Message to Michael O'Leary

[rh100]

O'Leary says that getting disabled people from check-in to the plane is something the airport should provide, not the carrier, and if you are paying £9.99 for a flight why should you get the same compensation as someone who has paid £200. Both perfectly reasonable points.

If the law says that they must compensate, (going from what I hear on the News, then it is law), then that is their problem and they should cough up. Just because their business model does not sit comfortably with the requirements of the law, does not mean they can pick when to ignore it and make their own rules up.

Whether you pay £5 or £500 for a ticket you still expect the same duty of care that you are entitled to from any operator.

He should price his tickets so the business can afford to cover these costs, then we would see how popular they are.

 

[rh100]

I see that nice Mr O'Leary's airline has changed its corporate mind.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8636461.stm

"Oliver Aust from the airline told the BBC's Radio 4 Today programme it will compensate passengers but said that the law was "unfair". "

My heart bleeds...

I think he was from SleazyJet, but the sentiments are the same I'm sure.

I see that they are all calling for compensation for themselves now, even Branson who I had a bit of respect for before.

They blame the govmt for closing airspace, yet if they had not and engines all failed, then they would be complaining about that. So now they demand compensation, shafting the tax payer same as the banks did, we must all be mugs.

 

[Twenty Inch]

They are trying to eat their cake and have it, certainly. Had planes with clogged engines started dropping out of the skies, I am sure that the airlines would be trying to screw compensation from the government for not closing the airspace, as well as pleading for government intervention to help them survive the surviving relatives' litigation.

 

[Over The Hill]

Do any of the moaners understand the term "no frills".

You seem to want first class travel for steerage fares.

If you want the frills then buy the expensive ticket with BA. If you are saying the no frills airline in not actually cheaper then dont use them, use the one that is less or gives you more than taking you from A to B.

 

[Twenty Inch]

But if the airline hasn't looked at its obligations when building its business model, and allowed for them, that's not the moaners' fault - it's the airline's fault. I am sure that someone, somewhere, in Ryanair, discussed such a mass closure - esp after Sept. 11 - and then decided against taking out insurance against claims on the basis that it wouldn't be necessary.

I don't have to insure my car fully comp, but then I take the consequences. I DO have to insure it against Third Party damages, or accept that I will go to court and be liable if I knock someone over.

 

[wafflycat]

But if the airline hasn't looked at its obligations when building its business model, and allowed for them, that's not the moaners' fault - it's the airline's fault.

^ +1

 

[Twenty Inch]

Anyway, Ryanair have backed down:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8636944.stm

 

[summerdays]

I wouldn't fly with Ryan Air unless it was the only way I could get to somewhere... I'd rather pay more to someone else. Any time I've looked at their costs its started off being the cheapest flight but by the time I've added suitcases, fee for booking online, fee for being allowed to step onto one of their jets etc then usually they are no longer the cheapest.

 

[jay clock]

I wouldn't fly with Ryan Air unless it was the only way I could get to somewhere... I'd rather pay more to someone else.

Agreed 100%. EasyJet have slowly and surely edged themselves up the ladder in terms of quality and service. The problme I have is that living near Southampton and Bournemouth airports very often Ryanair IS the only way I can go, unless I am prepared for the massive extra hassle of Gatwick or even further away. Flybe is an excellent airline and I use them sometimes. But my starting point is "please, not Ryanair"

 

[Twenty Inch]

I wouldn't fly with Ryan Air unless it was the only way I could get to somewhere... I'd rather pay more to someone else. Any time I've looked at their costs its started off being the cheapest flight but by the time I've added suitcases, fee for booking online, fee for being allowed to step onto one of their jets etc then usually they are no longer the cheapest.

+ 1

 

[yello]

But he's only about profile and profit. IMO.

In fairness, I think he'd agree with that assessment. He's running a business. I'm sure he's even stated that he doesn't care if he's liked. Agreed, I don't think he needs to be such an arse into the bargain (he'd charge you for that if he could!), and I don't like his business model either, but I do find myself almost admiring the front of the guy. He is an unrepentant capitalist. And probably the ideal of one; the purist form of it.

 

[jonesy]

I don't think that's the point.

It may be an archaic regulation that needs to be reviewed now that a plane is often cheaper and quicker than a train. But telling passengers who booked with an understanding of the regulation to get stuffed isn't the right thing to do. He know what he should be doing if he really wants things changed. But he's only about profile and profit. IMO.

Someone from Easyjet made that point very well on the Today programme this morning. They felt that the legislation wasn't designed with that sort of situation in mind, but they were still going to fulfil their legal obligations to their passengers. Ryanair's anti-customer service business model must its limits.