well done that woman" for subsidising my great value and hassle free travel experience.

Strumms

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Mitt Romney??

Fair enough...lets go back to your first post on this thread.



To me, that reads that anyone not in the ranks of said profession doesn't know what they are talking about. I, respectfully, disagree, as this is a customer service issue, and not strictly an aviation issue, and used the hull loss incident to demonstrate that their aviation side of things is actually pretty damn good. So thanks for acknowledging that you are wrong to contend that anyone not involved in aviation doesn't know what they are talking about.




It isn't always the case for a number of airlines, yet anything to do with ryanair seems to have a higher publicity quotient attached.




back to your first post...



That is exactly what you said. I agree with Ryanair here, so that implies that by your measure, i am not a decent human being. I think i can live with that slur on my character though.



Not complying with crew instructions is breaking the terms of your contract. I never said that this incident was as severe as it could have been if she had kicked off in the air. However, her actions do show a propensity TO kick off. That could have happened on the ground or in the air. The fact that a member of the civil authorities had to come on board the aircraft and escort her off shows that she was being disruptive, unreasonable, and could have been construed as a threat to the aircraft.




I don't have a chip on my shoulder at all, i just dislike people who refuse to accept that there are rules and regulations that apply to all of us, and particularly on something that goes drilling holes in the sky at 500+MPH

Im all for having a genuine debate with somone regardless of a differing viewpoint. However if you like to misquote things I didn't actually type and subsequently in the above post then quote what I did actually type yet claim its the same thing and then take some alternative menaing from it which clearly isnt there just to furnish your own argument and sence of being 'right' (you are not) then the debate is kind of redundant somewhat but you know go for your life ! At the end of the day its more important to be a keyboard warrior and be 'right' about these things isnt it. I respect your view on the matter all be it I do not agree with any of it hardly but none the less.

knucklehead6

Strumms wrote: »

Im all for having a genuine debate with somone regardless of a differing viewpoint. However if you like to misquote things I didn't actually type and subsequently in the above post then quote what I did actually type yet claim its the same thing and then take some alternative menaing from it which clearly isnt there just to furnish your own argument and sence of being 'right' (you are not) then the debate is kind of redundant somewhat but you know go for your life ! At the end of the day its more important to be a keyboard warrior and be 'right' about these things isnt it. I respect your view on the matter all be it I do not agree with any of it hardly but none the less.

and i'm all for genuine debate as well, just when someone starts off by regarding me and anyone who agreed with the crew actions as not decent, reasonable human beings, and when called on it try to obfuscate the issue, it becomes apparent that they are not willing to engage in one.

I took issue with 2 things in your first post on this thread, and i called you on them.

I agreed with you that there was a lot more to this than meets the eye, and the appearance of the cop on the aircraft was only an indication of the fact that this woman was preventing the crew from doing their jobs and getting the rest of the passengers safely to their destination.

As for being a keyboard warrior? ha!! The idea is laughable.

Strumms

I am beginning to question if misquoting and misinterpreting comments is actually a hobby of yours or just a lazy way to try and point score or win an imaginary argument either way.. I never mentioned 'crew actions' anywhere in this topic so again I am at a loss as to what or who you speak of but either way. Just to move this debate on a little bit than get bogged down into symantics....

I missed my train from Edinburgh to London last year. Bought an Easyjet ticket to Gatwick at the last minute. Realized my printer was ****ed. Hadnt got time to look for a neighbour or anything so I hot footed it to the airport fully expected to have to cough up for a boarding pass. I didn't, staff were really helpful thought I was nuts in fact for thinking I'd have to pony up 60 quid for 2 minutes of their time and an a4 sheet of paper. Staff on board were great, a few lairy pissed up football fans who could have caused an issue were 'firmly' sweet talked into being cool and ever since then I've used them anywhere in the UK. Same deal every time from checkin in to collecting bags. They operate the low cost model yet you get the sence that you are being looked after, that your business is appreciated and that you get treated as a human rather than a commodity who must conform to small print simply. I'd just love for Ryanair to do more of that. I gave them a lot of credit in a recent thread for the good stuff they do. great on time record, cheap fares, the positive impact in the industry as regardes lower fares greater competition, route structures, jobs etc. That's all the good stuff so I'm not on an anti FR crusade by any means. When they do so much right like that so much positive it just ****s me off that the customer experience should just be so much better. It is the difference between being an ok or good airline to being great.

knucklehead6

Strumms wrote: »

I am beginning to question if misquoting and misinterpreting comments is actually a hobby of yours or just a lazy way to try and point score or win an imaginary argument either way.. I never mentioned 'crew actions' anywhere in this topic so again I am at a loss as to what or who you speak of but either way. Just to move this debate on a little bit than get bogged down into symantics....

I missed my train from Edinburgh to London last year. Bought an Easyjet ticket to Gatwick at the last minute. Realized my printer was ****ed. Hadnt got time to look for a neighbour or anything so I hot footed it to the airport fully expected to have to cough up for a boarding pass. I didn't, staff were really helpful thought I was nuts in fact for thinking I'd have to pony up 60 quid for 2 minutes of their time and an a4 sheet of paper. Staff on board were great, a few lairy pissed up football fans who could have caused an issue were 'firmly' sweet talked into being cool and ever since then I've used them anywhere in the UK. Same deal every time from checkin in to collecting bags. They operate the low cost model yet you get the sence that you are being looked after, that your business is appreciated and that you get treated as a human rather than a commodity who must conform to small print simply. I'd just love for Ryanair to do more of that. I gave them a lot of credit in a recent thread for the good stuff they do. great on time record, cheap fares, the positive impact in the industry as regardes lower fares greater competition, route structures, jobs etc. That's all the good stuff so I'm not on an anti FR crusade by any means. When they do so much right like that so much positive it just ****s me off that the customer experience should just be so much better. It is the difference between being an ok or good airline to being great.

Allow me to spell out the crew actions bit for you. I DID mention it in my first post but it appears that you may not have seen it, or weren't paying attention, or were too busy attempting to attack the poster, not the post.

1) Lady gets to aircraft with baggage that is outside regulations.
2) Crew call cops.


There's the crew action bit for you. I hope it's clear enough.

As for your experience with easyjet, yes, that is good customer service, and should rightly be applauded.

christy c

Strumms wrote: »

I missed my train from Edinburgh to London last year. Bought an Easyjet ticket to Gatwick at the last minute. Realized my printer was ****ed. Hadnt got time to look for a neighbour or anything so I hot footed it to the airport fully expected to have to cough up for a boarding pass. I didn't, staff were really helpful thought I was nuts in fact for thinking I'd have to pony up 60 quid for 2 minutes of their time and an a4 sheet of paper. Staff on board were great, a few lairy pissed up football fans who could have caused an issue were 'firmly' sweet talked into being cool and ever since then I've used them anywhere in the UK. Same deal every time from checkin in to collecting bags. They operate the low cost model yet you get the sence that you are being looked after, that your business is appreciated and that you get treated as a human rather than a commodity who must conform to small print simply. I'd just love for Ryanair to do more of that. I gave them a lot of credit in a recent thread for the good stuff they do. great on time record, cheap fares, the positive impact in the industry as regardes lower fares greater competition, route structures, jobs etc. That's all the good stuff so I'm not on an anti FR crusade by any means. When they do so much right like that so much positive it just ****s me off that the customer experience should just be so much better. It is the difference between being an ok or good airline to being great.

I agree with you that there are much better customer service airlines out there, but the thing is customer service costs money. In your case because Easyjet doesn't charge I'm guessing that more people turn up at airport without boarding passes meaning the two minutes they spent with you is multiplied by several other passengers = more staff needed = more cost.

FR are relentless with costs and this is what drives everything. They have baggage fees to reduce handling costs, €60 check in fee to reduce check in staff costs, etc. Yes it can be a pain from the consumers point of view but the business model seems to work so far

Del2005

Strumms wrote: »

Take a look at the last line you wrote. If you or anyone think that that is acceptable in any regard when dealing with 'human beings' in ANY walk of life than as regards decency, honesty and a way to treat customers in business than you certainly don't fall into any category of decency in my view. Questioning or calling out a company you have paid good money to, to provide you a service where you feel they have failed is not creating an unsafe situation but as a Ryanair apologist it sure would suit yours and their argument down to the ground. Would you have felt threatened by her ? did the staff ? Did her fellow passengers ? Get off the stage sunshine. The 'well you know the deal that they will treat you like a prick before you ticked the box' is NOT and never should be acceptable.

IMO that's the correct way to deal with it. There could have been 180 other people on the plane who managed to comply with Ryanairs policies and boarded correctly. The woman didn't, why should the others be delayed because she thinks she's special?

I wish more companies would look after the people who actually obey the rules instead of pandering to the people who think that rules/T&Cs are for everyone else not them.

bluecode

I agree that sometimes Ryanair pushes the rudeness thing to the limit, unnecessarily so in my opinion. But it's not as if anyone should be surprised at this point. Like most people I never had a problem with Ryanair because like most people. I comply with the rules however daft they are. But I've seen people get themselves into problems. I remember some woman onboard complaining about something saying she'd never fly Ryanair again. She got precious little sympathy from the rest of us. Then there was the woman with the overweight hand luggage. She used the 'I have kids' excuse. Looking down the queue most of us had kids and we all sorted ourselves even if it was five in morning. She just delayes us all with her silliness.

Same with the woman in the video. All she managed to do was cause hassle for herself. A pointless exercise.

Strumms

to clarify.... yes there were xxx amount of people on board who were respectful fare paying individuals who should expect to get to their destination on time, her accompanied departure from the aircraft by the authorites or indeed whoever was possibly just in some regard. When the airline identifed the' issue' on board with the lady... it is from then on that I have a problem with their lack of flexibility, understanding and courtecy and how they acted. The measure of them as an airline and service provider should be based on how they helped rather than persecuted and threw the small print in her face. I don't buy this argument about T&C's simply because most transactions we enter as customers have those applied or stipulated. Hands up who reads them all ?? Its not like this lady tried to board with 6 suitcases and a baby elephant.... But those T&C's for the most part are there for a reason as in to protect the company, streamline terms of service and advise customers of their rights as a consumer. My issue with FR is that their T&C's can be intrepreted and as I believe designed in some cases as tools to trip people up for profits sake, its very easy like most of us here in this forum are well versed in travelling on aircraft (not everyone is), the Ryanair model etc... so we know 'the game'. Which is why I'd be more interested in evaluating the events that led up to the youtube confrontation as filmed insted of evaluating what I know as just FR seeing a rather crass way to kick someone in the butt and make another buck because they maybe, harmlessly and innocently didnt't tick all the boxes. You wouldnt like it if it was your mother, then again I guess there are one or two of you that would tell her she should have read the T&C's.

Del2005

Strumms wrote: »

to clarify.... yes there were xxx amount of people on board who were respectful fare paying individuals who should expect to get to their destination on time, her accompanied departure from the aircraft by the authorites or indeed whoever was possibly just in some regard. When the airline identifed the' issue' on board with the lady... it is from then on that I have a problem with their lack of flexibility, understanding and courtecy and how they acted. The measure of them as an airline and service provider should be based on how they helped rather than persecuted and threw the small print in her face. I don't buy this argument about T&C's simply because most transactions we enter as customers have those applied or stipulated. Hands up who reads them all ?? Its not like this lady tried to board with 6 suitcases and a baby elephant.... But those T&C's for the most part are there for a reason as in to protect the company, streamline terms of service and advise customers of their rights as a consumer. My issue with FR is that their T&C's can be intrepreted and as I believe designed in some cases as tools to trip people up for profits sake, its very easy like most of us here in this forum are well versed in travelling on aircraft (not everyone is), the Ryanair model etc... so we know 'the game'. Which is why I'd be more interested in evaluating the events that led up to the youtube confrontation as filmed insted of evaluating what I know as just FR seeing a rather crass way to kick someone in the butt and make another buck because they maybe, harmlessly and innocently didnt't tick all the boxes. You wouldnt like it if it was your mother, then again I guess there are one or two of you that would tell her she should have read the T&C's.

For someone who works in the industry you don't understand contract law. When you tick the box "I understand and agree to the above T&Cs" you are signing a legally binding document, they have to provide the flight if you turn up with your Passport*, so why don't you have to do as you agreed. The fact that you don't read it shows how little of an understanding you have.

They aren't kicking anyone in the butt, they just follow their T&Cs to the letter. By doing this they can load and unload their aircraft faster. I dislike getting onto a plane, some half empty, from other airlines and can't access the overhead bins due to people bringing the kitchen sink with them.

I got stung for an oversize cabin bag with Ryanair and in fairness they did offer to let me repack and try again, but I knew the bag was too big to start with. But I wasn't going to delay the plane repackng as I was 1st in the queue for priority boarding. I'm sure if I'd ran to the gate at the last minute they wouldn't have offered to let me repack, but a lot of people would try.

I'd rather have a cheap, on time flight than nice customer service and arrive late. "Good customer service" is only needed for the bad customers, the 180 good customers on that flight would have gotten bad service if they let her on. Once they let one person break the rules then as you know people will start pushing and ruin it for everyone.



*Usual airline restrictions on intoxication etc apply.

rugbyman

slightly off topic but interesting

Flying from Beauvais to Dublin about a month ago, there was continuing polite < well, not rowdy ,conversation between a Ryanair steward a civilian an a.n. other up at the front end ,inside the door. no loud voices. another fellow, I think PAF(police of air and frontiers) came along and left .
then ,quick as a flash two uniformed fellows( not sure who they were ,not Gendarmes anyway) lifted the civilian bodily, spun him round and out the door, steward locked the door and off we went.

I enquired about this and was told he was being deported from France, and refused to go willingly and choose to go back to jail. the actual removal was a matter of seconds ,start to finish

Rugbyman

Tenger

rugbyman wrote: »

.....Flying from Beauvais to Dublin about a month ago, there was continuing polite < well, not rowdy ,conversation between a Ryanair steward a civilian ..........the actual removal was a matter of seconds ,start to finish

1 thing about that video strikes me. FR state that they rules and conditions allow them to keep fast turnarounds and excellent punctuality. I wonder how long that confrontation delayed the entire flight........all because she was carrying a fragile scroll. Just saying that sometimes rules can be bent a little for common sense reasons.
--Now,on the other hand perhaps this lady may have brought herself to the attention of the crew in another way an they maybe used the scroll issue as the rationale for refusal of travel.

faceman

Del2005 wrote: »

I'd rather have a cheap, on time flight than nice customer service and arrive late. "Good customer service" is only needed for the bad customers, the 180 good customers on that flight would have gotten bad service if they let her on. Once they let one person break the rules then as you know people will start pushing and ruin it for

And herein lies the problem. Good customer service should apply to all customers. There is no excuse.

Southwest Airlines in the US invented the 20 minute turnaround and O'Leary based his business model on them. Yet Southwest have an excellent customer service model. They also quote a price on their website that is the price you pay.

O'Leary chose to ignore those components.

LeftBase

rugbyman wrote: »

slightly off topic but interesting

Flying from Beauvais to Dublin about a month ago, there was continuing polite < well, not rowdy ,conversation between a Ryanair steward a civilian an a.n. other up at the front end ,inside the door. no loud voices. another fellow, I think PAF(police of air and frontiers) came along and left .
then ,quick as a flash two uniformed fellows( not sure who they were ,not Gendarmes anyway) lifted the civilian bodily, spun him round and out the door, steward locked the door and off we went.

I enquired about this and was told he was being deported from France, and refused to go willingly and choose to go back to jail. the actual removal was a matter of seconds ,start to finish

Rugbyman

God the French Government must really be skint!

newcavanman

Eli Manning wrote: »

Good. All she had to do was put it in her suitcase. Instead she caused a disruption. We all know the rules at this stage. If you don't like them then fly with someone else

Couldnt agree with you more . They may be as strict as the SS, but everyone knows the rules . If you don't like them, go with someone else, no one has put a gun to your head to fly with Ryanair

Strumms

Del2005 wrote: »

For someone who works in the industry you don't understand contract law. When you tick the box "I understand and agree to the above T&Cs" you are signing a legally binding document, they have to provide the flight if you turn up with your Passport*, so why don't you have to do as you agreed. The fact that you don't read it shows how little of an understanding you have.

They aren't kicking anyone in the butt, they just follow their T&Cs to the letter. By doing this they can load and unload their aircraft faster. I dislike getting onto a plane, some half empty, from other airlines and can't access the overhead bins due to people bringing the kitchen sink with them.

I got stung for an oversize cabin bag with Ryanair and in fairness they did offer to let me repack and try again, but I knew the bag was too big to start with. But I wasn't going to delay the plane repackng as I was 1st in the queue for priority boarding. I'm sure if I'd ran to the gate at the last minute they wouldn't have offered to let me repack, but a lot of people would try.

I'd rather have a cheap, on time flight than nice customer service and arrive late. "Good customer service" is only needed for the bad customers, the 180 good customers on that flight would have gotten bad service if they let her on. Once they let one person break the rules then as you know people will start pushing and ruin it for everyone.



*Usual airline restrictions on intoxication etc apply.

I understand it, that's the simple part. Agreeing with it, no. I would also have an issue with categorising people as 'bad customers' also. As consumers at times we sure do ourselves no favours by coming up with this stuff MOL would be delighted. I am more of the line of thinking with the others here who mentioned the Southwest example and how you CAN operate the low cost model very profitably without the Gestapo style rigid SS attitude and inflexibility, still meet your turnarounds and be reasonable and pleasant with the people who you are serving. The suck it up attitude and you know what to expect doesn't fly with me.

IngazZagni

faceman wrote: »

And herein lies the problem. Good customer service should apply to all customers. There is no excuse.

Southwest Airlines in the US invented the 20 minute turnaround and O'Leary based his business model on them. Yet Southwest have an excellent customer service model. They also quote a price on their website that is the price you pay.

O'Leary chose to ignore those components.

Southwest has aged. They have improved their attitude towards customers in recent years. They have lost their youth and have bought competitors, they are no longer the Ryanair of the U.S. That title belongs to Spirit Airlines. They are in ways worse than Ryanair yet are the fastest expanding carrier in North America.

Ryanair are about 20 years behind Southwest in terms of progression. They will follow the Southwest model in the future and Ryanair will improve its attitude towards customers. MOL has admitted this but that won't happen until the future of the company is secure and part of that is the possible takeover of Aer Lingus and another massive aircraft order.

Del2005

Strumms wrote: »

I understand it, that's the simple part. Agreeing with it, no.

It's simple, if you don't agree with their T&Cs don't tick the box agreeing to the T&Cs.