Ryanair found guilty of discrimination

Ryanair has been sued for leaving a wheelchair-bound woman on the runway at Luton Airport because 'all it was interested in was getting the plane airborne on time'.

As RYANAIR seems to be the most popular TOPIC ON THE FORUM this was in the news TODAY

Jo Heath, who suffers from multiple sclerosis, was left 'humiliated' and stranded on the runway and had no means of boarding the plane by herself. Her husband Paul had to give her a fireman's lift onto the aircraft.

Northampton County Court awarded her £1,750 after it ruled the airline broke disability discrimination laws and breached its contract with Heath when its staff refused to help the couple.

Speaking in Travel Weekly, Husband Paul said: 'Ryanair tried to brush us under the carpet. They offered us more money than we eventually received but we refused it because they wanted us to sign a confidentiality clause.'

Jo Heath said: 'I'm not terribly impressed with the pay-out but it's not a question of money. It's about standing up for people with disabilities.'

Judge Paul McHale ruled: 'I find as a matter of fact that anything that interfered with the [aircraft] turnaround time was going to be ignored. All the defendant was interested in was getting the plane airborne on time.'

But Ryanair said it would appeal on the grounds that Luton Airport was responsible for assisting the passengers under European Union law.

The couple had submitted a special requirements request for a hydraulic Ambulift, but it failed to turn up on the day, resulting in the awkward situation for Jo and her husband

Flack Jacket on again.

I'ts all about money (greed) with Ryanair, you can see that's the case when you try and contact them.  Customer service is a bare minimum or non existent, and  when they upset a few,  'so what?'  at those prices loads more will come along.  I can hear people saying  ''You can't have it both ways, you have budget or you have good''  but sooner or later their bad reputation will  and in fact is catching  up with them, they were featured on watchdog only  last night for misleading pricing.  

This message was last edited by rod on 15/04/2011.

This message was last edited by rod on 15/04/2011.

"Judge Paul McHale ruled: 'I find as a matter of fact that anything that interfered with the [aircraft] turnaround time was going to be ignored. All the defendant was interested in was getting the plane airborne on time"

I hope that's a misquote because that in itself is probably grounds for appeal.  The judge was ruling on the specific issue of whether Ryanair was in breach of contract regarding this disabled passenger.  It is NOT a matter of fact that anything that interfered with turnaround time was going to be ignored.  A fire in the passenger toilets would interfere with turnaround time.  Is the judge arguing that that would have been ignored.  It is NOT a matter of fact that all Ryanair was interested in was getting the plane airborne on time.  It was a major priority for them  That is what makes them the best performers on on-time flights.  But the judge is not qualified to extrapolate from the general case he was trying to make sweeping generalisations for which no evidence has been submitted and which is patently nonsense.
There is an issue here about responsibility.  I suspect that the judge is right in that Ryanair were in breach of their contract with the disabled passenger and were fined accordingly.  But I'll bet Ryanair have a claim for non-performance and damages against the company with whom they contracted for the provision of the lifting equipment. 

And what does anyone suggest that Ryanair should have done in the circumstances? 

Rod. I am Sorry. Yes. You did mention it in your thred.

  JB

I use Ryanair a lot because they are generally cheaper than any other company. I find only the sense of potential problems in the queue an issue. I always think  it could all go wrong and have seen some unseemly scrambles to board the plane. There's a general sense of anxiety amongst the queue that seems to filter into the calmest of people. What difference would it make to be able to book seat numbers instead of priority boarding tickets I cannot fathom? Naturally people who travel together want to sit together- especially, though not exclusively,  families with young children. I suppose they reckon people finding seats will slow down the process but I would argue that most people do not just 'take up the next available seat' anyway.

On the plane I find little to complain about. Usually a few hours in a slightly cramped space- not much different than travelling by train.

On the occasion in question it seems Ryanair will appeal as they believe the problem exisited with the airport and not with them. Why they then offered to settle out of court I do not know. To keep bad publicity out of the new's? But, if they are correct that it was an issue with the airport then why the concern? I know few details but is it that they did not attempt to get the problem solved by chasing up the boarding equipment that appears to put them into the frame for 'discrimination'

jek

with the huge profits Ryanair are making , they should have a back up system in place. This could happen at any time, but  if it means Ryanair might lose a bit of their vast profit by looking after a disabled people properly, then I guess they are not interested?.

goodstitch, And should they have a spare aviation fuel tanker on standby in case the airport falls over on that?  And a fleet of their own buses at each airport?  Business doesn't work like that.  And the costs of your proposals go on to the price of the ticket.

Tony,  With priority boarding you get to choose your seat once you're on the plane.  Your proposal adds to costs.  Basic economic theory.  You cause the cost; you pay for it.  It goes on the price of the priority boarder's ticket.  I don't have a problem with the queue.  I don't pay the surcharge.

jek

I think we will have to agree to dissagree on this. I just think Ryanair are all about greed and profit and not about people or customer satisfaction, and without balance we head towards abuse of human rights issues. I know it's all about keeping costs down, but I don't see that an an excuse for not making sure that those already in a disadvantaged position are made to feel even worse. I don't just blame the airline, I feel the airport along with the airline should make sure that this sort of thing can't happen again. No excuses.

 Just like the banks pushing up mortgage interest rates by 2.5% in the last year to cover their losses, and the ECB rate had not moved at all until recently. There is no point in slating Ryanair when all companies are only interested in the same thing......bigger and bigger profits....... and they really do not care about the average joe and how much they hurt or inconvienience you.

There you go.  That's capitalism for you.  Greed and self-interest are the essential fuel of capitalism.  The profit motive drives efficiency gains and customer benefit.  You can moan about it but you would never have got the innovations that Michael O'Leary has brought to air travel other than in a capitalist economy.  And you will find yourself in a very small minority if you reckon that we are worse off as a result of O'Leary's innovations.

Talk of human rights issues is just pure drivel.

jek

no, I think the defense of greed and self interest by banks/airlines at the cost of disabled people is drivel.

In this day and age, ALL airlines should make better provision for those who are non ambulant...... for example,  I consider it against human rights not to provide accessible toileting provision for those who require access.

Imagine how you would feel stuck without this basic provision and denied these travel opportunities.

Experience what it is to be non ambulant sometime (wheelchair bound) and the impact on everyday existence, and then say that the profit motive should rule all. In my personal opinion all airlines should plough some profit into facilities to enhance the rights of those disadvantaged, not leave them discriminated against and made to feel like pariahs because of some inflexible capitalist pressure motive.

Surely there's a basic line for customer care that all airlines could meet across the board.

It just  takes some forethought and commitment (and perhaps some moral conscience!!! )

ads

quite right, but you have to care about those people to form that opinion, and that cuts across the grain of unchecked capitalism.

Changing to another Airline... (Easy Squeezy)..

I recently did a return trip to the UK. On the outbound flight we were told that 'No nut products of any kind, or those including trace of nuts' would be served on the flight - due to one passenger having a severe nut allergy.

This is the first I have heard of this!  Good job I could do without nuts for 3hrs :)

PS - This was a particularly event filled day as A) we were offloaded from the que in the corridor (after having been checked in for boarding), due to the plane being given to an earlier flight that had been cancelled. B) We had to wait for the earlier plane to be checked over thouroughly - It had experienced 'On board computer failure' (a bit worrying! C) We had to use one toilet between 120 of us (the other reason the plane had been grounded earlier was due to one of the 2 toilets having a fault). The above. Oh, and 'Is there a doctor or nurse onboard' request from the Captain.  We all looked at each other and though it might be the nut allergic person, but it turned out to be an elderly lady in her 80's that had collapsed. (I must say the crew seemed to do a good job and gave her all the oxygen they had onboard and an ambulance was waiting the other end)

Who says flying is dull ;)

 We've had the "no nuts please due to a passenger with nut allergy" on several flights.  

If you get the "is there a doctor on board" then immediately stop watching the film Airplane!