Ryanair cabin crew strike 25 and 26 July 2018 - cockpit strike 10 August

[lumumba]

From Securex (a Belgian private Social Security Office) - thus referring to Belgian legislation:

"...In ondernemingen zonder vakbondsafvaardiging moet de werknemer die afwezig wil blijven om aan een collectieve actie deel te nemen, zelf het initiatief nemen en zijn werkgever verwittigen..." Translated via Google: "... In companies without a trade union delegation, the employee who wants to remain absent to take part in a collective action must take the initiative and inform his employer..."

Which is totally next to the point as to be employed under Belgian legislation is what they are fighting for

And therefore I added: "...thus referring to Belgian legislation:..."

But they are still not!!!!

[Passenger]

Press release 01st August 2018 from Kris Peeters, federal minister for Work/Employment:

"...Vice-eersteminister en minister van werk Kris Peeters heeft een antwoord ontvangen van Ryanair op zijn brief van maandag 30 juli. Daarin heeft hij opgeroepen om het sociaal conflict niet te laten escaleren en wijst hij erop dat het stakingsrecht inhoudt dat werknemers niet op basis van hun deelname aan een staking ontslagen kunnen worden.

Over de bewuste ‘no show’ brieven aan het stakend personeel, zegt Ryanair in zijn antwoord dat de stakende werknemers enkel hun loon voor de stakingsdagen niet zullen ontvangen en er hen geen andere sancties zullen worden opgelegd.

Kris Peeters: “Ryanair geeft aan dat het de principes van het stakingsrecht respecteert. Dat zou een evidentie moeten zijn, maar dit antwoord kan een geruststelling zijn voor het personeel. Ryanair moet nu ook aan tafel gaan zitten en constructieve onderhandelingen voeren met de vakbonden. Mijn oproep van maandag om het sociaal conflict niet te laten escaleren geldt onverminderd"...

Source:
http://krispeeters.be/portfolio/antwoor ... ow-brieven

- - -

Translated by Mr or Mrs Google:

"... Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Employment Kris Peeters has received a reply from Ryanair to his letter of Monday, July 30. In it he has called for the escalation of the social conflict and he points out that the right to strike means that employees do not on the basis of their participation in a strike can be dismissed.

On the 'no show' letter to the striking staff, Ryanair said in his reply that the striking employees will not receive their wages for the strike days only and no other sanctions will be imposed on them.

Kris Peeters: "Ryanair indicates that it respects the principles of the right to strike. That should be obvious, but this answer can be a reassurance for the staff. Ryanair must now also sit down at the table and engage in constructive negotiations with the trade unions. My call from Monday not to escalate the social conflict is without prejudice "...

[Passenger]

With their strike, the trade unions & Ryanair staff cause a lot of damage to passengers. Just one example: when Ryanair is unable to offer a decent rerouting, other non-refundable travel arrangements are lost unless the passengers buy new tickets. Which will be, quite obviously, a lot more expensive then what they have paid months and months ago.

For the travel trade, these additional costs are for their account when the Ryanair ticket is part of a package. Travel legislation protects the passengers, and travel agents or touroperators can only avoid responsability in case of force majeure. Which is not the case because a strike is a voluntary action, and thus avoidable.

Dutch travel publication TravMagazine.nl has published this article about this problem for the travel trade:
https://www.travmagazine.nl/36651-2/

[luchtzak]

Ryanair announced that they cancelled 104 flights to/from Belgium on 10 August, all passengers have been notified by SMS/MAIL. Affected passengers will be rerouted or refunded.
.


More information: https://www.aviation24.be/airlines/ryan ... 10-august/

[convair]

With their strike, the trade unions & Ryanair staff cause a lot of damage to passengers. Just one example: when Ryanair is unable to offer a decent rerouting, other non-refundable travel arrangements are lost unless the passengers buy new tickets. Which will be, quite obviously, a lot more expensive then what they have paid months and months ago.

For the travel trade, these additional costs are for their account when the Ryanair ticket is part of a package. Travel legislation protects the passengers, and travel agents or touroperators can only avoid responsability in case of force majeure. Which is not the case because a strike is a voluntary action, and thus avoidable.

Dutch travel publication TravMagazine.nl has published this article about this problem for the travel trade:
https://www.travmagazine.nl/36651-2/

Don't the travel agents have the possibility to demand compensation from Ryanair, as pax do?

[convair]

. Affected passengers will be rerouted "ON OTHER RYANAIR FLIGHTS"* or refunded.

* words in red added by convair to luchtzak quote in order to correctly reflect Ryanair's statement.
.

Aren't they obliged to book their pax on other airlines if necessary?

[luchtzak]

. Affected passengers will be rerouted "ON OTHER RYANAIR FLIGHTS"* or refunded.

* words in red added by convair to luchtzak quote in order to correctly reflect Ryanair's statement.
.

Aren't they obliged to book their pax on other airlines if necessary?

They are not.

[Passenger]

Ryanair must rebook on other airlines when they cannot offer a rerouting themselves.

EU-Regulation 261/2004 is consumer protection legislation. So if there is any doubt, the benefit of the doubt must go to the consumers. And me thinks there can be little doubt in this official clarification by the European Commission, in their Interpretative Guideline (15/06/2016):

When passengers are offered the option of continuation or re-routing of a journey, this must be ‘under comparable transport conditions’. Whether transport conditions are comparable can depend on a number of factors and must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the circumstances, the following good practices are recommended:

- if possible, passengers should not be downgraded to transport facilities of a lower class compared with the one on the reservation (in the event of downgrading, the compensation provided for in Article 10 applies),

- re-routing should be offered at no additional cost to the passenger, even where passengers are re-routed with another air carrier or on a different transport mode or in a higher class or at a higher fare than the one paid for the original service,

- reasonable efforts are to be made to avoid additional connections,

- when using another air carrier or an alternative mode of transport for the part of the journey not completed as planned, the total travel time should, if possible, be as reasonably close as possible to the scheduled travel time of the original journey in the same or higher class of carriage if necessary,

- if several flights are available with comparable timings, passengers having the right to re-routing should accept the offer of re-routing made by the carrier, including on those air carriers cooperating with the operating carrier.

Source - with language choice:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content ... 1)&from=EN

Once again: whan a flight is cancelled, consumer legislation applies. The above Guideline describes the conditions for a rerouting on other carriers, so it's obvious that airlines have to do this onto other carriers, when they can't reroute themselves. But Ryanair won't. They are not IATA and no part of an airline Alliance, so they don't have interline agreements. So a rerouting onto another carrier will be a costly business, specially when you have to do this for a few Thousand passengers. And we know how Ryanair thinks about indemnities from 261/2004: "we don't pay, unless we're ordered to do so by court".

[DIBO]

Ryanair said in his reply that ....no other sanctions will be imposed on them.

Is there anyone who still believes Lyanair, except some totally blind politicians??

With their strike, the trade unions & Ryanair staff cause a lot of damage

And R. management's unethical behavior and disrespect for (subcontracted) employees and for passengers the past decades, is no factor in the current conflicts??????

...cause a lot of damage to passengers.

can't really say I'm feeling sorry for them

And we know how Ryanair thinks about indemnities....

and about all the other legal and moral obligations to their staff and passengers...

[Passenger]

All cabin crew, all cockpit crew and all trade union delegates know that Ryanair won't assist the passengers when the rerouting they need, doens't please Ryanair. All cabin crew, all cockpit and all trade unions know that Ryanair won't pay additional costs that passengers have to make - example hotel costs when they are stranded in a foreign country. And all cabin crew, all cockpit crew and all trade union delegates know that Ryanair won't pay the legal indemnity. And they know that most passengers won't go to court (or even to a claim office) for 2 x 150 €.

To organize a full strike, despite knowing the above facts, the strikers surpass "...Ryanairs' management's unethical behavior and disrespect for (subcontracted) employees..." When you know that you will cause not unly unconvenience but also severe costs to third parties, you should look for other weapons in your battle with your employer. Refuse to sell scratch lottery cards. Refuse to sell meals/drinks. Refuse to charge for overweight Luggage and oversized hand luggage. Refuse to charge for "I forgot my boarding pass". When possible, accept passengers that arrive a few minutes after the one-hour gate-closed time. Hold a 15 minutes strike when all passengers are seated and engines are on. Load divertion fuel to be able to reach Cancun. Do your damnest to damage your airline, but please: leave the passengers out of it.

[nordikcam]

Today, a normally constituted passenger knows Ryanair's policy when he buys a ticket from this company: he will not be compensated in the event of a strike and the said company will not care about any costs incurred by the passenger if he does not fly with it ! This passenger knows that he will not necessarily be helped in case of rerouting and that he will not be referred to a traditional company. This passenger knows the incredible conditions of engagement of staff and knows he will fly in a livestock ( bétaillère ). This same passenger knows in the same way that this company sits on the European regulation. In short, this passenger knowingly knows what may happen to him! No ?

[convair]

...you should look for other weapons in your battle with your employer. Refuse to sell scratch lottery cards. Refuse to sell meals/drinks. Refuse to charge for overweight Luggage and oversized hand luggage. Refuse to charge for "I forgot my boarding pass". When possible, accept passengers that arrive a few minutes after the one-hour gate-closed time. Hold a 15 minutes strike when all passengers are seated and engines are on. Load divertion fuel to be able to reach Cancun. Do your damnest to damage your airline, but please: leave the passengers out of it.

The problem is that not respecting the employer's instructions when you work is a fault, whereas being on strike is a right.

Today, a normally constituted passenger knows Ryanair's policy when he buys a ticket from this company: he will not be compensated in the event of a strike and the said company will not care about any costs incurred by the passenger if he does not fly with it ! This passenger knows that he will not necessarily be helped in case of rerouting and that he will not be referred to a traditional company. This passenger knows the incredible conditions of engagement of staff and knows he will fly in a livestock ( bétaillère ). This same passenger knows in the same way that this company sits on the European regulation. In short, this passenger knowingly knows what may happen to him! No ?

I understand what you mean: to a certain extent, the pax are accomplices of Ryanair in its refusal to abide by the laws.

And they know that most passengers won't go to court (or even to a claim office) for 2 x 150 €.

But that's the pax' fault; the employees on strike cannot be made (even morally) guilty for that. I guarantee you that, if that happened to me, I would sue Ryanair.

Anyway, as I said before, Ryanair deserves what it has been looking for and the employees had no choice in this case, since even the EU and the governments are not able to make them abide by the laws.

By principle I'm against strikes whenever you can avoid it, but you have to admit here that too much is "te veel".

[Passenger]

Today, a normally constituted passenger knows Ryanair's policy when he buys a ticket from this company: he will not be compensated in the event of a strike and the said company will not care about any costs incurred by the passenger if he does not fly with it ! This passenger knows that he will not necessarily be helped in case of rerouting and that he will not be referred to a traditional company. This passenger knows the incredible conditions of engagement of staff and knows he will fly in a livestock ( bétaillère ). This same passenger knows in the same way that this company sits on the European regulation. In short, this passenger knowingly knows what may happen to him! No ?

No, passengers don't. They know they have to be extremely careful during the booking process (example: "we'll have to pay a fine for a typo error, even when it's just one letter"). They know they won't be allowed when they are one minute too late. They know they will have to pay a fine when they don't follow the Ryanair rules for online check-in, for hand luggage, for checked luggage.

But regarding the flight itself, they regard Ryanair as a reliable and extremely punctual airline. And when something goes wrong, they expect at least that Ryanair will get them to their end destination.

The average passenger, no matter what airline he has booked, expects that all European airlines respect the basic legislation. Ryanair passengers indeed assume that Ryanair won't pay the EU-indemnity (150-600). But they also know that claim bureaus will then do that for them at a fee of 30%.

On 7th July, The Guardian called them "the reliable bastards": they're mean, but finally you can rely on them. The pilots rosters issue (Sept 2017) and the ongoing strike issues are making the airline "unreliable bastards". Commercially, that's the worst that could happen to them.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... e-bastards

[SN501]

All cabin crew, all cockpit crew and all trade union delegates know that Ryanair won't assist the passengers when the rerouting they need, doens't please Ryanair. All cabin crew, all cockpit and all trade unions know that Ryanair won't pay additional costs that passengers have to make - example hotel costs when they are stranded in a foreign country. And all cabin crew, all cockpit crew and all trade union delegates know that Ryanair won't pay the legal indemnity. And they know that most passengers won't go to court (or even to a claim office) for 2 x 150 €.

To organize a full strike, despite knowing the above facts, the strikers surpass "...Ryanairs' management's unethical behavior and disrespect for (subcontracted) employees..." When you know that you will cause not unly unconvenience but also severe costs to third parties, you should look for other weapons in your battle with your employer. Refuse to sell scratch lottery cards. Refuse to sell meals/drinks. Refuse to charge for overweight Luggage and oversized hand luggage. Refuse to charge for "I forgot my boarding pass". When possible, accept passengers that arrive a few minutes after the one-hour gate-closed time. Hold a 15 minutes strike when all passengers are seated and engines are on. Load divertion fuel to be able to reach Cancun. Do your damnest to damage your airline, but please: leave the passengers out of it.

Maybe I fail to understand, but it seems you suggest that the crew shouldn't go on strike because their management doesn't respect the EU legislation helping passengers in case of disruption?

[Passenger]

Maybe I fail to understand, but it seems you suggest that the crew shouldn't go on strike because their management doesn't respect the EU legislation helping passengers in case of disruption?

Almost correct. Not because management doens't respect legislation but because the crew knows that passengers will suffer financially. Hence I said: do other things that hurt the airline, but don't hurt passengers.

[convair]

Maybe I fail to understand, but it seems you suggest that the crew shouldn't go on strike because their management doesn't respect the EU legislation helping passengers in case of disruption?

Almost correct. Not because management doens't respect legislation but because the crew knows that passengers will suffer financially. Hence I said: do other things that hurt the airline, but don't hurt passengers.

If the strikes don't "work", what do you think "your" little actions would bring? They would be considered ridiculous by MOL. The scratch lottery cards bring peanuts in comparison with the loss caused by the strikes.

[KriVa]

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, since you seem to skirt quite handily around the question each and every time: what would your alternative be? Do you really think a strike is the first action in the toolbox of the unions and the crew? They haven’t tried anything else, they haven’t tried to sit around the table and discuss things, they haven’t tried to reason and they haven’t threatened to strike. Is that really the way you see things? A strike is a last resort, a last option. At a certain point, all other options are depleted and all that rests is a strike.
I know you won’t answer my question, but I’ll ask it again: what is your alternative? What is your answer that will make management listen, but will not inconvenience the passengers in any way?

[sean1982]

Maybe I fail to understand, but it seems you suggest that the crew shouldn't go on strike because their management doesn't respect the EU legislation helping passengers in case of disruption?

Almost correct. Not because management doens't respect legislation but because the crew knows that passengers will suffer financially. Hence I said: do other things that hurt the airline, but don't hurt passengers.

Knowingly breaching your contract is reason for immediate discharge, going on strike is a right.

Mods, can we stop this fool posting these constant nonsense please?? quite tiresome to read every single day in every single topic. The joy of reading this forum is loooong gone

[jan_olieslagers]

The joy of reading this forum is loooong gone

You have every freedom to quit.

[jan_olieslagers]

Play the ball or play the player?

And, err, if "real life" is the point, on an "aviation" forum, whom of them twain has ever been at the controls of an aircraft? Is that not the ultimate point of "real life" "aviation"?

Above all, I stand by my earlier word: none should complain this forum isn't fun to read, because there is no obligation. SM/bondage is not among the forum's mission goals, AFAIK