Ryan air to charge to use toilet

PolishBigSpender

notakid wrote: »

I don't think that they can cram more seats in the place, many flights I've been on have had empty rows of seats which you are unable to use, I was told this is due to the balancing of the plane when flying.

This is usually when the plane isn't full - there will be some gains in fuel economy by placing most of the weight near the centre of the plane. More environmentally friendly, too!

The staff need a toilet too, and I think many people with small children would resent paying to change a nappy so will do it on the seats. I wouldn't like to be the staff to clean up the aftermath.

Would they really want to shame themselves into the fact that they're too cheap to pay to change their baby's nappy in a toilet?

Its headlines, not real. If they really wanted to save costs with the Lavs they could half the number in use.

I wouldn't be surprised if the next move is to reduce the number on board - I've always wondered why they spend so much money taking so many toilets up, especially given the short length of many sectors.

lelasuzi

I`m fairly sure if they sell food they have to provide washing facilities. Its all a wind-up. Its just a publicity stunt.

WickedWolfie

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

The thing you fail to take into account is that they were discriminating against less able passengers with the wheelchair charges. With this proposed charge, they're discriminating against no-one - so the DDA simply wouldn't present a problem. If there was a case under the DDA, then any provider of toilets would be forced into providing free access to the disabled. This isn't the case.

I do love when armchair lawyers try and make out that they have the faintest understanding of the law.

What part of 'you do not have to fly Ryanair' do you not understand?

...and I love it when O'Leary's lick-spittle apologists try to hide the truth!

The Republic Of Ireland's Equal Status Act 2000, which came into operation in October 2000, is based on the principle that everyone has an equal right to participate in our society. People should not be denied access to services, facilities or amenities because of race, age, disability or membership of a traveller community – everyone should be seen as being of equal worth and entitlement. Each person should be treated on his or her own merits and not on the basis of a prejudice or stereotype.

"The Act provides comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in the delivery of goods and services, whether provided by the State or private sector – this will be of particular benefit to people from marginalized groups and those vulnerable to discrimination.

Under the Act, it is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, disability, race and membership of the traveller community in:

· the provision of goods, facilities and services available to the public generally"

I think that covers air travel nicely!!!

The concept of indirect discrimination (ie something which while not a direct discrimination impacts more upon one group than another) is a well established legal concept. Such charges would impact upon all of those who have medical conditions resulting in increased urination and/or defecation. As such they would be indirectly discriminated against.

Oh, and Ryanair may be registered in Ireland but it operates out of, and markets, its services in UK so I suspect the Uk courts would take a dim view of your assertion that it is wholly exempt from UK legislation. Directgov.uk states the following: "The Disability Discrimination Act gives disabled people important rights not to be discriminated against
-in accessing everyday goods and services" (looks very similar to the Irish law doesn't it!)

Yours an armchair lawyer who actually knows something, not an eastern european with an arrogant opinion and no factual basis!

PolishBigSpender

lelasuzi wrote: »

I`m fairly sure if they sell food they have to provide washing facilities. Its all a wind-up. Its just a publicity stunt.

Really?

So why are many food outlets in the UK allowed to operate without providing such facilities? For instance - Greggs, Pret a Manger, WH Smiths, Boots, countless independent cafes, roadside 'burger vans' and so on. Are all these breaking the law because they don't provide access to hand washing facilities? Don't be ridiculous!

Wickedwolfie wrote:

...and I love it when O'Leary's lick-spittle apologists try to hide the truth!

Oooh, this is fun...

The Republic Of Ireland's Equal Status Act 2000, which came into operation in October 2000, is based on the principle that everyone has an equal right to participate in our society. People should not be denied access to services, facilities or amenities because of race, age, disability or membership of a traveller community – everyone should be seen as being of equal worth and entitlement. Each person should be treated on his or her own merits and not on the basis of a prejudice or stereotype.

"The Act provides comprehensive legal protection against discrimination in the delivery of goods and services, whether provided by the State or private sector – this will be of particular benefit to people from marginalized groups and those vulnerable to discrimination.
Under the Act, it is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, disability, race and membership of the traveller community in:

· the provision of goods, facilities and services available to the public generally"

Looks similar to many anti-discrimination laws throughout Europe. But of course, you have completely missed the point that a 1 pound charge will apply to everyone *equally* - there is no discrimination where

Ryanair fell foul of the law because able bodied passengers were not required to pay for transport from security to the gate, whereas wheelchair bound passengers were required to. This was clearly discriminatory - although all they were doing was passing on the charge, they were found guilty.

Ryanair would NOT be discriminating against anyone if they applied a charge equally to everyone on the flight. Anyone with half an ounce of common sense can see that if a charge is applied to everyone equally, then there's no discrimination. If there was, why are charges to use disabled toilets widespread throughout the UK?

The concept of indirect discrimination (ie something which while not a direct discrimination impacts more upon one group than another) is a well established legal concept. Such charges would impact upon all of those who have medical conditions resulting in increased urination and/or defecation. As such they would be indirectly discriminated against.

A well established legal concept in which juristriction?

Of course, if it's proven that disabled passengers with increased urination/defecation needs are being indirectly discriminated against, then I'm sure Ryanair could require those passengers to provide proof of the disability in order to gain free access to the facilities.

However, any complaint could be on shaky legal ground given the apparent legality of charging for disabled toilet facilities in the UK, let alone Ireland.

Yours an armchair lawyer who actually knows something, not an eastern european with an arrogant opinion and no factual basis!

It would seem to be you that cannot use facts.

Your casual racism is also very amusing

Then again, there's probably a reason why Michael O'Leary can afford to have a personal chaffeur, while you are posting incorrect assumptions based on Google.

lisyloo

I don't like Michael O leary or RyanAir, but obviously I have to admit his product appeals to many.
But it's really quite simple.
If you don't like it, don't fly with Ryan Air.
It really is as simple as that.
I would probably chose an alternative holiday to flying with RyanAir if it was the only airline available, but there is no denying that people flock to the product he's selling.

Comparing train staions is not the same at all.
There is almost always an alternative to using a train staion loo.
If you've left it to the last minute of are travelling with a health issue then that is a personl choice you have made and you should not expect to be subsidised by others.

I've got no problem with the theory but I feel RyanAir is just too uncomfortable and too low quality in too many areas to travel with.

Surely this is jsut a choice isn't it??

Pollycat

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't like Michael O leary or RyanAir, but obviously I have to admit his product appeals to many.
But it's really quite simple.
If you don't like it, don't fly with Ryan Air.
It really is as simple as that.
I would probably chose an alternative holiday to flying with RyanAir if it was the only airline available, but there is no denying that people flock to the product he's selling.

Comparing train staions is not the same at all.
There is almost always an alternative to using a train staion loo.
If you've left it to the last minute of are travelling with a health issue then that is a personl choice you have made and you should not expect to be subsidised by others.

I've got no problem with the theory but I feel RyanAir is just too uncomfortable and too low quality in too many areas to travel with.

Surely this is jsut a choice isn't it??

Lisyloo
you're right, it is just a choice of whether you choose to fly with Ryanair or not - for whatever reason.

Unfortunately, many people book with Ryanair but don't read the T&Cs then complain about charges or want to book with Ryanair but try to impose another carrier's business model onto Ryanair because they prefer 'transparency of pricing'.

PolishBigSpender

Pollycat wrote: »

Lisyloo
you're right, it is just a choice of whether you choose to fly with Ryanair or not - for whatever reason.

Unfortunately, many people book with Ryanair but don't read the T&Cs then complain about charges or want to book with Ryanair but try to impose another carrier's business model onto Ryanair because they prefer 'transparency of pricing'.

The problem is that they don't want to pay for other carriers because other carriers are too expensive. So they essentially want Ryanair's headline prices with the transparency and ease of BA. Cloud cuckoo land, I feel.

Pollycat

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

The problem is that they don't want to pay for other carriers because other carriers are too expensive. So they essentially want Ryanair's headline prices with the transparency and ease of BA. Cloud cuckoo land, I feel.

PBS
my point exactly.

deegee999

Just got back from crete, had to use a thomsom flight, no other alternative from stanstead. Used ryanair to malta last october so had chance to compare them. Less legroom on first choice plane allocated seats, not good as all we got were oaps saying can we change we always have isle/window seats. food, same colour brochure as ryanair SAME prices only they appeared not to have any sarnies etc even though these were advertised never happened to me on ryanair. plane generally scruffy toilet dirty children allowed to jump about all over the place stewards not bothered. the newer ryanair fleet is twice as good as the thomsom fleet.

lelasuzi

PBS, Please dont say I`m ridiculous. There is no need to be rude. All the examples that you have shown are not "sit in and eat". I`m sure that years ago if you ate in a cafe or such you had to be provided with free handwashing facilities. I said maybe. I dont know about now. You talk a lot of sense but you can be so horrid when you reply to posts. Chill out. Its a forum on a message board.