Aeromot
Superior Pilot

‘Zero-tolerance’: Why Ryanair is suing a passenger for €15,000
The budget airline has warned this will not be the last time it goes to court over unacceptable behaviour on its aircraft.

If I were running an airline, I'd have the flight attendants hand a printed card to every single passenger who boards a plane. On it, it would say:
As a passenger on this airplane, you are legally required to obey the instructions given to you by the flight attendants and the pilots.
If you do not obey the flight attendants' instructions while the airplane is still at the gate, this is what we will do:
If I were running an airline, I'd have the flight attendants hand a printed card to every single passenger who boards a plane. On it, it would say:
As a passenger on this airplane, you are legally required to obey the instructions given to you by the flight attendants and the pilots.
If you do not obey the flight attendants' instructions while the airplane is still at the gate, this is what we will do:
1. xxx
2. Have you removed from flight.
3. Ban you from ever flying on our airline again.
4. Communicate this information with other airlines, who might want to ban you from travel on their flights, too.
5. Sue in you in court for any costs we incurred as a result of your actions, plus our attorney's fees.
A reasonable estimate of the amount that we are likely to sue you for in an event such as this is $99,999.99.
If you do not obey the flight attendants' instructions while the airplane is still on the ground after having left the gate, this is what we will do:
1. xxx
2. Have you removed from flight.
3. Ban you from ever flying on our airline again.
4. Communicate this information with other airlines, who might want to ban you from travel on their flights, too.
5. Sue in you in court for any costs we incurred as a result of your actions, plus our attorney's fees.
A reasonable estimate of the amount that we are likely to sue you for in an event such as this is $99,999.99.
If you do not obey the flight attendants' instructions while the airplane is in the air, this is what we will do:
1. xxx
2. Have you removed from flight.
3. Ban you from ever flying on our airline again.
4. Communicate this information with other airlines, who might want to ban you from travel on their flights, too.
5. Sue in you in court for any costs we incurred as a result of your actions, plus our attorney's fees.
A reasonable estimate of the amount that we are likely to sue you for in an event such as this is $99,999.99.
I respectfully disagree, Brian. I firmly believe that every employee a customer/passenger comes into contact with, from the moment they step onto airport property, should have received comprehensive customer service training. The Disney approach to training comes to mind as a great example. If that training does not work, then let's try your idea ;-)
The word 'obey' seems overly strong, and I think it's misguided to give flight attendants, who should be in the service business, a different mindset than what they should be focused on.
It's probably no surprise that I enjoy flying, but I'd rather drive 8-10 hours to avoid it. My earliest memories of flying PSA, from around 10 years old, were extremely exciting. Airport staff and flight attendants were warm and welcoming. And I swear that the pilots would almost put children like myself in a headlock to check out the cool cockpit.
I find myself to be a rational person most of the time but a few of my encounters with rude employees and incidents that I've witnessed personally make me angry. Perhaps I'll share those stories another time, but probably not. Suffice it to say that, aside from the smoking and the occasional hijacking, flying used to be an enjoyable experience. ;-)
By law, flight attendants are in the safety business first and foremost. Service is secondary. And by law, passengers are required to obey their instructions under penalties of fines and/or imprisonment. Too many passengers today seem to have a sense of entitlement (often fueled by alcohol) which justifies their breaking that law, and in doing so, jeopardizing the lives and safety of hundreds of others. If their legal responsibility to obey that law and the consequences of breaking it were made clearer to all passengers, maybe we could deter more of that illegal and dangerous behavior.The word 'obey' seems overly strong, and I think it's misguided to give flight attendants, who should be in the service business, a different mindset than what they should be focused on.
By law, flight attendants are in the safety business first and foremost. Service is secondary. And by law, passengers are required to obey their instructions under penalties of fines and/or imprisonment. Too many passengers today seem to have a sense of entitlement (often fueled by alcohol) which justifies their breaking that law, and in doing so, jeopardizing the lives and safety of hundreds of others. If their legal responsibility to obey that law and the consequences of breaking it were made clearer to all passengers, maybe we could deter more of that illegal and dangerous behavior.
Better be very careful with #4.
Thanks for this post, I agree completely.
For every bad customer, it seems there are 5 bad employees. Flight attendants should always remember that they are in the service industry, smile more, and talk less IMO. Several times I've seen them be rude to
passengers for no reason. One decided to use the four letter word 7 times, in the span of about 20 seconds on a flight. That upset numerous other passengers, who then told her to stop cursing, so she went into a 40 second rant, swearing as much as possible.
Flight attendants prioritize safety and comfort, not enforcement. Again, I think Disneyesque training would go a long way. I am willing to bet that proper training could have prevented many in-flight incidents we have heard about, including those involving intoxicated or entitled passengers. I suspect my personal safety while flying is more at risk due to untrained staff than an entitled passenger or someone who has had too much to drink.By law, flight attendants are in the safety business first and foremost. Service is secondary.
Fortunately, I've never had a bad day - in public ;-), but if I did, I'd like to be allowed to move on from it. I hope for a society where order prevails, and kindness, gratitude, and courtesy spread like a pandemic. However, I believe there's a culture of punishment that often doesn't fit the crime. This might seem surprising, coming from someone who supports the death penalty and thinks it should be applied more widely.If a consortium of airlines decided to share this data, I believe that doing so could be done in a manner that was completely legal. Hell, very often the names of these idiots are posted in the news.
Again, safety comes first. Comfort and service are both lower priorities. And enforcement isn't their job at all; that job belongs to law enforcement personnel and the courts. But they do have the authority to detain and restrain those creating a safety hazard by refusing to obey them, and to turn those recalcitrants over to law enforcement on landing no matter what they're wearing.Flight attendants prioritize safety and comfort, not enforcement.
All I'll say, is it's a slippery slope.If a consortium of airlines decided to share this data, I believe that doing so could be done in a manner that was completely legal. Hell, very often the names of these idiots are posted in the news.
Ryanair should worry about their reputation more, and I'll bet this lawsuit hurts their business to an amount of money far in excess of a paltry $15300.
View attachment 14137