I got the following info from a poster on another site and I think he or she makes a very good point. They following account of what a barrister representing Ryanair had to say was published in yesterday's Irish Times.
Mr Beatty insisted Ryanair’s position did not represent “a blanket ban” on promotion for those who had outstanding complaints against the company.
Mr Beatty argued that even if the firm had such a ban, it was not illegal. “You might find it distasteful or immoral, but it is not unlawful,” he said. Discrimination was prohibited in relation to gender, sexual orientation, race or membership of the Travelling community. But apart from the criteria “specifically laid down by statute, an employer can use any criteria to engage or promote staff”.
Even Ryanair's barrister considers that their actions might be "distasteful or immoral". He is presumably concerned enough about Ryanair's actions that he is pointing out that such discrimination cannot be taken into account as the actions were "not unlawful". (This was at the end of a court/tribunal hearing, presumably constructive dismissal).
As the original poster put it:
Is this stuff not so telling? Unless discrimination is specifically prohibited the "employer can use any criteria to engage or promote staff". Any criteria!!! That includes not liking the kind of car you drive, and 1.5 million other things.
I think that all of this puts Ryanair's "safety action" - and all their other actions - in a correct context for our discussions and comments here. This has everything to do with what Ryanair want to do and nothing to do with morality, fairness nor anything else that looks like civilised or reasonable behaviour.
Not only do they not do shame, they are proud of their actions. And the likes of
Mrs Ryan thinks it equally good to be a jelly fish who hears and sees no evil. Jelly fish is a well chosen name to describe such people.