Skip to main content

Ryanair : lève-toi et vole

Article tiré de metrofrance.com

Payer moins cher restant debout. Payer plus cher en allant aux toilettes. Voilà ce que compte proposer la compagnie aérienne Ryanair à ses clients.

Un avion de 
la flotte de la compagnie aérienne low cost irlandaise Ryanair.
Image: metrofrance.com

Un avion de la flotte de la compagnie aérienne low cost irlandaise Ryanair.
Photo : bigpresh/flickr.com
La compagnie aérienne low cost Ryanair est passée à l'acte. Après avoir abandonné l'idée d'une taxe sur les gros, elle confirme vouloir lancer des offres de vols debout et rendre l'accès aux toilettes payant. Pour environ 5 livres (6 euros), il sera possible de voyager à moindre prix sur les vols de la compagnie mais au sacrifice du confort. Un espace "zone debout" va être créé à l'arrière des 250 avions qui composent la flotte de Ryanair.
"Nous avons l'intention de supprimer les dix derniers rangs des appareils pour pouvoir y mettre des stations verticales. De la sorte, nous aurons 15 rangs assis et l'équivalent de 10 rangs debout", a expliqué Michael O'Leary, le directeur de la compagnie irlandaise, selon le quotidien britannique Daily Telegraph.
Un porte-parole de Ryanair a précisé que Boeing avait été consulté pour pratiquer ces modifications et installer des "sièges verticaux" où la personne reste debout tout en étant attachée comme le veulent les consignes de sécurité. Le prix de ce type de billet devrait varier entre 5 et 10 euros. Reste encore à pratiquer des tests de sécurité sur ces sièges verticaux, ce qui sera fait l'année prochaine mais qui laisse sceptique l'Organisation de l'aviation civile internationale.
Par ailleurs, il a annoncé qu'il allait désormais falloir débourser 1 livre (1,20 euros) pour avoir accès aux commodités des appareils sur les vols de moins d'une heure. L'objectif est d'encourager les passagers à prendre leurs précautions et à utiliser les toilettes des aéroports plutôt que ceux présents à bord des avions. Il faut donc s'attendre à voir apparaître des toilettes à ouverture déclenchée par l'insertion d'une pièce de monnaie dans les avions de la compagnie low cost.

******************************************************************************
D'autres idées pour Ryanair: (simplyflying.com)
The airline has launched a competition where anyone in Europe can suggest ideas by email to competition@ryanair.com on how RyanAir can make more money off their customers! The best idea wins €1,000.
Some of the wackiest ideas are already stated on RyanAir’s website:
  • Charging for toilet paper – with O’Leary’s face on it,
  • Charging €2.50 to read the safety cards,
  • Charging €1 to use oxygen masks,
  • Charging €25 to use the emergency exit,
  • Charging €50 for bikini clad Cabin Crew.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is "Input Processing"?

Input Processing (IP) was proposed by Bill VanPatten, Professor of Spanish and Second Language Acquisition from Michigan State University. Bill may be known to some of you from his podcast show Tea with BVP. He is one of those rare university academics who makes a specific effort to engage with practising teachers. IP was first proposed in a 1993 article (published with T. Cadierno in the Modern Language Journal) entitled "Input processing and second language acquisition: A role for instruction." My summary of it is based on an article "Input Processing and Processing Instruction: Definitions and Issues" (2013) by Hossein Hashemnezhad. IP is a little complicated to explain, but I'll do my best to summarise the key points before suggesting how it relates to other ways of looking at classroom language teaching. Is this actually any use to teachers? I apologise in advance for over-simplifying or misunderstanding. To paraphrase Dr Leonard McCoy from Star Trek &q

Pros and cons of pair and group work

Most teachers have made frequent use of pair and group work for many years, notably since the rise of communicative language teaching in the 1980s. Even before then it would have been common for pupils to work in pairs on simple role-play and dialogue tasks. So pair and group work is standard practice, if not universally supported by language teachers. It’s always worth evaluating, however, whether a practice works - whether, in this case, it helps students develop their proficiency. Pros Rod Ellis (2005) summarises the advantages of pair/group work (based on Jacobs, 1998) “1. The quantity of learner speech can increase. In teacher-fronted classrooms, the teacher typically speaks 80% of the time; in groupwork more students talk for more of the time. 2. The variety of speech acts can increase. In teacher-fronted classrooms, students are cast in a responsive role, but in groupwork they can perform a wide range of roles, including those involved in the negotiation of meaning. 3. There can

New MFL GCSE consultation

Updated on 7th April, with a few modifications to the original post written about a month earlier. ........................................................................... The DfE in England has recently published information about the proposed new GCSE exams, first teaching September 2023, first exams June 2025. There are two consultations going on, one regarding the subject content, and the other (much shorter) with respect to the assessment arrangements such as tiering.  The context is important here. DfE are worried about uptake in GCSE MFL, especially with their EBacc target of 90% uptake in mind. (This is highly unlikely to be achieved.) Therefore they would like an exam which makes the subject more attractive, both in terms of interesting content and accessibility (how easy it is thought to be). They are aware also of criticisms levelled at current papers that the exam is elitist, featuring too much subject matter which appeals to middle class students. Recall that MFL has be

An NCELP lesson resource analysed

NCELP (National Centre for Excellence for Language Pedagogy) is the body set up and financed by the DfE in England. based at the University of York and headed by Emma Marsden and Rachel Hawkes. It works through a number of hub secondary schools which, in turn, work with a small group of other schools. Their mission is, broadly speaking, to spread the research findings and principles as laid out in the Teaching Schools Council (TSC) Review of MFL Pedagogy from 2016. By sharing a selected body of research, considered relevant to secondary MFL in England, and creating schemes of work and lesson resources across the hub schools, they hope to spread so-called best practice around the country. As I write this, schemes of learning and lesson resources have been written up to the third term of Y8 for French, German and Spanish. I've been watching with interest as these resources have been built up and in general my view has been that the research resources are very useful and informative (