Every site that has been the source of criticism of Ryanair has been the subject of legal efforts by Ryanair to intimidate those controlling the site to remove contributions, or to prevent contributors from criticising Ryanair.
For an example of what this does to a site, have a look at this:
Ryanair Campaign
I do not agree with what Danny has done, but I think we probably do not know the half of what is going on. I look at the history of PPRuNe and Danny's contribution and I can only conclude that Ryanair have launched some serious legal missives. To that extent Danny has my support and sympathy for his predicament.
Let us be clear about this: Ryanair has, at a minimum, an agressive stance towards anyone it perceives to act in a manner that is not in its interests. That's as mild as it can be stated. Others would look at the same corporate stance an say that verbal agression, insults and intimidation is a corporate style - both within and without the company. Anyone who has talked to a Ryanair employee of long-standing will be aware, as a matter of FACT that, at an absolute minimum, this perception is widely shared. Rightly or wrongly there are Ryanair employees fearful of what will happen to them in various circumstances.
Sufficient contributors to PPRuNe have given enough examples for this to be, if not "proved", established as something that any wise legislator, safety manager, etc. should treat seriously.
On this site, in the "victimisation" thread, was reproduced a Ryanair memo to Dublin pilots which clearly threatened them with serious consequences for not following the company line. Are we are expected to believe that a company that will WRITE some of the things we have seen in the past couple of years in an industrial context rigourously keeps the operational sphere free of such interference? Well, just look at the John Goss case and the role of the Chief Pilot, who was absent and unconcerned about stress until.... well a particular moment. What happened is a matter of public record and I remind everybody that Ryanair were ordered by the High Court to return Captain Goss to flying status against the wishes and expressed "judgment" of his management, and his Chief Pilot.
I noted two letters in Flight recently from the Irish Airline Pilots Association. Clearly these letters were dancing around the same difficulty. What I read them as saying (from memory) is that there is a gap between what the law says and corporate reality. They were, in effect, asking the Irish Aviation Authority to take an interest in this "gap". The IAA seems uninterested in the "gap". Maybe they too are fearful of the Ryanair lawyers? Or is it a case of "hear no evil, see no evil"?
On the other hand, IALPA has now had two serious encounters with Ryanair and has won both and Ryanair, despite their usual verbal gymnastics to the contrary, were the only party to pay legal costs.
The IALPA action, and where it is leading, should be discussed on this thread - as Danny says. However, the real issue for me is that if Ryanair are successful in supressing all comment - which they HAVE been - then a major failing will have taken place. I think that THIS is now the issue for discussion.