Ryanair: Caught Napping
 

Don't miss Dispatches tonight. 21:00 on Channel 4.

http://www.channel4.com/listings/C4/...t=0&position=0

20:00 Dispatches

Ryanair: Caught Napping
A major undercover investigation into the way in which Ryanair, one of the largest and most successful low-cost airlines, operates.

Already in my sky+ :)

Likewise! :D

It's also in my sky+.
Hope there's still room after all the Air Crash Investigations from last week.

And for those of us without Sky, a "new" series of Aircrash Investigations starts tonight at 9pm on Channel Five and continues over the next few Monday evenings.

It's on now - Channel 4.

Very interesting!

Wow, this is dynamite! Prospective FAs have to pay a lot of money up front for bad training followed by an exam that no one fails.....

Did you see the bit about the 737-200?

Ahh, the bit about the piece of metal that guarntees anyone sitting in 1A dies in an accident. I'm sure an expert in aviation related jigsaw puzzles might be able to clarify that one.

Indeed.

according to one of FR's reponses, it's horsesh!t (point 2, the whole entertaining correspondence is here).

am loving this - It took me 3 months to get cleared by BA security and I don't even work at the airport/on a plane!!!

I’m sitting here with my mouth open the whole program, I can’t believe what I am watching here!
I wonder how many people watching this; will never get on a Ryanair flight again…

Return flight London to Dublin the FA's get £28.

Would you do it?

That's £8 per hour...

well, seeing as it's not on ITV1 and is up against Corrie, I'd hazard most of the Ryanair clientele have failed to tune in!

and, yes that was a wild generalisaton...

I've flown with them once from PIK to MJV, but no matter how cheap they were, I dont intend going anywhere near them again after seeing the terrifying breaches in security here. Faulty slides, napping cabin crew (who are working for a pittance considering what they do), vomit on the floor. Scary, SCARY stuff.

Efin

Watching it now, with 30 min delay (sorry I HAD to watch the second episode of the new series of 24 first).

Shame Channel 4 no longer has "Right To Reply". I shall keep a close eye on the Dispatches section of the Ryanair website.

Shocker!

What are the chances of half of Ryanair's roster being turned away at Stansted's door tomorrow?

<shudder> That's one scary airline.

OK, it's over. I naturally expect the boards at another pplace to start warming up.

Of course people are going to complain that the programme wasn't balanced, but there were certainly parts that were undeniably questionable:

(a) The apparent faking of references;
(b) The possibility of an aircraft departing with an unsafe slide.

But then there were parts of the programme that were definitely unfair to Ryanair too:

(c) The delays on boarding. Anyone working for any airline could delay an aircraft by spending too much time on checking the documentation. Yes, there should be security but it must be done appropriately.
(d) The non-opening of the bars on the ground in Spain. Well if they're not allowed to open them, what's the Captain supposed to do?

And certainly Ryanair's claim at the end that "900 hours works out at 18 hours a week" leaves Joe Public with completely the wrong impression as to FC hours.

It was interesting that the focus of the programme was more on corporate culture, mis-management of staff and poor rosters rather than proving that Ryanair is an unsafe airline.

On the basis of today's programme I didn't see anything that would make me never fly with them again (although I would think twice...)

Hmmm, that programme did nothing whatsoever to tempt me away from my staple diet of KLM, BA, BMI and SN.

It's finished, but on again: -

3.25am Wednesday 15th February 2006 set those videos, or if you are blessed with Sky + - use that!

Well I've always thought it and now I know it : FR is the crummiest outfit that ever had the gall to call itself an airline. :td: :td: :td:

What about the training - I've never witnessed such bad training. If what my FA friend at BA says, their annual tests are hard. An quite frankly, that's what I expect. Somebody who works at Abercrombie and Fitch could get a job with Ryanair (have you ever been into Abercrombie and Fitch - if you have, you should know what I mean!)...

Flying with an inoperable escape slide, without reducing the passenger numbers and informing them as required to do so, is quite enough for me.

And added to that is the fact that Ryanair have no record of it - come on!

Also showing again on More4 Saturday at 8.10pm.

Ryanair is one nasty airline. Nasty to its Pilots, nasty to its cabin crew and and nasty to you. That's all I gotta say.

I know what you're saying Dave, but there was an element of doubt in the reporter's head as to whether the arrow was in the green or not. I'm not saying there wasn't a problem just that it didn't seem certain to me.

I mean I won't be travelling Ryanair myself any time soon - and all that business about the pax in 1A dying on the 737-200. What was all that about?!

I remember the other Dispatches programme about BA staff drinking. A lot of ppeople complained about that too being a hatchet-job. Yes: parts of it were. But as with this there's certainly a case to answer for. Even if it is isolated incidents.

I have mixed feelings. I've seen many of these type of undercover investigations before and it is terribly easy to make fairly mundane shortcomings look like terrible safety breaches.

For example, on my flight back from MUC on Friday (on BA) which was delayed 3.5 hours due to blizzard conditions at MUC, the captain told us before we left the gate that either himself or the FO would be popping out of the flight deck to check the wings after de-icing to ensure they were happy that all the ice had been removed. In the event, this did not happen. We got de-iced then took off.

How easy would it be to make the above situation look like a serious security breach in an undercover investigation? "In a shocking safety breach, the Captain placed the safety of all 180 passengers solely on the assurances of the de-icing team that they had cleared all the ice, without checking himself, despite assurances that he would" etc. etc. you get the picture.

It is interesting to read the to and fro letters on the Ryanair website about this. Interesting to note the following:

- Ryanair sent the initial Despatches letter and their first (admittedly fairly comprehensive) reply to the CAA and IAA and the MD of Stansted Airport of their own free will

- It appears that both aviation authorities saw no evidence to warrant an investigation (although I think at that stage the undercover video evidence may not have been available)

I'm not defending Ryanair. I think they are a pretty awful airline, led by a particularly odious man. But I just want to reinforce the old cliché "Don't believe everything you see on TV".

You see, this is exactly the problem I'm talking about. There was no evidence that it was in-op. Only that it "looked funny". That from a cabin crew who by her own admission had spent almost no time on the aircraft for practical training. If Ryanair had no "record" of it, that's probably because it was absolutely fine and didn't actually need fixing in the first place. Be careful about what conclusions you jump to based on significantly incomplete evidence!

(I'm really, really not trying to defend Ryanair, honest!)

Don't normally look at the staff. Couldn't take my eyes of the Abercrombie catalogue!..

LOL :D I know exactly where you're coming from mate. ;)

IIRC the programme said that two crew members believed the indicator showed the slide was u/s and that they informed the No.1 who took no action.

And you've just made the programme's point; if the reporter who had completed the training course is not qualified to determine if an exit is u/s, why on earth are they flying as crew?

I'm ex BA staff...and since leaving (and losing my concessions) had become a real Ryanair convert....less than £50 to a small uncongested airport that's ultimately closer to my destination....great on time performance...no hassle.

I watched this documentary expecting to jump to Ryanair's defence....afterall all airlines (including BA) have their own unsavoury stories to tell.

However, the evidence filmed by C4 was truly appalling. The occassional napping cabin crew member or security infringment were startling if not altogether surprising..but perhaps the most alarming of all was the complete contempt that Ryanair staff seem to have for both their employer and their customers.

This company doesn't deserve to be doing as well as it is....I shall be boycotting it from now on..I hope others do the same and give Michael O'Leary his just desserts!!!

My Sky+ planner is saying THURSDAY 16th @ 4.10am...

well.. just goes to show, there are other ways... and then there's British Airways!!! :p

been dying to say that!!!

I have to agree that, while i think that programs like this normally sensationalise oversights of laxes of security and procedures, that the fact the flight crew didnt seem particularly bothered with pushing the point of getting the captain to check the slide was ok was worrying enough, as was the fact that no.1 didnt seem to do anything about it. It would be different if the other CC had said that no 1 had looked and stated that it was ok - this would indicate that they were taking charge and responsibility for checking etc, but in this case the crew the reporter was working with seemed completely uninterested. This is not a good thing when they are ultimately responsible for the lives and safety of over a hundred pax.

Efin

Thank you, I was trying to find a word to best express my feelings of this wretched airline - contemptible sums it up.

Dave_C, I agree it's not a particularly desirable situation - that's why I'm not defending Ryanair. The training situation (i.e. only training to pass the test and not doing any near enough practical training) seems to be particularly bad - very worrying in fact. But even then, you only saw one or two bad pieces of advice in how many months of full time training?

I was just trying to show how incomplete evidence can be presented in such a way to lead viewers to a certain conclusion. For example the only evidence that the No.1 did nothing about the situation is that our undercover crew didn't see them do anything about it. Given the observed chaos during turnaround/boarding, she could easily have missed the No.1 doing something about it, couldn't she? Now you can make assumptions about the likelihood of that, based on subjectivity or preconceived thoughts built up and encouraged earlier in the programme, but that's exactly the kind of stuff that these type of programmes rely on for their effectiveness.