Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
Oct 13th 2005 | 7:43 am
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
By Jenny Booth
The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
of blind people off one of its aircraft.
Nine blind or partially-sighted passengers bound for Italy were in
their seats waiting for take-off at Stansted airport when the pilot
told them that they would have to disembark.
He told them that Ryanair's safety policy allows no more than four
"disabled" people on any one flight. The flight had its quota of
disabled passengers, he said, so they would have to catch another
plane.
One of the nine passengers claims that she telephoned the airline
months in advance to ensure that there would be no problem, but a
Ryanair spokesman insisted today that no advance notification had been
given. The incident happened several weeks ago.
Now the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) says that it is
considering taking legal action against Ryanair.
"Apparently the pilot asked one of the group how they would manage if
the aircraft filled with smoke," said an RNIB spokesman.
"But we would point out that blind people are used to being in an
environment where they cannot see and would therefore probably have
been able to find their way around the aircraft more easily than
sighted people."
The RNIB said that it had received a number of complaints about the way
Ryanair dealt with passengers with sight difficulties. "We have had
eight complaints about them during the past couple of years - and we
can find no record of any complaints about any other airlines.
"We have not taken legal action against them at this stage. The main
problem is that the Disability Discrimination Act does not cover the
treatment of disabled people on trains, planes and buses etc. It was
basically badly drafted. We are campaigning for that loophole to be
closed - and we hope that it will be before too long.
"But we are considering legal action against Ryanair on behalf of
someone who has had problems with Ryanair's online booking system.
The system appears to discriminate against disabled people by not
allowing them to book online and therefore qualify for discounts."
Ryanair offered its sympathies to the passengers involved in the
incident and a spokeswoman said they had been victims of an
"unfortunate situation".
But the airline said that its policy on disabled passengers was in line
with other airlines and had been agreed with disability rights groups.
Pilots had to be sure that passengers could leave a plane quickly in an
emergency.
"Safety has to be Ryanair's number-one priority," the spokeswoman said.
"We apologise to these passengers, but at the end of the day, they did
not inform as they are required to do of their disability at the time
of booking."
The nine visually impaired passengers were part of a group of 12 people
from Norfolk who were travelling to Italy for a holiday. Beryl Barton,
from Norwich, who is in her mid-60s, was travelling with her husband
Jim, 58, who is almost completely blind.
She said: "We couldn't understand it. They said they already had four
disabled people on the plane and told us 'we have got to take the
whole group off'. It was very humiliating."
She said the party had to wait at the airport in sweltering heat until
alternative flights became available. Some of the party flew out that
evening and the rest flew out the next morning. "We were made to feel
like second class citizens. I will never fly with Ryanair again."
Dermot Jewell of the Consumers Association said that the Ryanair policy
was "extraordinary".
"It diminishes the rights of the passenger, particularly when
passengers were not ever advised that there was a potential for this to
happen," he said. "It creates a very serious problem in relation to the
opportunity or the lack of opportunity for the disabled to travel."
By Jenny Booth
The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
of blind people off one of its aircraft.
Nine blind or partially-sighted passengers bound for Italy were in
their seats waiting for take-off at Stansted airport when the pilot
told them that they would have to disembark.
He told them that Ryanair's safety policy allows no more than four
"disabled" people on any one flight. The flight had its quota of
disabled passengers, he said, so they would have to catch another
plane.
One of the nine passengers claims that she telephoned the airline
months in advance to ensure that there would be no problem, but a
Ryanair spokesman insisted today that no advance notification had been
given. The incident happened several weeks ago.
Now the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) says that it is
considering taking legal action against Ryanair.
"Apparently the pilot asked one of the group how they would manage if
the aircraft filled with smoke," said an RNIB spokesman.
"But we would point out that blind people are used to being in an
environment where they cannot see and would therefore probably have
been able to find their way around the aircraft more easily than
sighted people."
The RNIB said that it had received a number of complaints about the way
Ryanair dealt with passengers with sight difficulties. "We have had
eight complaints about them during the past couple of years - and we
can find no record of any complaints about any other airlines.
"We have not taken legal action against them at this stage. The main
problem is that the Disability Discrimination Act does not cover the
treatment of disabled people on trains, planes and buses etc. It was
basically badly drafted. We are campaigning for that loophole to be
closed - and we hope that it will be before too long.
"But we are considering legal action against Ryanair on behalf of
someone who has had problems with Ryanair's online booking system.
The system appears to discriminate against disabled people by not
allowing them to book online and therefore qualify for discounts."
Ryanair offered its sympathies to the passengers involved in the
incident and a spokeswoman said they had been victims of an
"unfortunate situation".
But the airline said that its policy on disabled passengers was in line
with other airlines and had been agreed with disability rights groups.
Pilots had to be sure that passengers could leave a plane quickly in an
emergency.
"Safety has to be Ryanair's number-one priority," the spokeswoman said.
"We apologise to these passengers, but at the end of the day, they did
not inform as they are required to do of their disability at the time
of booking."
The nine visually impaired passengers were part of a group of 12 people
from Norfolk who were travelling to Italy for a holiday. Beryl Barton,
from Norwich, who is in her mid-60s, was travelling with her husband
Jim, 58, who is almost completely blind.
She said: "We couldn't understand it. They said they already had four
disabled people on the plane and told us 'we have got to take the
whole group off'. It was very humiliating."
She said the party had to wait at the airport in sweltering heat until
alternative flights became available. Some of the party flew out that
evening and the rest flew out the next morning. "We were made to feel
like second class citizens. I will never fly with Ryanair again."
Dermot Jewell of the Consumers Association said that the Ryanair policy
was "extraordinary".
"It diminishes the rights of the passenger, particularly when
passengers were not ever advised that there was a potential for this to
happen," he said. "It creates a very serious problem in relation to the
opportunity or the lack of opportunity for the disabled to travel."
Oct 13th 2005 | 10:44 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
> The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
> of blind people off one of its aircraft.
Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
hifi instead.
/M
> of blind people off one of its aircraft.
Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
hifi instead.
/M
Oct 13th 2005 | 7:17 pm
#3
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
MATTI schrieb:
>
> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>
> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
> hifi instead.
Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
are as important as seeing.
BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
could not leave the plane fast enough? So I think the regulation makes
sense.
Ulli
>
> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>
> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
> hifi instead.
Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
are as important as seeing.
BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
could not leave the plane fast enough? So I think the regulation makes
sense.
Ulli
Oct 13th 2005 | 9:39 pm
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> MATTI schrieb:
>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
>> hifi instead.
> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
> are as important as seeing.
> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
> could not leave the plane fast enough?
Thats what flight attendants are for
> So I think the regulation makes
> sense.
So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
out of your way.
How very kind of you.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
news:[email protected]...
> MATTI schrieb:
>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
>> hifi instead.
> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
> are as important as seeing.
> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
> could not leave the plane fast enough?
Thats what flight attendants are for
> So I think the regulation makes
> sense.
So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
out of your way.
How very kind of you.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Oct 13th 2005 | 9:44 pm
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith W"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> MATTI schrieb:
>>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
>>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
>>> hifi instead.
>> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
>> are as important as seeing.
>> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
>> could not leave the plane fast enough?
>Thats what flight attendants are for
>> So I think the regulation makes
>> sense.
>So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
>out of your way.
>How very kind of you.
KLM thinks so too.
--
Martin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> MATTI schrieb:
>>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
>>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
>>> hifi instead.
>> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
>> are as important as seeing.
>> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
>> could not leave the plane fast enough?
>Thats what flight attendants are for
>> So I think the regulation makes
>> sense.
>So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
>out of your way.
>How very kind of you.
KLM thinks so too.
--
Martin
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:13 am
#6
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith W"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> MATTI schrieb:
>>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
>>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
>>> hifi instead.
>> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
>> are as important as seeing.
>> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
>> could not leave the plane fast enough?
>Thats what flight attendants are for
Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
>> So I think the regulation makes
>> sense.
>So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
>out of your way.
>How very kind of you.
>Keith
I think it is inspiring how people can overcome their difficulties.
There is absolutely no reason why disabled people should stay at home.
I remember years ago having a surprise meeting with a blind friend in
Blackpool who was on a coach trip to see the lights.
I was amazed at the very idea. However, when I thought about it, I
recalled that very few blind people are totally in the dark. So they
should be able to see the colours. As someone else said, there are
also the smells, food, laughter, companionship etc on a trip.
So I'm all for disabled people taking part in everything they are
capable of doing.
Having said that, some disabled people could be more aware of how
they impose their requirements on other people. Frequently they have
no choice but it can be a moot point whose rights take precedence.
When I was in college, I went on a holiday to Switzerland with a
group. We were in accomodation with 4 to a room. In our room was a
lad who had difficulty walking. He could stand and walk a little if
you pulled him upright and got him balanced but he couldn't do this
for himself and spent much of the time in a wheel chair. We weren't
informed of his disability beforehand.
He clearly had overestimated his own capabilities and oversold himself
to the trip organiser. Sadly this only became clear to him as the
holiday advanced. In the event we had to spend the two weeks
looking after him.
Being a naturally selfish bugger, I was furious at the time that I
had these responsibilities thrust upon me. I reasoned that I had paid
the same as everyone else for my holiday but I was not free to do as I
pleased.
In retrospect I am really glad that I was given the opportunity to
help someone disabled. It opened my eyes to so many things and I
hope has since made me a more understanding person.
I believe we should all be prepared to inconvenience ourselves a
little to help less able people. It really doesn't take much. However
I also appreciate how practically difficult some simple situations can
become and how one's evaluation of safety changes when there is a
disabled person involved.
Derek
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> MATTI schrieb:
>>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a group
>>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a new
>>> hifi instead.
>> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
>> are as important as seeing.
>> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
>> could not leave the plane fast enough?
>Thats what flight attendants are for
Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
>> So I think the regulation makes
>> sense.
>So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
>out of your way.
>How very kind of you.
>Keith
I think it is inspiring how people can overcome their difficulties.
There is absolutely no reason why disabled people should stay at home.
I remember years ago having a surprise meeting with a blind friend in
Blackpool who was on a coach trip to see the lights.
I was amazed at the very idea. However, when I thought about it, I
recalled that very few blind people are totally in the dark. So they
should be able to see the colours. As someone else said, there are
also the smells, food, laughter, companionship etc on a trip.
So I'm all for disabled people taking part in everything they are
capable of doing.
Having said that, some disabled people could be more aware of how
they impose their requirements on other people. Frequently they have
no choice but it can be a moot point whose rights take precedence.
When I was in college, I went on a holiday to Switzerland with a
group. We were in accomodation with 4 to a room. In our room was a
lad who had difficulty walking. He could stand and walk a little if
you pulled him upright and got him balanced but he couldn't do this
for himself and spent much of the time in a wheel chair. We weren't
informed of his disability beforehand.
He clearly had overestimated his own capabilities and oversold himself
to the trip organiser. Sadly this only became clear to him as the
holiday advanced. In the event we had to spend the two weeks
looking after him.
Being a naturally selfish bugger, I was furious at the time that I
had these responsibilities thrust upon me. I reasoned that I had paid
the same as everyone else for my holiday but I was not free to do as I
pleased.
In retrospect I am really glad that I was given the opportunity to
help someone disabled. It opened my eyes to so many things and I
hope has since made me a more understanding person.
I believe we should all be prepared to inconvenience ourselves a
little to help less able people. It really doesn't take much. However
I also appreciate how practically difficult some simple situations can
become and how one's evaluation of safety changes when there is a
disabled person involved.
Derek
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:36 am
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
Derek McBryde wrote:
> >> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
> >> could not leave the plane fast enough?> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith
> >
> >Thats what flight attendants are for
> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
> passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
> them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
An excellent reason to limit the number of small children on aeroplanes
to 4!
efnlic
> >> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
> >> could not leave the plane fast enough?> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith
> >
> >Thats what flight attendants are for
> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
> passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
> them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
An excellent reason to limit the number of small children on aeroplanes
to 4!
efnlic
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:38 am
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
Derek McBryde <[email protected]> writes:
> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
> passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
> them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
Does Ryanair also have a quota on the acceptable number of small
children it will carry? Or a combined quota on them and disabled
persons?
Des
> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
> passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
> them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
Does Ryanair also have a quota on the acceptable number of small
children it will carry? Or a combined quota on them and disabled
persons?
Des
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:39 am
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
"Derek McBryde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> MATTI schrieb:
>>>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a
>>>> > group
>>>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>>>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a
>>>> new
>>>> hifi instead.
>>> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
>>> are as important as seeing.
>>> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
>>> could not leave the plane fast enough?
>>Thats what flight attendants are for
> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
> passengers.
Including those with disabilities
> What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
> them?
Applying the Ryanair logic small children should be banned
as well. In real life they have to prioritise
> Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
>>> So I think the regulation makes
>>> sense.
>>So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
>>out of your way.
>>How very kind of you.
>>Keith
> I think it is inspiring how people can overcome their difficulties.
> There is absolutely no reason why disabled people should stay at home.
There is if public carriers refuse them passage and that is the
issue here.
> I remember years ago having a surprise meeting with a blind friend in
> Blackpool who was on a coach trip to see the lights.
> I was amazed at the very idea. However, when I thought about it, I
> recalled that very few blind people are totally in the dark. So they
> should be able to see the colours. As someone else said, there are
> also the smells, food, laughter, companionship etc on a trip.
> So I'm all for disabled people taking part in everything they are
> capable of doing.
OK
> Having said that, some disabled people could be more aware of how
> they impose their requirements on other people. Frequently they have
> no choice but it can be a moot point whose rights take precedence.
Indeed
> When I was in college, I went on a holiday to Switzerland with a
> group. We were in accomodation with 4 to a room. In our room was a
> lad who had difficulty walking. He could stand and walk a little if
> you pulled him upright and got him balanced but he couldn't do this
> for himself and spent much of the time in a wheel chair. We weren't
> informed of his disability beforehand.
Why should you be - you werent the organiser. He/she should have
been informed however.
> He clearly had overestimated his own capabilities and oversold himself
> to the trip organiser. Sadly this only became clear to him as the
> holiday advanced. In the event we had to spend the two weeks
> looking after him.
You should have raised this with the group organizer and told
him/her to take charge or at least organise a rota.
> Being a naturally selfish bugger, I was furious at the time that I
> had these responsibilities thrust upon me. I reasoned that I had paid
> the same as everyone else for my holiday but I was not free to do as I
> pleased.
> In retrospect I am really glad that I was given the opportunity to
> help someone disabled. It opened my eyes to so many things and I
> hope has since made me a more understanding person.
> I believe we should all be prepared to inconvenience ourselves a
> little to help less able people. It really doesn't take much. However
> I also appreciate how practically difficult some simple situations can
> become and how one's evaluation of safety changes when there is a
> disabled person involved.
All very true but there is a European code of conduct for airline
companies when dealing with the disabled and its one that
Ryanair have flagrantly breached on several occasions.
If they want to fly the routes they should be forced to stick to
the rules.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> MATTI schrieb:
>>>> > The budget airline Ryanair may face legal action after removing a
>>>> > group
>>>> > of blind people off one of its aircraft.
>>>> Why blind go holiday, can not see anything! Save the money and buy a
>>>> new
>>>> hifi instead.
>>> Seeing is not everything a trip is about. Tasting, smelling and hearing
>>> are as important as seeing.
>>> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
>>> could not leave the plane fast enough?
>>Thats what flight attendants are for
> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
> passengers.
Including those with disabilities
> What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
> them?
Applying the Ryanair logic small children should be banned
as well. In real life they have to prioritise
> Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
>>> So I think the regulation makes
>>> sense.
>>So you think anybody who is disabled should stay at home
>>out of your way.
>>How very kind of you.
>>Keith
> I think it is inspiring how people can overcome their difficulties.
> There is absolutely no reason why disabled people should stay at home.
There is if public carriers refuse them passage and that is the
issue here.
> I remember years ago having a surprise meeting with a blind friend in
> Blackpool who was on a coach trip to see the lights.
> I was amazed at the very idea. However, when I thought about it, I
> recalled that very few blind people are totally in the dark. So they
> should be able to see the colours. As someone else said, there are
> also the smells, food, laughter, companionship etc on a trip.
> So I'm all for disabled people taking part in everything they are
> capable of doing.
OK
> Having said that, some disabled people could be more aware of how
> they impose their requirements on other people. Frequently they have
> no choice but it can be a moot point whose rights take precedence.
Indeed
> When I was in college, I went on a holiday to Switzerland with a
> group. We were in accomodation with 4 to a room. In our room was a
> lad who had difficulty walking. He could stand and walk a little if
> you pulled him upright and got him balanced but he couldn't do this
> for himself and spent much of the time in a wheel chair. We weren't
> informed of his disability beforehand.
Why should you be - you werent the organiser. He/she should have
been informed however.
> He clearly had overestimated his own capabilities and oversold himself
> to the trip organiser. Sadly this only became clear to him as the
> holiday advanced. In the event we had to spend the two weeks
> looking after him.
You should have raised this with the group organizer and told
him/her to take charge or at least organise a rota.
> Being a naturally selfish bugger, I was furious at the time that I
> had these responsibilities thrust upon me. I reasoned that I had paid
> the same as everyone else for my holiday but I was not free to do as I
> pleased.
> In retrospect I am really glad that I was given the opportunity to
> help someone disabled. It opened my eyes to so many things and I
> hope has since made me a more understanding person.
> I believe we should all be prepared to inconvenience ourselves a
> little to help less able people. It really doesn't take much. However
> I also appreciate how practically difficult some simple situations can
> become and how one's evaluation of safety changes when there is a
> disabled person involved.
All very true but there is a European code of conduct for airline
companies when dealing with the disabled and its one that
Ryanair have flagrantly breached on several occasions.
If they want to fly the routes they should be forced to stick to
the rules.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:42 am
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
On 14 Oct 2005 14:38:02 +0100, Des Small <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Derek McBryde <[email protected]> writes:
>> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
>> passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
>> them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
>Does Ryanair also have a quota on the acceptable number of small
>children it will carry? Or a combined quota on them and disabled
>persons?
Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
to fly you back to Europe.
--
Martin
wrote:
>Derek McBryde <[email protected]> writes:
>> Flight attendants are for the safety and comfort of all the
>> passengers. What if someone else (perhaps with a small child) needed
>> them? Totally hypothetical situation, of course.
>Does Ryanair also have a quota on the acceptable number of small
>children it will carry? Or a combined quota on them and disabled
>persons?
Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
to fly you back to Europe.
--
Martin
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:46 am
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
Hans-Ulrich Steingrobe wrote:
> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
> could not leave the plane fast enough? So I think the regulation makes
> sense.
There are all sorts of reasons why some people would be slower than
others at leaving an aircraft in an accident. They might be elderly,
drunk, panicky, have taken a sleeping tablet, dragging a couple of kids
along with them.....or injured during the accident. None of these
would have drawn the attention of the airline to their condition before
the flight.
If the cabin was filled with smoke, a sighted persone would probably be
slower to get out than a blind person, so perhaps only 4 sighted people
should be allowed on board - that would make about as much sense!
efnlic
> BUT: What if there would have been an accident and the blind people
> could not leave the plane fast enough? So I think the regulation makes
> sense.
There are all sorts of reasons why some people would be slower than
others at leaving an aircraft in an accident. They might be elderly,
drunk, panicky, have taken a sleeping tablet, dragging a couple of kids
along with them.....or injured during the accident. None of these
would have drawn the attention of the airline to their condition before
the flight.
If the cabin was filled with smoke, a sighted persone would probably be
slower to get out than a blind person, so perhaps only 4 sighted people
should be allowed on board - that would make about as much sense!
efnlic
Oct 14th 2005 | 1:54 am
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
"Derek McBryde" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> I believe we should all be prepared to inconvenience ourselves a
> little to help less able people. It really doesn't take much. However
> I also appreciate how practically difficult some simple situations can
> become and how one's evaluation of safety changes when there is a
> disabled person involved.
> Derek
As a followup the following facts have become clear
1) Ryanair were informed that the passengers concerned
were blind when the booking was made
2) Each blind person and a fully or partially sighted guide
there were only 3 totally blind pax in the group of 9
3) The reason they were not allowed to fly was that Ryanair
have an arbitrary rule that says only 4 disabled pax
per flight and there were already 3 on board, something
totally beyond the control of the people who werent allowed
on the airplane. European rules only state that the number of
disable pax should not exceed those who are fully mobile.
4) All of the passengers were fully mobile with no other
disabilities than their sight problems.
5) The Royal National Institute for the Blind said it had received
eight complaints about Ryanair but none about any other airline.
A spokesman said RNIB lawyers were considering legal action.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:39:54 +0100, "Keith W"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> I believe we should all be prepared to inconvenience ourselves a
> little to help less able people. It really doesn't take much. However
> I also appreciate how practically difficult some simple situations can
> become and how one's evaluation of safety changes when there is a
> disabled person involved.
> Derek
As a followup the following facts have become clear
1) Ryanair were informed that the passengers concerned
were blind when the booking was made
2) Each blind person and a fully or partially sighted guide
there were only 3 totally blind pax in the group of 9
3) The reason they were not allowed to fly was that Ryanair
have an arbitrary rule that says only 4 disabled pax
per flight and there were already 3 on board, something
totally beyond the control of the people who werent allowed
on the airplane. European rules only state that the number of
disable pax should not exceed those who are fully mobile.
4) All of the passengers were fully mobile with no other
disabilities than their sight problems.
5) The Royal National Institute for the Blind said it had received
eight complaints about Ryanair but none about any other airline.
A spokesman said RNIB lawyers were considering legal action.
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Oct 14th 2005 | 2:16 am
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
Martin wrote:
> Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
> to fly you back to Europe.
> --
That actually might make some sense - ISTR that a thrombosis is a
reasonably common result of a broken leg, and being stuck in the middle
of the Atlantic would not be ideal. A 'waiting period' befire flying
might be advisable.
efnlic
> Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
> to fly you back to Europe.
> --
That actually might make some sense - ISTR that a thrombosis is a
reasonably common result of a broken leg, and being stuck in the middle
of the Atlantic would not be ideal. A 'waiting period' befire flying
might be advisable.
efnlic
Oct 14th 2005 | 2:35 am
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
On 14 Oct 2005 07:16:21 -0700, "efnlic" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Martin wrote:
>> Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
>> to fly you back to Europe.
>> --
>That actually might make some sense - ISTR that a thrombosis is a
>reasonably common result of a broken leg,
Reasonably common?
DVT is not that rare amongst KLM passengers, thanks to the lack of leg
room.
> and being stuck in the middle
>of the Atlantic would not be ideal. A 'waiting period' befire flying
>might be advisable.
Normally a doctor decides whether or not a passenger is in a condition
to fly not the airline. For KLM it's a matter of principle not to take
disabled passengers.
--
Martin
>Martin wrote:
>> Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
>> to fly you back to Europe.
>> --
>That actually might make some sense - ISTR that a thrombosis is a
>reasonably common result of a broken leg,
Reasonably common?
DVT is not that rare amongst KLM passengers, thanks to the lack of leg
room.
> and being stuck in the middle
>of the Atlantic would not be ideal. A 'waiting period' befire flying
>might be advisable.
Normally a doctor decides whether or not a passenger is in a condition
to fly not the airline. For KLM it's a matter of principle not to take
disabled passengers.
--
Martin
Oct 14th 2005 | 3:24 am
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Ryanair apology for ejecting blind group
"Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On 14 Oct 2005 07:16:21 -0700, "efnlic" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Martin wrote:
>>> Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
>>> to fly you back to Europe.
>>> --
>>That actually might make some sense - ISTR that a thrombosis is a
>>reasonably common result of a broken leg,
> Reasonably common?
> DVT is not that rare amongst KLM passengers, thanks to the lack of leg
> room.
>> and being stuck in the middle
>>of the Atlantic would not be ideal. A 'waiting period' befire flying
>>might be advisable.
> Normally a doctor decides whether or not a passenger is in a condition
> to fly not the airline. For KLM it's a matter of principle not to take
> disabled passengers.
They claim otherwise on their website
http://www.klm.com/jp_en/index.jsp
I take it you are referring to a specific case , could you post
more details please ?
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
news:[email protected]...
> On 14 Oct 2005 07:16:21 -0700, "efnlic" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Martin wrote:
>>> Take into account that if you break a leg in the USA KLM will refuse
>>> to fly you back to Europe.
>>> --
>>That actually might make some sense - ISTR that a thrombosis is a
>>reasonably common result of a broken leg,
> Reasonably common?
> DVT is not that rare amongst KLM passengers, thanks to the lack of leg
> room.
>> and being stuck in the middle
>>of the Atlantic would not be ideal. A 'waiting period' befire flying
>>might be advisable.
> Normally a doctor decides whether or not a passenger is in a condition
> to fly not the airline. For KLM it's a matter of principle not to take
> disabled passengers.
They claim otherwise on their website
http://www.klm.com/jp_en/index.jsp
I take it you are referring to a specific case , could you post
more details please ?
Keith
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
