ACM publishes decision on complaints of Ryanair about Schiphol's 2018 tariffs and conditions
Following complaints filed by Ryanair, the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets (ACM) has assessed whether the Royal Schiphol Group N.V., when setting the tariffs and conditions for Amsterdam Airport Schiphol that came into force on 1 April 2018, complied with the relevant rules.
ACM has ruled that Ryanair's complaints about Schiphol's tariffs and conditions for 2018 are unfounded.
Setting tariffs and conditions
On 31 October 2017, Schiphol set the tariffs and conditions that would come into force on 1 April 2018. Users of the airport, such as airlines, were given the opportunity to file complaints with ACM about these tariffs and conditions.
According to Ryanair, Schiphol consulted insufficiently with airlines, and insufficiently took into account Ryanair's opinion. Ryanair’s complaint was primarily about the consultation on the quality of Schiphol's security service and about the projections of the efficiency gains.
According to ACM, it has not been established that Schiphol had consulted its users insufficiently, or that it had taken Ryanair's opinion into account insufficiently.
Ryanair considers Schiphol's "Security Service charge” (SSC) not to be reasonable.
In its assessment of the reasonability of the SSC charge, ACM used a benchmark of other airports and the ratio between cost prices and tariffs, among other factors. The assessment did not show that the SSC tariff is unreasonable.
Finally, Ryanair argued that Schiphol should use separate tariffs for specific services, so that only airlines that make use of such services would have to pay for them.
ACM has assessed this with regard to the so-called Privium service, as well as the security scan for checked baggage. Regarding Privium services, passengers who do not make use of them do not have to pay for them because these services are not considered regulated aviation-related activities. In regard to the security scan, ACM does not consider the current tariff to be unreasonable, and does not find the SSC to be discriminatory.