Simply compare and contrast folks - the High Court judgement says all that needs to be said
Originally Posted by EI-RB
RYANAIR DISAPPOINTED AT HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT IN THE REPA CASE
Ryanair, today (Wednesday, 12th July 2006) expressed its disappointment with the outcome of the action it had taken against the REPA website, which published a number of threats including criminal activities against Ryanair employees, some of them specifically identified, who did not participate in a trade union campaign in Dublin.
Ryanair took this case in order to protect our employees and to identify the names of just three individuals who had made anonymous postings on the REPA website advocating threats (including the slashing of car tyres) against specific Ryanair employees who had accepted positions here in Dublin, which was contrary to the campaign being waged by the pilot trade union.
Had Ryanair not taken action to identify and prevent the publication of these threats, Ryanair may have been accused of allowing its employees to be bullied or intimidated by these pilot trade union activists. This decision shows the difficulties which employers face when dealing with anonymous trade union websites which are used by their members to publish threats and/or advocate criminal activities against specific individuals or employees who do not wish to participate in their trade union campaigns. This is regrettable.
Ryanair will continue to defend its constitutional right to deal directly with its employees without the interference of trade unions and will continue to fight for the right of the vast majority of our employees who wish to continue to deal directly with the company – to be allowed to do so - without being bullied or intimidated by pilot trade unions or their anonymous websites.
Did anyone ever hear such 
in their lives !!!!! Leo will be on later echoing this bull !
From RTE website:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0712/ryanair.html
The High Court has dismissed an application by Ryanair seeking disclosure of the identities of pilots using a website set up by the Ryanair European Pilots' Association.
Ryanair has contended that some of their pilots had been intimidated by postings by anonymous individuals using codenames.
However, Mr Justice Tom Smyth refused to allow the identities to be revealed.
He described the evidence of some Ryanair management witnesses as 'baseless' and 'false'.
In 2004, Ryanair told pilots they would have to pay re-training costs of €15,000 if the airline were forced to negotiate with unions during the following five years.
Shortly afterwards, the REPA set up a website to allow pilots to communicate anonymously, using codenames including 'ihateryanair' and 'cantfly-wontfly'.
Ryanair claimed the website was being used to intimidate pilots not to sign up to the retraining terms and called in the gardaí to investigate.
They went to the High Court to force disclosure of the real identities of pilots using the website.
In dismissing the Ryanair application, Mr Justice Tom Smyth described the original terms for retraining including the €15,000 bond as irrational and unjust, saying these 'most onerous' conditions bore all the hallmarks of oppression.
He pointed out that pilots called by Ryanair to give evidence of intimidation had not given any such evidence. He said the only evidence of intimidation related to the conduct of the airline.
He found there was no conspiracy by the pilots, who had engaged in nothing unlawful, and said Ryanair had suffered no actionable wrong.
The Irish Airline Pilots' Association welcomed the ruling as a vindication, and called on the board of Ryanair to investigate the conduct of management.