PDA

View Full Version : Ryanair management back in court


the grim repa
24th May 2006, 17:48
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=692399

Read this story and you would nearly believe that ryanair management gave a hoot about their employees.The fact is that nobody was intimidated and ryanair want to shut down this very effective form of communication for ryanairs pilots.

sky9
24th May 2006, 18:50
Once again Ryanair filling the pockets of the legal profession. I'd love to know what their score is on legal judgements; bet it's about 10 to 1 against.

The Real Slim Shady
24th May 2006, 18:55
Extract from The European Human Rights Act.
ARTICLE 10
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND ASSOCIATION
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
2. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.

MarkD
24th May 2006, 22:09
slim

only the second article is relevant, since FR is not State owned.

The Real Slim Shady
24th May 2006, 22:46
Mark, I dont dispute that.
The judiciary, however, is a State body which must be cognisant of the EHRA. Equally, the clause for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, may have some bearing as most contracts specifically prohibit the wider dissemination of information which could be regarded as commercial in confidence.

LTNman
25th May 2006, 18:27
Ryanair went to court yesterday to find out who is behind messages on its pilots website. The airline wants to know the identity of those people who go under the codenames 'ihateryanair', 'cantfly-wontfly' and others on the Ryanair European Pilots Association (REPA) website.

The REPA website was set up two years ago to give 'an anonymous and secure way for Ryanair pilots throughout Europe to communicate with each other'. According to the website, it 'allows Ryanair pilots to freely express their views on a range of industrial safety and professional issues'.

In the action, which began yesterday in the High Court, Ryanair is seeking a number of orders against Neil Johnston, an official with the trade union IMPACT; the Irish Airline Pilots Association and its British counterpart, BALPA.

The airline contends it has a duty to identify the persons behind the codenames. It claims the website was established by and is controlled by IALPA and BALPA. This is denied by both pilots' associations.


Ryanair claims the defendants have refused its requests to identify the persons behind the codenames and alleges they have sought to destroy records, registration details, databases and information relating to REPA members. It also claims that unknown persons, allegedly known to the defendants, are engaged in a concerted process of intimidation, bullying, harassment and criminal activity.

In an affidavit, Eddie Wilson, director of personnel with Ryanair, said that REPA, which was not a registered trade union, was set up in 2004 and its web site was designed to allow Ryanair pilots communicate with one another in a manner designed to obscure the identity of the person communicating through the use of codenames and password procedures.

The defendants deny the claims and say REPA was established to facilitate the organisation of pilots employed by Ryanair in order to protect those pilots and their employment within the industry. The case continues.

Flap 5
25th May 2006, 18:56
It beggars belief, doesn't it? They'll be going round the pubs next demanding from the landlords what's being said about them. :hmm:

BEagle
25th May 2006, 21:35
Methinks they do protest too much....

The ryanair management, that is.....

G-CPTN
25th May 2006, 22:36
So anyone blowing a whistle must first provide their identity to MoL? Yea, right!
Pea off!

Colonel Klink
25th May 2006, 23:30
Sounds like paranoia is rife among the Ryanair management; maybe if they weren't so hateful, their pilots would like them more....!!

Dave Spart
25th May 2006, 23:51
The words I wish to describe the Ryanair management may or may not be compatible with British law, therefore I will keep my thoughts to myself, sufficed to say that I would in no way entertain the idea of even contemplating employment with this airline.

Here are two totally unrelated Wikipedia links:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryanair

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignancy

Nov71
26th May 2006, 01:06
Freedom of Expression is applicable to all, irrespective of whether directed at State owned industry. It does allow for Statutory exemption eg libel etc but IMO identification of authors should be covered by data protection or a Court ruling as part of a particular Court action, not a fishing trip eg journalist sources

heavy glider
26th May 2006, 03:03
It has long been said that Ryanair has no need for an internal 'Personnel' dept when it does most of its 'negotiating' with staff thru the Courts. :ugh:

Hansol
26th May 2006, 08:30
IF and its a big IF it can be shown by documentary evidence (ie the postings on the site) that entries are libelous or intimidating to FR or their staff, then under law they have a case, just ask the moderators here.

The rule is be careful how you frame anything you may post.

Leo Hairy-Camel
26th May 2006, 10:37
ryanair want to shut down this very effective form of communication for ryanairs pilots.
Very effective form of your own personal self aggrandisement, you mean Didimus. Last time I checked your REPA identity, you were up to 450ish posts, making you the second most prolific author after Agent Johnson himself. Been a busy little beaver, haven't you! Pitty you're being somewhat economical with the truth now, though. What about all those suggestions to 'key' the cars of those pilots who showed up for work in Dublin? What about the wickedly false attacks on Ryanair maintenance standards and quality of training, both of which I can tell you are world class? What about the LO'C 'fatigue' beatup? What about incitement to 'sickoffs' and other forms of industrial disobedience? What about nearly destroying JG after he good-naturedly offered to bulwark REPA's pathetic opening gambit? False claims of discrimination and intimidation by Ryanair? Talk about the prostitute calling the pole dancer a slut! Priceless hypocrisy, Dim Repa. All of these, and other, sticky fingered activities will, sure as night follows day, come back to bite you in the arse, Didimus, and not before time.

The real story here, folks, is that IALPA and BALPA are beside themselves as Ryanair goes from strength to strength. Threatening their existance and very purpose as pilot unions, Ryanair is emasculating once proud and occasionally profitable airlines, and overwhelming their traditional markets with better service, hugely improved punctuality, the highest margins, lowest costs and greatest profitability on earth. Not surprisingly, then, these desperate and rather pathetic attempts at ingratiating themselves on a pilot corps who clearly don't want them, by whatever nefarious means and through whatever targets of opportunity, even with the offer of free representation (€€€ouch€€€), reflect a woefully turgid organisation who'll resort to pillory and threats, especially when the "quality of opinion" (morning Aloue) is discordant with their own. If you wish to understand unions, observe a group of capricious two years olds at play for half an hour. Disturbing, yet instructive parallels.

Unions in general, and pilot unions in particular, are, with tiresomely familiar regularity, the Angels of airline death and should be strenuously resisted to the last...no matter what. Understand that, Minuteman, and you understand me completely.

Stampe
26th May 2006, 10:45
No airline has ever gone out of business because it paid its staff too much or treated them too well.Airline staff deserve proper reward ,treatment,working conditions and respect from their employers.

the grim repa
26th May 2006, 10:56
Hi V.things not going too well in the high court,i see.Pity that.Anyhow back to your post,they have become so banal,i just do not have the heart to pick it apart point by point.Sticks and stones may break my bones,but names will never hurt me.looks like it was all the pilots fault all along.such naughty boys for picking on poor old ryanair management.
Your post reminds me of A.H. in the bunker wondering where it all went wrong and blaming anyone but himself.
maybe der fuhrer would like to walk into the high court in the bollicky buff today to protest at the courts intimidation of his beloved pilots.as an aside might grab some of that oh so loved publicity,the egomaniac craves.

Leo Hairy-Camel
26th May 2006, 11:02
No airline has ever gone out of business because it paid its staff too much or treated them too well
Are you for real?:eek:

United, Delta, Northwest, BA's unfunded 2 billion pound pension deficit? Sound familiar? Do your homework and have a close look here (http://www.justplanes.com/AirlineHist.html) and your view may perhaps change...although I doubt it somehow.

angels
26th May 2006, 11:20
Leo - Thank you for transporting my son and the rest of his school group safely from Girona the other day. 40 minutes late isn't that bad for an on-time airline.

No thanks to your representatives who refused to even countenance any form of compensation for the virtual destruction of my son's suitcase.

Rude bar stewards. I didn't have an axe to grind with you lot, I now do.

RAT 5
26th May 2006, 11:22
Stampe:
Totally agree with you. What IS TRUE, Leo, is that pilots want to retain a job for the length of their careers. They do not want to change airlines every few years, for better T's & C's, and most certainly do not want to be seeking new jobs because their own has disappeared from under them. It is the pilots, NOT managment, who have a far greater interest in the longterm survival of an airline. Managers have a short-term interest in jacking up the share price, selling their options and then not giving a toss. There will always be another sucker airline somewhere. Just look how many useless airline managers have moved around the market placxe pedalling their incompetance.

Leo: Yes we are talking to you!!

"Unions in general, and pilot unions in particular, are, with tiresomely familiar regularity, the Angels of airline death..."

You have been asked many direct questions in the past; all unanswered! Well, here ia another. Please quote dates, people, places and relevant company names to back up this statement.

Of course leave out: Eastern, TWA, Pan AM, Paramount, Sabre, Dan Air, Swiss Air, Piedmont, Air Canada, Air France (nearly) Iberia (nearly) Lufthansa (nearly) Alitalia (nearly, perhaps yet) Olympic, Sabena, Air Scotland, Air Holland (4 times) Air Littoral, Air Liberte, National Jets Italia, Sterling, etc. etc.

This is only a short list off the top of my head in a few moments. A little more research would extend it to pages, but none of them were pilot caused.

Of course, also leave out all the chapter 11 airlines, both US & other countries, where they were brought to the brink by shoddy short-term management stratergies, and then asked the pilots and other lower employees to sacrifice their salaries in a rescue campaign. The vast majority agreed. Talking of greed, there were many of the top honchos who did not make similar sacrifices, yet it was they who had undone the bolts and caused the wheels to come off.
Share holders have short term gains in mind; pilots have long term futures in mind. History has made it clear from whom the greater threat of survival comes. He who does not learn from history will continue to make the same mistakes in the future. History is the teacher of the future.


Leo: I have just linked to your list of defunct airlines. Please identify which ones were caused by greedy unproductive pilot actions. Until then stop spreading innuendo.

tallinnman
26th May 2006, 11:53
Quote "Ryanair is emasculating once proud and occasionally profitable airlines, and overwhelming their traditional markets with better service,"

The Camel is having a Giraffe!

Pigsfly
26th May 2006, 11:57
Ladies n Gents.

One must remember that one does not get Justice in a Court....You get Law !!!!!!!!

P

Rosta Change!
26th May 2006, 12:22
No wonder Ryanair are upset:

"It also claims that unknown persons, allegedly known to the defendants, are engaged in a concerted process of intimidation, bullying, harassment "

Isn't that their job?!!

Bronx
26th May 2006, 13:15
Grim Repa Anyhow back to your post,they have become so banal
Pots and kettles. :rolleyes:
You've made 234 posts since you registered in 2004 and only 9 out of 234 aint been giving the world your views on Ryanair.
It don't suit you but some folk think a discussion is more interesting if you get to hear both sides.
Maybe if you were more selective and you posted on some other topics other than Ryanair you'd have some credibility.

the grim repa
26th May 2006, 13:21
Bronx,thanks for the reality check.my purpose here is to counter ryanairs management propoganda machine by telling the truth.while they sing a merry tune here,they are F**king my colleagues and friends royally.sorry that does not amuse you.I am not here for amusement,this is a task i perform.

camlobe
26th May 2006, 13:33
Originally posted by Pigsfly

"Ladies n Gents.

One must remember that one does not get Justice in a Court....You get Law !!!!!!!!"

Funny thing that. When I was speaking to my solicitor (works for well known firm of litigation specialists) yesterday about an up-and-coming case, I stated that I looked forward to Truth and Justice prevailing.

His response.....















Oh...............

sugden
26th May 2006, 13:35
With the exception of Bronx and Camel, I hope you lot understand flying better than you understand capitalism, corporate management and the balancing of costs and revenues.

Grim Repa, if you hate Ryanair so much, get another job.

the grim repa
26th May 2006, 13:57
I Am afraid that you misrepresent my position here.I Do not hate RYANAIR.I Detest the manner in which its management feather their own nests on the backs of young hard working men and women who seek to make a better life for themselves and their famiiles.The management do not tell the truth and entrap and exploit young workers.Changing their contracts of employment at will when they know that these vulnerable kids are ensnared by doubts and huge debt.I Care a lot for these,my colleagues and if that is anti capitalism,communist or ignorant,then that is what i am.I Remember being in a similar position only a few years ago.I Will not be flying the hammer and sickle over my flat,but hell i will not stand idly by and see peoples lives and human rights made a mockery of.

Leave,why should i.Run like those who turned their backs on the jews.Who will be left when they come for me.
Get another job,and have to face this **** for the rest of my career.Forget it pal.I will face the consequences of my actions in due time.But i will have done my best for others and that for me is the most important thing.

Bronx
26th May 2006, 14:19
grim repa sorry that does not amuse you.I am not here for amusement,this is a task i perform. Amusement don't come into it.
If both sides get told folks can decide for themselves which side is telling the truth or if the truth is somewhere between the two.
Being a man on a mission is all fine and dandy but it don't help your cause if you lose your credability by coming across as a man with an obsession. Folks will have all different views but speaking for myself I wouldn't take what you said about Ryanair unless it was confirmed by someone who came across as more balanced.
Just my 2 cents FWIW.

sugden
26th May 2006, 14:44
Repa

Are you seriously comparing a debate about terms and conditions at ryanair with the genocide of Jews and gypsies perpetrated by Adolf Hilter? I don't know if that is laughable or contemptible. Either way, it calls into serious question the value set that you employ in determining your response to Ryanair issues.

Still, I'm sure the vulnerable kids are grateful for your guidance in their time of need. After all, they're only good at flying passenger jets, not at thinking for themselves.

I suggested that you leave Ryanair for another job. May I now revise that suggestion? Leave Ryanair and go to University. There you can espouse your blinkered, utopian world view on the union steps in the tradition of many a starry-eyed kid, full of youtful optimisim and with a mind completely uncluttered by the complexities of reality.

Jump Complete
26th May 2006, 15:11
Not directly connected with this thred, not wishing to join in the Ryanair bashing, just an observation....
Flew in as a pax last night on Ryanair, no complaints about that (40 mins late departing, but hey, with 25 min turnrounds how can they possibly stay on time?)
At 0015 I walked out to the bus station at Stansted (isn't it about time that got rebuilt, the one in my parents market town in Norfolk is far better!) and was suprised to see Ryanair flight deck and cabin crew slumped on the benches waiting for a bus. Don't they deserve a quick taxi to the hotel after a long days work?

the grim repa
26th May 2006, 15:23
Bronx - point taken.

Sugden - no i am not drawing comparisons between the two.It is an impossibility to do so.i am just highlighting the fact that doing nothing is not an option when faced with the treatment of people we are witness to everyday.

yamaha
26th May 2006, 17:37
On Leo's list from Oct 8 2004. VBIRD

Great time, great company, great atmosphere, low pay.
I would go back tomorrow as its also a great shame.

Pilots pay and everyone else's for that matter was low. So Leo hairy whats your name, you have managed to fool most of the people, so far, for most of the time.

Your day will come and you and ryan air will financially bleed to death.

There will not be many mourners.

You would do well to take a leaf out of VBIRD's book and treat ALL EMPLOYEE'S with respect.

Faire d'income
26th May 2006, 20:10
Unions in general, and pilot unions in particular, are, with tiresomely familiar regularity, the Angels of airline death..."

Interesting comment using death as an analogy, considering Corporate Pressure has been found to be a contributory factor in many fatal accidents.

atse
26th May 2006, 21:14
(1) What about all those suggestions to 'key' the cars of those pilots who showed up for work in Dublin? (2) What about the wickedly false attacks on Ryanair maintenance standards and quality of training, both of which I can tell you are world class? (3) What about the LO'C 'fatigue' beatup? (4) What about incitement to 'sickoffs' and other forms of industrial disobedience? (5) What about nearly destroying JG after he good-naturedly offered to bulwark REPA's pathetic opening gambit?
Leo I have quoted no less than 5 significant claims above. Three of these I do not recognise - as in they are new to me (1, 2 & 4). Are you saying that these things have been organised? I think you are. Wow! (3) I know about and (5) I know about, but do not recognise your version.

I have heard about developments in court in Dublin over the past couple of days. It looks to me from what you say above as though you have been speaking to some management figure, because you seem to have taken the same line as FR management took in court - a line that helps them justify what they apparently believe BUT CANNOT PROVE.

Just a couple of points: The fact that a fatigued pilot is not believed does not make him either wrong, or a conspirator, or worthy of demotion. The fact that management in Ryanair became convinced that a particular captain was involved in REPA and, via REPA, in intimidation does not in itself mean that he was.

What I have been told is that the entire management notion about captain Goss - bar your REPA bit - got aired in court in the last 48 hours. Leo let me be the first to tell you: IT DOES NOT HOLD WATER and it was taken to pieces by the lawyers. However, my informant tells me that while everybody else can see the screw-up for what it is, FR management cling doggedly to the notion that they are right, but seem to think the only problem is that they just can't prove it. (Exactly the tone of your post).

The case is not over and I certainly don't know what way things may go - but the following were reported to me: (a) the Ryanair IT specialist claimed that accessing the REPA website improperly "was unethical and illegal", (b) it was suggested to a senior FR manager that his sworn testimony was inaccurate and he agreed that perhaps it was "under a particular interpretation" [or words to that effect], (c) the source of original accusation against captain Goss turns out to have been a management pilot - who reportedly was told by another pilot that captain Goss telephoned him (so we now know the source for the claims about the famous intimidating telephone calls) – "small" problem: the named pilot turned up in court and emphatically denied ever having been telephoned by Goss, (d) other pilots testified that they disagreed with the FR version of events (at one point one of the pilots called as a witness by FR was nearly declared a "hostile witness" by the airline's lawyers - HAVING DECLARED THAT HE WAS INTIMIDATED BY RYANAIR, NOT OTHER PILOTS). What are the odds that FR management are by now convinced that there is a now a new conspiracy built on lies (not their’s, of course!)?

By all accounts FR cannot sustain their argument BUT neither can they grasp the reality that you have not grasped either - which is that a BIG, as in MEGA BIG error of interpretation led to a series of really stupid management decisions.

Leo you are going to have to get real here: the fact that FR management are convinced of something does not make it true. The 5 points I cited at the top of this post are so close to the views of the besieged FR management team that you had better come up for a breath of air and common sense. Ultimately evidence - the facts - count. Especially when you get to court. Geddit?

Leo Hairy-Camel
26th May 2006, 22:34
Get real, atse? Come on, now. You make my case for me better than I ever could. You evidently take the view that any divergent opinion is, by its very existence, sedition and inviting of attack. So much for debate, eh. So much for discourse. So much for the fairplay of ideas.
You have inserted a post about a different country, about a different issue, in this threat about a subject that you clearly know little about - presumably in order to score a cheap point in another another argument. The Ryanair pilots have started to pull together and your post is not welcome (by myself at least and, I suspect, by many others).

Why don't you take your argument off to a different place? You could start by deleting your post, unless you wish to join with the "ordinary Ryanair pilot" Leo who makes a career out of attacking his colleagues for not wishing to be the pawns of a management which cares little for them.

Bronx and sugden, you seem to have the mark of our man Dim Repa. But you're being a tad unfair. To really know our little pal, to really know what makes him tick, you could do worse than have a read of this gem from his personal Pprune archives of not so long ago.
i personally have no sympathy for you guys who buy your rating.you line up like a bunch of morons and part with your money,in turn screwing up the market.you do a chit chat with some knob from hr and then struggle through a 737 200 sim check.then most importantly sign the cheque.you come in with 200 hours and believe that you have earned the right to sit in the right seat.you cannot expect the respect of your peers and let the company ride roughshod all over you.you are no more than slaves and that is how you shall be treated.
And this from a London based B737-800 first officer, on almost 4000 pounds Sterling after tax each month. Would-be mouthpiece of the downtrodden, friend of the working man, deflector of slings and arrows, champion of the oppressed, and an individual who believes, one presumes, that he's earned the right to sit in the right hand seat and enjoy the respect of his peers, whereas others who seek to emulate his fortune have not. Dear oh dear, Didimus, have you really thought this through?

It is this particular post by Dim Repa, my personal favourite, that I think exposes the true moral north of the man, and the nature of his character. You don't give a fiddler's about your brother pilots, Didimus, do you? You're about the maintenance and expansion of your own personal circumstances by whatever means necessary. As your chums at IALPA so regularly demonstrate, Didimus, with their monotonous and predictable regularity, why trouble one’s self with honestly and decency when guile and hubris will do just as well? I was well informed a long time ago, that one can tell a great deal about a person by the company they keep. It troubles me to admit, Dim Repa, but I find myself uncertain as to who's the worse done by. You for knowing REPA, or REPA for knowing you...

atse
26th May 2006, 23:04
You evidently take the view that any divergent opinion is, by its very existence, sedition and inviting of attack.
Leo to take a selective quote out of context proves little. The appropiate quote, which is the antitheses of what you claim, is contained at the end in my post above: Ultimately evidence - the facts - count. That is something that applies to myself, as much as to yourself. However, one of the many characteristics of your contributions here is you utter unwillingess to face up to inconvenient facts or to engage at a level beyond the throwing of ill-founded accusations. (I did notice that you always ignore inconvenient facts).

My point was that it is this very weakness which has led your chums into what appears to be a cul de sac in court. I await the court's decision. What do you await?

Clandestino
26th May 2006, 23:17
You would do well to take a leaf out of VBIRD's book and treat ALL EMPLOYEE'S with respect.

VBIRD is dead. Nothing to do with being nice to employees though, but surely something MGT wants common peas... I mean employee to believe.

Ryanair's MGT knows it's next to impossible to get names behind the nicks and it's not that they're after. Ultimately they'll fail to discover the Ryan-haters' identity but true mission behind this escapade is just to keep the pressure on their employees because it's good for the productivity. Let's face it: if it wasn't for the slavedrivers, there would be no pyramids.

Faire d'income
27th May 2006, 00:33
if it wasn't for the slavedrivers, there would be no pyramids.

Did you mean pyramid schemes? :hmm:

yamaha
27th May 2006, 07:36
The point I was trying to make (very badly) by mentioning VBIRD was that an airlines presence on that list of now defunct airlines was not due to high crew wages.

Furthermore due to the excellent atmosphere within the company VBIRD got a lot out of their crews.

Contrary to LHC's almost paranoid views, VBIRD was most certainly not about money and pilots demands being too high.

In my opinion the below the belt tactics and attitude from LHC will catch up with him. His legacy will not be a positive one.

However he has made his fortune and we are still stupid enough to fly for him.
So he has managed to fool most of the people for most of the time.
Until that changes posts like this will go on forever and ever.

bacardi walla
27th May 2006, 08:01
At 0015 I walked out to the bus station at Stansted (isn't it about time that got rebuilt, the one in my parents market town in Norfolk is far better!) and was suprised to see Ryanair flight deck and cabin crew slumped on the benches waiting for a bus. Don't they deserve a quick taxi to the hotel after a long days work?

er, which hotel would that be then :ugh:

Crews at STN are all based there and thus some would be waiting for a bus to take them to their houses, flats, park benches etc.

The fact behind this thread is that RYR clearly don't like their staff being open with their opinions about the airline. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I've witnessed their bullying tactics first hand and they are clearly an arrogant bunch to work for and it's all driven from the top down.

It's high time RYR actually listened to their staff's concerns, maybe even address them but I'm afraid the day that happens, is the day they close down and based on that, the bullying approach won't last forever :mad:

Boy
27th May 2006, 08:25
Irish Times article for today.
Pilots reject Ryanair allegations
Mary Carolan
A number of Ryanair pilots have rejected claims by Ryanair management before the High Court that the pilots were threatened and intimidated by other pilots about returning to Dublin in 2004 to retrain, under controversial terms, on new aircraft acquired by the airline.
Capt John Gale told the court yesterday he had felt "victimised" and "intimidated", not by other pilots, but rather when he was attending a meeting in November 2004 with a member of Ryanair management, Warwick Brady, about returning to Dublin.
Capt Gale was based in Stansted at that time. While he wished to return to Dublin, he had understood he would have to remain in Stansted for about another year and had bought a house and car there. He said Mr Brady told him he had two-and-a-half days to sign the contract for returning to Dublin.
Mr Brady told him that, if he did not take up the Dublin offer then, he would never return to Dublin.
Captain Gale also told the court he took steps to inform Ryanair management that he had never said that another senior Ryanair pilot, Capt John Goss, had threatened pilots about returning to Dublin.
Capt Gale said he told Ryanair's chief pilot, Capt Ray Conway, that Capt Goss had issued no such threats and Capt Conway said he would "cut the balls off" any person who spread rumours to that effect. In separate High Court proceedings, Capt Goss, who has always denied he ever made threats or engaged in intimidation, sued Ryanair after the airline initiated disciplinary proceedings against him. Those proceedings were later settled.
He also told Mr Brady in December 2004 of his concern that his [Capt Gale's] name was being used as the source of claims of intimidation by Capt Goss.
Mr Brady had said not to worry, that he had "plenty of evidence" about Capt Goss from postings on the Ryanair European Pilots Association website, the witness said. He had never felt cold-shouldered about returning to Dublin but rather felt welcomed, he said.
Capt Gale was giving evidence on the third day of proceedings in which Ryanair is seeking to identify persons engaged in communications on a pilots website. It claims the messages show evidence of wrongful activity against Ryanair and its employees.
The action by Ryanair is against Neil Johnston, an official with the trade union Impact, the Irish Airline Pilots Association (Ialpa) and its British counterpart, Balpa.
Ryanair claim the defendants have a duty to name people identified by the codenames "ihateryanair", "cantfly-wontfly" and others on the Ryanair European Pilots Association website. It claims the website was established by and is controlled by Ialpa and Balpa - a claim denied by both groups.
The court heard yesterday that Ryanair had subpoenaed a number of its pilots to give evidence in the action.
One of those pilots, Capt Gale, told the court he phoned Capt John Goss in November 2004 to inform him that he, Capt Gale, was not the person making allegations about Capt Goss.
He said he liked and respected Capt Goss, who had trained him, and was amazed that Capt Goss could be linked with alleged intimidation.
Another pilot, Capt Andrew Walters, who was also in court under subpoena, was asked yesterday about evidence given to the court by Capt Jack Bagnall to the effect that Capt Walters had told Capt Bagnall that Capt Goss had threatened him in relation to returning to Dublin.
Capt Walters said he had no recollection of having any such conversation with Capt Bagnall but he was 100 per cent sure he never had any conversation with Capt Goss about the matters in 2004 relating to retraining. He did not remember having a conversation with Capt Bagnall "but I'm not going to make up lies about John Goss so I would say I never had that conversation", he said. Capt Walters added that he had never felt bullied, threatened, harassed or excluded as a result of taking up the position in Dublin.
Earlier yesterday, at the close of his evidence, Capt Bagnall said there was no note of the conversation which he had told the court he had with Capt Walters. He agreed that the conversation was the basis for an investigation initiated by Ryanair relating to Capt Goss. He said he had given a summary of his conversation to Mr Brady. He said it was a casual conversation during a chance encounter with Capt Walters.
When Brian O'Moore SC, for Ialpa, said that it was "almost as if the conversation had never happened", Capt Bagnall said he would not agree with that. He said he had reported the conversation because he perceived there could be a breach of Ryanair's personnel regulations. He believed Capt Walters was concerned about his transfer to Dublin. The case resumes on Tuesday before Mr Justice Thomas Smyth.
© The Irish Times

cargo boy
27th May 2006, 12:17
Ryanair web probe hits trouble

(Daily Mail Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) (http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/05/26/1661009.htm)

RYANAIR'S legal battle against three Irish pilots failed to get off the ground yesterday when their star witness claimed it was 'unethical' to view evidence in the case by accessing the pilots' website.


The Irish low-cost carrier has taken its action to the High Court to try to unmask the identity of pilots responsible for controversial remarks about the company's working practices which were made on an Internet message board run jointly by the British and Irish pilots' unions.

The airline wants to know the identity of those people who go under the codenames 'ihateryanair', 'cantfly-wontfly' and others on the Ryanair European Pilots Association (REPA) website.

Since being employed by Ryanair to carry out an independent assessment on the electronic evidence, IT security specialist Eoin Keeley said he never once tried to enter the contentious website.

Under cross-examination, he insisted it was morally wrong to analyse data that he was not privy to.

'It is totally unethical, and I believe illegal, to gain access to any site without permission' he said.

Camel Killer
27th May 2006, 13:31
All of these, and other, sticky fingered activities will, sure as night follows day, come back to bite you in the arse.....

Your own words, directed of course at Didimus, but so so applicable to the drama being played out in the High Court. You are obviously unaware of the sheer scale of the legal disaster that has overwhelmed the Ryanair attempt to sort out REPA. The media reports do not even begin to convey the extent to which their case has unravelled. Your ignorance of this and your brave effort to ignore the Titanic class iceberg that has holed "Ryanair v Neil Johnston and others" means that you are considerably lower down the food chain than I once suspected. Perhaps you are an ordinary line pilot, after all:rolleyes:

GGV
28th May 2006, 09:10
It is beginning to look as though the "boil may have been lanced". Clearly exciting days in Dublin.

etrang
28th May 2006, 11:00
The fact behind this thread is that RYR clearly don't like their staff being open with their opinions about the airline.

And with good reason.

corsair
28th May 2006, 19:24
You know, I really find all this really depressing. It's all so completely unneccessary. Ryanair is tremendously successful as an airline. I was at Girona recently and saw that the entire flight line was made up of Ryanair aircraft. I should have felt a surge of pride at all those Irish registered aircraft lined up waiting to transport eager travellers all over Europe. It is remarkable by any standards. There are similar scenes at many airports around Europe. Many jobs are created when Ryanair lands at the local airport.
But I didn't feel any pride because we all know that Ryanair is run to maximise profits for a few individuals and essentially has no soul. It deals with it's staff as ruthlessly as it deals with it's customers. I don't know of another company in any field of businss never mind the airline business, that generates so much bad publicity for itself and has provided so much revenue for it's lawyers. Most companies try to maintain a positive image of itself to customers and staff, sometimes hyprocritically but they at least they try. Ryanair doesn't even bother. It thinks everything is about money. It's equally contemptous of it's customers and staff.

We all know this is generated by it's 'colourful' chief executive and permeates the entire management and even down to check in staff at airports who don't even work for Ryanair directly. It's obviously deliberate and my question to Michael O'Leary and the acolytes like leo hairy camel is why??? Will profits fall devastatingly if customers are treated like customers and not as cash cows or if staff are treated valuable members of a team who take pride in their work and do the best for the company and not as cost centres?

Like this court case, they want to pursue and intimidate staff using the website instead of addressing the issue of why they feel it's neccessary to complain in this anonymous way rather than deal with via their own management or internal processes. They cannot see there is something rotten in the state of Ryanair.

So Leo, why is there so much discontent in Ryanair?

TDK mk2
28th May 2006, 22:01
'She said he said...' this is all very entertaining for us who hope we will never be so unlucky as to have to work for Ryanair - and I mean no disrespect to those who do. But I just wonder what the Judge (or is he a Justice?) makes of all this. It's like a playground tiff that's been taken to the Headmasters (sorry Headteacher) office. It's pretty clear what Ryanair management are up to, and it's got little to do with 'protecting' other employees from bullying and harrassment.

I'd echo what Corsair says although I believe that most companies these days hold pretty much the same attitude towards their customers and their employees. However most exersize somewhat more discretion and sophistication in the way they persue those policies.

atse
28th May 2006, 22:24
TDJ mk2, I think you will find it is a bit more than 'She said he said...'. I'm told the press reports do not capture the mood in the court room, nor do they report how strongly the tide is running against Ryanair (but this perception depends on the reporter, does it not?). But it does seem at this point as though there will be clear findings on important issues of fact. Of course, as you say, it really comes down to what the judge has to say ... and since the evidence is not all in as yet .... speculation here is hardly worth the effort.

Wizofoz
29th May 2006, 08:11
there will be clear findings on important issues of fact.

No there won't. Ryan will do what it always does when it knows it's going to lose (which is MOST times it ends up in court). It will withdraw its' action, pay the other sides costs, than claim a "stunning victory"!:ugh:

highcirrus
29th May 2006, 09:01
corsair

You included the following in your last post:

Michael O'Leary and the acolytes like leo hairy camel

Is not the pseudonym "leo hairy camel" but an anagram for Michael o’Leary and hence the two names refer to one and the same person?

That is how I had always understood it.

Carmoisine
29th May 2006, 09:16
No he ain't. He or she is just a wannabe punk, who uses lots of smoke and mirrors but has time and time again shown that he/she doesn't really have all the up to date information.

Ryanair have also shown how terrified they really are of REPA despite what they say on here, that they have to go to court to try and shut it down. Approaching 600 members and growing fast, base reps elected, organisational structured formed, letters of support signed overwhelmingly. etc etc.

How you like them apples lads!?

(P.S Leo the wannabee this is for you honey button)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

http://uplink.space.com/attachments/270850-DoNotFeedTroll.jpg

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS

Aloue
29th May 2006, 16:19
If both sides get told folks can decide for themselves which side is telling the truth or if the truth is somewhere between the two.
These words are taken from a post by Bronx, who joined pprune in 2002 and has made around 107 posts.

With respect Bronx the debate has moved on somewhat from sorting out “which side is telling the truth”. You have been around here long enough to acquaint yourself with the voluminous material posted on pprune about Ryanair. You can make your own mind up, based on the evidence already offered. You can, if your sympathies go that way, go with Good Ole Boy Leo and other Ryanair apologists or you can go with the many others who feel that there is a stench of impropriety associated with Ryanair personnel policies and certain of their actions.

It is however unreasonable to come in, just at the moment when a major court case is taking place to suggest that people, such as myself, who have a very clear position are in some way failing to provide “balance”. If you think that there is not enough material here to help you make an informed assessment of “which side is telling the truth or if the truth is somewhere between the two” then you have not been carefully reading what is already to be found on this website.

atse
29th May 2006, 22:54
What about all those suggestions to 'key' the cars of those pilots who showed up for work in Dublin?
This question is from a post by Leo H-C above. I responded to that post - in which he made his usual wild and ideological claims - but not to this specific item since I did not know at the time what “keying” a car is. Nor did I understand the significance of his reference. However, it now turns out that Ryanair have been making “inquiries” in Dublin about this very subject with some of their pilots.

Keying, I am told, refers to the practice of using car keys to scratch the paintwork on a car. Leo you are very well informed for a pilot who is not based in Ireland. My sources there tell me that this information only surfaced over the weekend among the Dublin pilot group. To be informed of what Ryanair are up to in advance suggests very close ties to management. This matter has now been scheduled to make an appearance in court, by all accounts. Let’s wait until the court case is over - then we can tackle Leo about his role as a management spokescamel and his part in helping two well known figures to spread management inspired rumours about his fellow pilots.

Leo to comment in good faith is one thing, to become a protagonist and participant in spreading false accusations or misleading rumours is another (remember your “duvet days” comment?). You have already directly attacked at least two pilots here on pprune that I can recall – both attacks were in direct support of a position taken by management, one of them in advance of the management stories getting into circulation. Your comments about the two pilots (one demoted and the other pilloried as an “intimidator”) have not been supported by the facts - nor by the widespread regard they both enjoy amongst their colleagues.

Why do you repeatedly attack fellow pilots? How do you justify this to yourself – do you answer to some higher entity than us mortals? I have another question for you Leo - another one you will not answer, of course – is it really your contention that, as you put it, “the unfortunate captain Goss” was actually involved in intimidation? As in: do you really believe such nonsense?

You must be the last interested party not to have worked it out Leo. Ryanair got it wrong. They screwed up badly. They can look for evidence - but you can’t find what does not exist. Still don’t geddit, do you, Leo Hairy Quisling? You have crossed the line from fellow traveller to active supporter. Shame on you. :=

d246
30th May 2006, 06:01
If there were rational discussion rather than hurled insults then some of you may be taken seriously. Referring to 'management' as some sort of natural evil is akin to children blaming their teachers for every ill. Regardless of the case against RA you surely cannot expect them to simply accept the gross abuse they suffer on this forum. Win or lose they can afford to keep the unions busy.

RAT 5
30th May 2006, 13:03
Questions:

1. Leo: You still have not answered the direct question; which of the defunct airlines you posted in your list was forced into demise by pilot actions? You used that list to support a point. It is false unless you can provide evidence. So where is it?

2. This claim by RYR that anonymous writers have been trashing RYR on REPA website. How do they know? Is it not a private website/forum for RYR pilots who have to register and be authenticated? Management, I assume, would not be allowed to register. So who's been grassing about postings? Perhaps REPA should start an investigation to find the mole.

Carmoisine
30th May 2006, 16:07
They are quite happy they know who the "mole" is. But some of the Moles may have been leaned on and done it under duress so they are holding the horses on that one. Incidentally I think most posters are happy to have the Management reading whats posted, as its stands now its the only real one to one forum of communication we have to them. Arguably.

TheRedVonBaron
31st May 2006, 13:08
Pilot threats deleted in 90 minutes



Threats to "slash tyres" posted on a website set up to allow Ryanair pilots based across Europe communicate with each other were removed within 90 minutes by the site's operators, the High Court was told yesterday.
The threats were made in 2004 at a time when the court heard there was concern among pilots in Dublin about the circumstances in which pilots were being asked by the airline to relocate to Dublin to operate new 737-800 aircraft.
One of the co-ordinators of the Ryanair European Pilots' Association (Repa) website, Trevor Phillips, told the court yesterday that he did not believe the posting relating to slashing tyres on the web made in December 2004 was a serious suggestion.
He said the posting was inappropriate and the pilots' unions were against threats and intimidation.
In his opinion, the person who made the posting was unhappy in their job and did it in a moment of "stress and fatigue", he said.
He told Richard Nesbitt SC, for Ryanair, that he would have been reluctant to provide website users' identities to the police but, if those identities were demanded, they would have provided them, insofar as that was possible.
He said they had left postings on the site that expressed pilots' frustration.
They did not believe the site should be "anodyne or bland", but it should not be "scurrilous".

Mr Philips was giving evidence on the fifth day of proceedings in which Ryanair is seeking to identify persons engaged in communications on the website which, it claims, show evidence of wrongful activity against Ryanair and its employees.

The action is against Neil Johnston, an official with the trade union Impact, the Irish Airline Pilots' Association (Ialpa) and its British counterpart, Balpa.

Ryanair claims the defendants have a duty to name the persons identified by the codenames "ihateryanair", "cantfy-wontfly" and others on the Repa website which, it claims, was established by and is controlled by Ialpa and Balpa. Both defendants deny that claim.
The case continues today.
© The Irish Times

EI-CFC
31st May 2006, 18:15
Will profits fall devastatingly if customers are treated like customers and not as cash cows or if staff are treated valuable members of a team who take pride in their work and do the best for the company and not as cost centres?

Not devastatingly, I'd imagine, but yes probably. MOL's whole philosophy is to cut, cut, cut costs and to keep them down. Every little bit of money spent on a "frill" is another bit eaten away from their profit - and that includes such things as salaries, comforts, nice customer service etc. His attitude is that if Ryanair adds one "frill", then why not add another and so on so forth - which all adds up in the end.


Well, Southwest Airlines, being it a REAL Low Cost "majestic" Airline, unfortunately has to deal with pilot's union called SWAPA (www.swapa.org), and Southwest is still doing extremely good business anyways, "despite" the SWAPA... so explain to me, now, how REPA could ever damage RYANAIR then?

A whole different kettle of fish, really. Different continents, different approaches, different people, different regulation and most importantly now - a different history. It's like comparing an orange and a grapefruit and saying that they are the same because they are both citrus fruit. Ryanair and Southwest's business models share some similarities in that they are both "low-cost" carriers, but from there they've diverged greatly.

flatfour
31st May 2006, 19:19
The phrase "there's never smoke without fire" comes to mind with Ryanair's treatment of its pilots. If pilots feel able to discuss matters with their employers openly and fairly then they would do so directly, through their union. Unfortunately Ryanair appears to have engendered a climate of fear. Thus attitudes and problems which could be discussed in reasonable surroundings and with understanding, are aired in Court through legal representatives. I have no idea how forceful plots are prepared to be but Ryanair should realise that taking the problems of their own employees to court will be an unmitigated disaster for them both short term and medium term. Ryanair should try to discover precisely the causes of the resentment and confront it from within the company. Pax don't like seeing dirty washing being aired.

Hansol
1st Jun 2006, 08:57
Neck putting on block time !!! For a number of years now the poor treatment of FR pilots have been highlighted in this forum, and on most occasions it is presented as if the percieved injustice occurs against the entire pilot workforce, this simply is not the case. The vast majority of FR pilots are happy with their lot, the company simply could not prosper and grow if they were not. A small number are activists with their own agenda hell bent on stiring the pot. I know outside of work a number of FR Captains and first officers and most feel that FR are no better or worse then any other airline. So lets put a bit more balance into things and realise that the unions are driving most of this for their own ends.

Aloue
1st Jun 2006, 09:05
Hansol of course you are (intentionally?) putting your head on the block - since both contentions in your sentence -
The vast majority of FR pilots are happy with their lot.. and
... the company simply could not prosper and grow if they were not.
are nonsense. You may have missed the sea change in pilot opinion or the 95%+ vote to reject Ryanair's recent "generous" 5-4 pay offer. Or even the explosion in membership of their dedicated website. Just three clues as to the reality.

Hansol
1st Jun 2006, 13:21
Aloue - the explosion in membership of a secret website, come on that proves nothing. The REPA site can be manipulated to suit its owners ends.

FR are the champions of propoganda but pilots should be aware that the unions are very good at that game as well, and they have a lot to gain from getting into FR.

EI-CFC
1st Jun 2006, 14:31
that's why I have emphasised that RYANAIR is a very bad and a very sad copy of SWA


Sad, maybe in some aspects. Bad though? Nope. In fact in business terms they've re-defined SouthWests business model to such an extent that new entrants often copy FR than WN..now whether that is a good thing, is another matter. :eek:

the grim repa
1st Jun 2006, 14:58
Hi Hansol - I Think you are a very fine poster but i do not agree with your point of view.You have some alternative viewpoints.Anyhow that is your right.The right that ryanair management would have denied their employees on their private website www.repaweb.org.Had their own witnesses and experts not blown up so badly in their faces this week in dublins high court.

We have to ask the question,Why does ryanair management wish to deny pilots the right to private communication and the FREEDOM OF SPEECH?

Will pprune be the next website to dalliance with ryanair management in the courts.

cameldung
2nd Jun 2006, 08:04
I am a member of REPA and it has been made clear there that membership numbers there are overstated for various reasons (by a number I cannot recall, but it is around 40-50). That still indicates a membership of over 600. It also suggests that Ryanair-style manipulation of the facts is not normal on REPA, as you seem to suggest might be the case.

Hansol does this not actually imply that REPA is likely to be a more “reliable” source than Ryanair - for instance of pilot salary figures, of actual pilot treatment, of how agreements are really interpreted, how those paying for their type-rating are treated in practice (which is rapidly becoming the new "rip-off"), etc, etc. I think I know which one FR pilots trust and I think you might also know that too! Why would an employer go to so much trouble to infiltrate a website which it says it does not care about? Is it really because they are so concerned about their employees that they need a system of spies and anonymous sources?

delwy
2nd Jun 2006, 22:53
The REPA site can be manipulated to suit its owners ends. Hansol that's an interesting observation/suggestion. You don't work for Ryanair do you? I don't think most people would make that assumption or take such a line. You don't for example say it about pprune. In fact, was it not Ryanair that manipulated certain numbers in Stansted to out-manoeuvre BALPA a few years ago? Unlike your suggestion about REPA, in Ryanair's case the figures (proof) were there to be inspected after the event. So, as I say, you don't work for Ryanair do you?

Danny
6th Jun 2006, 21:10
Irish Times (http://www.ireland.com)

June 2nd 2006

Ryanair judgment reserved

The High Court has reserved judgment on a bid by Ryanair to obtain the names of individuals who posted material, including alleged threats, on a website set up to allow the airline's pilots communicate with each other.

Ryanair is seeking orders requiring the identification of persons engaged in communications on a website operated by Ryanair European Pilots Association (Repa). The company claimed the messages included a threat to "slash tyres" and showed evidence of wrongful activity against the company and its employees.

The action was taken against Neil Johnston, an official with the trade union Impact, the Irish Airline Pilots Association and its British counterpart, Balpa.

The company has claimed that pilots considering re-locating to Dublin to operate the new 737 800 aircraft were intimidated and threatened.

It contends the defendants have a duty to name the persons identified by the codename "ihateryanair", "cantfy-wontfly" and others on the Repa site and claims the website was established by and is controlled by Ialpa and Balpa. The defendants have denied the claims and contend Ryanair has not come to the court with clean hands and had itself engaged in intimidatory behaviour.

In closing submissions yesterday, Brian O'Moore SC, for Ialpa, said Ryanair had gone beyond the bounds of a reasonable reaction when it moved to investigate claims that pilots were being intimidated and bullied.

In reserving judgment on the seven-day hearing, Mr Justice Thomas Smyth said he would try to have a decision before the end of July.