Ryanair - 9
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Methinks you doth protest too much Racedo, yes you always retort with the 'I do not work for Ryanair' but very carefully ignore the question of, in that case, why do you so slavishly follow the Ryanair line in defending them if anyone should make any critical comment.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Loughborough
Age: 50
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simple Business Idea
Hi All.
Ive got a business proposal idea to put forward to Ryanair and their boarding card print outs. I dont want to divulge and information as if they take on the idea i would be hoping for a handsome payout, or a certain percentage.
The question is, who would i need to contact at Ryanair Towers, and how?
Sorry about the vagueness, but whatever the answer be it yes or no i will share with you all.
Thanks
Craig
Ive got a business proposal idea to put forward to Ryanair and their boarding card print outs. I dont want to divulge and information as if they take on the idea i would be hoping for a handsome payout, or a certain percentage.
The question is, who would i need to contact at Ryanair Towers, and how?
Sorry about the vagueness, but whatever the answer be it yes or no i will share with you all.
Thanks
Craig
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please cut out the back biting - and the sniping. It gets tedious for everyone to see it and the targets for it ARE sometimes innocent. Stick to the topic and please do NOT make up tales and stories.
AA&R Mods
AA&R Mods
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanair - Proposed 225k fine + 4 Aircraft confiscated
being reported here
Ryanair Fined 225,000 Euros, Loses Four Aircrafts for Violating French Labor Laws ? La Jeune Politique
"As ruled by the criminal court of Aix-en-Provence, the discount Irish airline, Ryanair, was required on Friday, May 31 to pay 225,000 euros in penalties, the maximum fiscal fine, in addition to the confiscation of four of the company’s Boeing 737 aircrafts as property payment. The charges are the result of what French courts have deemed “illegal” conduction of business in Marseille, arguing that the airline did not meet tax reporting requirements or apply French labor laws to its 127 employees from the Marseille-Provence airport.
When the company first opened business in Marignane, on the outskirts of Marseille, in 2007, the Irish airline did not officially register its new business activity with URSSAF, the French union which collects and organizes the national social security system. Up through the base’s temporary closure in 2010, Ryanair is also accused of denying its employees certain benefits, such as mandatory pension plans and union rights, and of employing pilot crews unlawfully.
Ryanair contests that its business affairs are only subject to European law and the laws of the country where its aircrafts are officially registered, in this case, Ireland and Irish law. It argues that Ryanair employees are paid under Irish contracts, and not French law. The aircrafts, the company argues, are only temporarily based on French soil and the staff takes orders from the headquarters in Dublin. The company openly denied exploitation of its base in Provence.
However, police investigations of Ryanair’s base in Marignane found 300 sq. meters of office space, with telephone and internet lines, 95 lockers, local employees, and two Ryanair executives appointed as supervisors to the site.
The prosecution of the site in Aix-en-Provence was opened on April 8 as a judicial inquiry, when the Central Office for the Fight Against Legal Work received complaints filed by both the Union of Seafarers of Civil Aviation and the National Union of Pilots. Lawyers advocating on the behalf of ten different civil parties claimed nearly ten million in damages on the part of Ryanair, labeling their business action as “deliberate social fraud.”
“We are dealing with a company whose sole purpose is to counter the law regardless of the interests of workers,” said prosecuting attorney, Annie Battini. While she acknowledged that the state did not want to do any harm to the low-cost airline industry, she argued that Ryanair’s system of employment was “absolutely contrary” to French legislation. “Ryanair plays on words,” she continued, noting that employer costs are 10.75% under Irish labor law, as opposed to 40% in France.
Ryanair’s defense lawyer, Luc Brossolet, contended that the operations in Marseille were simply “temporary” and that many of the individuals employed at the Marseille-Provence location actually live in Spain.
The first airline to pioneer extremely discounted airfare within the European Union after the signing of the 1992 European Open-Skies Treaty, Ryanair is one of today’s top providers of discount one-way flights within the EU, with ticket prices averaging around 80 euros. The industry, however, has faced legal troubles over the past few years, with the conviction of EasyJet and CityJet with similar charges of labor violations in 2010."
Ryanair Fined 225,000 Euros, Loses Four Aircrafts for Violating French Labor Laws ? La Jeune Politique
"As ruled by the criminal court of Aix-en-Provence, the discount Irish airline, Ryanair, was required on Friday, May 31 to pay 225,000 euros in penalties, the maximum fiscal fine, in addition to the confiscation of four of the company’s Boeing 737 aircrafts as property payment. The charges are the result of what French courts have deemed “illegal” conduction of business in Marseille, arguing that the airline did not meet tax reporting requirements or apply French labor laws to its 127 employees from the Marseille-Provence airport.
When the company first opened business in Marignane, on the outskirts of Marseille, in 2007, the Irish airline did not officially register its new business activity with URSSAF, the French union which collects and organizes the national social security system. Up through the base’s temporary closure in 2010, Ryanair is also accused of denying its employees certain benefits, such as mandatory pension plans and union rights, and of employing pilot crews unlawfully.
Ryanair contests that its business affairs are only subject to European law and the laws of the country where its aircrafts are officially registered, in this case, Ireland and Irish law. It argues that Ryanair employees are paid under Irish contracts, and not French law. The aircrafts, the company argues, are only temporarily based on French soil and the staff takes orders from the headquarters in Dublin. The company openly denied exploitation of its base in Provence.
However, police investigations of Ryanair’s base in Marignane found 300 sq. meters of office space, with telephone and internet lines, 95 lockers, local employees, and two Ryanair executives appointed as supervisors to the site.
The prosecution of the site in Aix-en-Provence was opened on April 8 as a judicial inquiry, when the Central Office for the Fight Against Legal Work received complaints filed by both the Union of Seafarers of Civil Aviation and the National Union of Pilots. Lawyers advocating on the behalf of ten different civil parties claimed nearly ten million in damages on the part of Ryanair, labeling their business action as “deliberate social fraud.”
“We are dealing with a company whose sole purpose is to counter the law regardless of the interests of workers,” said prosecuting attorney, Annie Battini. While she acknowledged that the state did not want to do any harm to the low-cost airline industry, she argued that Ryanair’s system of employment was “absolutely contrary” to French legislation. “Ryanair plays on words,” she continued, noting that employer costs are 10.75% under Irish labor law, as opposed to 40% in France.
Ryanair’s defense lawyer, Luc Brossolet, contended that the operations in Marseille were simply “temporary” and that many of the individuals employed at the Marseille-Provence location actually live in Spain.
The first airline to pioneer extremely discounted airfare within the European Union after the signing of the 1992 European Open-Skies Treaty, Ryanair is one of today’s top providers of discount one-way flights within the EU, with ticket prices averaging around 80 euros. The industry, however, has faced legal troubles over the past few years, with the conviction of EasyJet and CityJet with similar charges of labor violations in 2010."
Last edited by Saitek; 3rd Jun 2013 at 18:59.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can this be true?
I am surprised that this has not got more widespread coverage! The EUR225k fine I get ... but the confiscation of four aircraft? Does a French court even have the right to do this?
Presumably something FR can (and will) appeal?!
I don't usually have sympathy for FR (and I don't in relation to its treatment of its workers), but this effectively amounts to a EUR200m fine, which seems excessive.
Presumably something FR can (and will) appeal?!
I don't usually have sympathy for FR (and I don't in relation to its treatment of its workers), but this effectively amounts to a EUR200m fine, which seems excessive.
Last edited by akerosid; 2nd Jun 2013 at 15:01.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No sympathy whatsoever for FR, hit them where it hurts, a €225K wouldn't even put a dent in their profits, 200M, now that might get them to stop thinking they're above the law.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This case had been crawling through French courts for some time. FR may be good at stringing things out, but the French legal system tends not be subject to the kind of legal get outs that occur in the UK...or Ireland.
If FR thinks it stands to lose 4 planes imminently, I bet it will suddenly stop flying to any French airport.
Watch this space.
If FR thinks it stands to lose 4 planes imminently, I bet it will suddenly stop flying to any French airport.
Watch this space.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure if this is quite accurate, other news sources are saying that 225k is the maximum fine available so prosecutors are "suggesting" to the court that they ground the 4 aircraft which were based in France at the time.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MIA-IBZ
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
were simply “temporary” and that many of the individuals employed at the Marseille-Provence location actually live in Spain.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: France
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand it the way EcamSurprise describes.
The prosecution gives a "réquisitoire" in which it specifies what it believes to be an appropriate sentence. It doesn't mean that that has been decided yet.
Here's another report in English which says the prosecutor has "pressed" for the fine and confiscation of four aircraft.
This report in French says that the court has adjourned/deferred? its decision until 25 September 2013, by which time the defence will have argued their side of the case.
The prosecution gives a "réquisitoire" in which it specifies what it believes to be an appropriate sentence. It doesn't mean that that has been decided yet.
Here's another report in English which says the prosecutor has "pressed" for the fine and confiscation of four aircraft.
This report in French says that the court has adjourned/deferred? its decision until 25 September 2013, by which time the defence will have argued their side of the case.
I smell an appeal coming and a stay of the judgment for a few years.
Not much to these off-the-wall legal stories until the sentence is carried out.
But for the sake of interest is the fine commensurate with the profit that was gained by the actions?
Not much to these off-the-wall legal stories until the sentence is carried out.
But for the sake of interest is the fine commensurate with the profit that was gained by the actions?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I smell an appeal coming and a stay of the judgment for a few years.
Last edited by wingview; 2nd Jun 2013 at 19:10.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hades.
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But for the sake of interest is the fine commensurate with the profit that was gained by the actions?
Dislike MOL intensly, if it gets his soft spot - great
(My only sympathy would be for the workers who he will probably shaft as a result).
Last edited by helen-damnation; 2nd Jun 2013 at 19:12.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Stansted
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have come across a few guys that worked out of MRS with FR.
They all say the same thing;
AF protectionist unions at play and the only people the French have shafted are their own nationals. As it was mostly French pilots that worked out of MRS.
They also said the airport management didnt want the court case. They have lost revenue,flights and jobs (french jobs)
This case wont hurt FR but has hurt more Fench people than Irish thats for sure.
They all say the same thing;
AF protectionist unions at play and the only people the French have shafted are their own nationals. As it was mostly French pilots that worked out of MRS.
They also said the airport management didnt want the court case. They have lost revenue,flights and jobs (french jobs)
This case wont hurt FR but has hurt more Fench people than Irish thats for sure.