O'Leary going to Jail?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
speaking of clever , i can see from your posts on this site that you have a REAL SLIM INTELLECT to boot Mr shady
breaking a high court order in ireland is a very serious offence
there is a good chance MOL will get spanked in some way
breaking a high court order in ireland is a very serious offence
there is a good chance MOL will get spanked in some way
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here there and everywhere
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Shady. May I draw to your attention the following words used by the High Court judge last Wednesday and which I was shown earlier today. I understand these words are among other extracts from what the judge said that are shortly to be posted on another site:
“Going to jail” may not be probable, but I have no doubt whatsoever that the “certain persons” will have been told what my legal source told me. Which is: take this seriously, it is REAL.
Also, as somebody has already pointed out, the contempt issue has not gone away – it has just been held over to the main court action at the end of May.
Again for the avoidance of doubt I will make it manifestly clear that if there is a breach of my order and if the matter comes back before me I will have little or no hesitation in considering the issue or issues of contempt of court and if I find contempt of court it will take an awful lot to convince me that it is not appropriate to jail certain persons until such time as they purge their contempt.
Also, as somebody has already pointed out, the contempt issue has not gone away – it has just been held over to the main court action at the end of May.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What does it mean to be found to be in contempt of court?
I will say straight off that I am not a lawyer, and there are undoutedly others who are better qualified to make the following points. But in the absence of their contribution, I have to point out that there seems to be some confusion over the nature of contempt of court.
MOL is not facing a criminal charge, so he does not necessarily face the prospect of a specific fine or jail term, as he would if found guilty of a criminal offence. His case involves an allegation of civil contempt: the court sanctions some one for failing to obey an earlier order of the court, or for interfering with the administration of justice.
Civil contempt can arise in many ways. They include allowing your mobile phone to ring in court, trying to intimidate witnesses, reporting the case in a prejudicial manner, or failing to obey a court injunction (as is alleged in Mr O'Leary's case).
With civil contempt, the court can send you to jail until you "purge your contempt", which you do by coming back to court very humbly and promising not to do it again. Unlike a criminal jail term, you can (in theory) stay in jail indefinitely until you do so.
As an alternative, the High Court has in recent years sent a former government minister to jail for periods of a week at a time, for failing to comply with earlier court orders to provide documents and cooperate with a Tribunal of Inquiry. It was a first, and was widely welcomed by the public. It made great television.
Speaking of the public, many of the comments about the nature of the courts are also wide of the mark. While I rarely find myself speaking up for the legal profession, the courts do operate in public and are generally outside of the political process. Some people will certainly disagree with me, on this, and they are of course entitled to their opinion (how generous of me
). But there are many, many examples of Irish courts handing down decisions which have been embarassing to, or against the interests of, the government of the day or the establishment in general.
They are of course constrained by the fact that they are asked to implement and interpret the law, which may or may not amount to justice.
Let us wait and see. The main fight is still a few weeks away. In the meantime, the mandatory injunction requiring the pilot's suspension to be lifted is significant; it would be madness for Ryanair not to obey it to the letter. MOL will have been warned of that by his legal team - and he may even listen.
Shamrock 602
MOL is not facing a criminal charge, so he does not necessarily face the prospect of a specific fine or jail term, as he would if found guilty of a criminal offence. His case involves an allegation of civil contempt: the court sanctions some one for failing to obey an earlier order of the court, or for interfering with the administration of justice.
Civil contempt can arise in many ways. They include allowing your mobile phone to ring in court, trying to intimidate witnesses, reporting the case in a prejudicial manner, or failing to obey a court injunction (as is alleged in Mr O'Leary's case).
With civil contempt, the court can send you to jail until you "purge your contempt", which you do by coming back to court very humbly and promising not to do it again. Unlike a criminal jail term, you can (in theory) stay in jail indefinitely until you do so.
As an alternative, the High Court has in recent years sent a former government minister to jail for periods of a week at a time, for failing to comply with earlier court orders to provide documents and cooperate with a Tribunal of Inquiry. It was a first, and was widely welcomed by the public. It made great television.
Speaking of the public, many of the comments about the nature of the courts are also wide of the mark. While I rarely find myself speaking up for the legal profession, the courts do operate in public and are generally outside of the political process. Some people will certainly disagree with me, on this, and they are of course entitled to their opinion (how generous of me
). But there are many, many examples of Irish courts handing down decisions which have been embarassing to, or against the interests of, the government of the day or the establishment in general.They are of course constrained by the fact that they are asked to implement and interpret the law, which may or may not amount to justice.
Let us wait and see. The main fight is still a few weeks away. In the meantime, the mandatory injunction requiring the pilot's suspension to be lifted is significant; it would be madness for Ryanair not to obey it to the letter. MOL will have been warned of that by his legal team - and he may even listen.
Shamrock 602
I've only made a few posts so I don't feel the need to order a Personal Title and help support PPRuNe
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting quote from another thread which is possibly very relevant to the 'corporate culture' within Ryanair:
Seems to sum Ryanair management quite neatly. The actual quote, I believe, is from the report into the Air Ontario Crash at Dryden some time ago. 
The effectiveness of CRM is "contingent upon the committment of the employer and the employees involved. The attainment of such a commitment is not easily achieved. Without a dedicated commitment by the employer....such training is llikely to have little or no impact on its primary goal of safety enhancement." I would say further to this, that human nature is such that managers who are out of their depth WILL resort to bullying and coercion; a poor corporate culture WILL develop. CRM has become just another tool to whip Captains over the head - to test them, to tell them they are failing, to blame them Frankly, CRM should mean CORPORATE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT - and managers should be tested too. I think the public would be shocked to know that they aren't.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: oxfordshire. uk
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O'Leary going to Jail !!!!
The actual quote, I believe, is from the report into the Air Ontario Crash at Dryden some time ago.
----------------------------------------------
Sorry, I should have said. Yes you are right Cargo Boy. (Are you older than your name suggests?)
Moshansky, Virgil P. Commissioner (1992) Commission of the Inquiry Into the Air Ontario Crash at Dryden, Ontario, Fifth Report, Volume III, page 1090.
They are the words of Dr. Helmreich. I wish the rest of that post had also been by Helmreich - the bit that suggested that CRM should mean CORPORATE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT!
The bit that goes, "I would say further to this, that human nature is such that managers who are out of their depth WILL resort to bullying and coercion; a poor corporate culture WILL develop. " comes from a working knowledge of psychodynamics of organizations. Does anyone remember the experiment at Yale where people were asked to give electric shocks to 'learners'? (Milgram, Stanley. (1974) Obedience to Authority. Tavistock Publications)
The 'learners' turned out to be actors who 'screamed in agony' while the real subjects of the experiment, those giving the 'electric shocks', continued to 'harm' the actors to the point of giving them heart attacks. Conclusion? Normal people will harm others if they think they are being obedient to those in authority. "I was just following orders..." is an example of that.
Remember - more people have died because of those following orders than those who opposed them.
Managers WILL send pilots to fly when they are fatigued and coerce even more work out of pilots - even if it means risking their lives. They do this to please those in authority over them. They are not deliberately being murderous. This is the chilling fact; this behaviour is normal.
That is why we need an enlightened, proactive, Regulator, not merely a commercially-focussed enterprise that merely relies on market forces. Market forces (with concomitant organizational psychodynamics) can kill.
----------------------------------------------
Sorry, I should have said. Yes you are right Cargo Boy. (Are you older than your name suggests?)
Moshansky, Virgil P. Commissioner (1992) Commission of the Inquiry Into the Air Ontario Crash at Dryden, Ontario, Fifth Report, Volume III, page 1090.
They are the words of Dr. Helmreich. I wish the rest of that post had also been by Helmreich - the bit that suggested that CRM should mean CORPORATE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT!
The bit that goes, "I would say further to this, that human nature is such that managers who are out of their depth WILL resort to bullying and coercion; a poor corporate culture WILL develop. " comes from a working knowledge of psychodynamics of organizations. Does anyone remember the experiment at Yale where people were asked to give electric shocks to 'learners'? (Milgram, Stanley. (1974) Obedience to Authority. Tavistock Publications)
The 'learners' turned out to be actors who 'screamed in agony' while the real subjects of the experiment, those giving the 'electric shocks', continued to 'harm' the actors to the point of giving them heart attacks. Conclusion? Normal people will harm others if they think they are being obedient to those in authority. "I was just following orders..." is an example of that.
Remember - more people have died because of those following orders than those who opposed them.
Managers WILL send pilots to fly when they are fatigued and coerce even more work out of pilots - even if it means risking their lives. They do this to please those in authority over them. They are not deliberately being murderous. This is the chilling fact; this behaviour is normal.
That is why we need an enlightened, proactive, Regulator, not merely a commercially-focussed enterprise that merely relies on market forces. Market forces (with concomitant organizational psychodynamics) can kill.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In the sticks
Posts: 9,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.rte.ie/business/2005/0509/ryanair.html
Ryanair pilot John Goss, whose suspension from flying duties triggered a bid to jail Michael O'Leary for contempt of a court order, has still not been reinstated to his flying roster.
Two weeks ago, Mr O'Leary escaped a possible prison sentence for contempt on a legal technicality.
Captain Goss's union, the IALPA, had alleged in court that Ryanair was in breach of a previous court order restraining it from holding a disciplinary meeting regarding the pilot.
At the time, Mr Justice White did not make any determination on the substantive row between the pilot and the airline, which has been scheduled for a full hearing on May 31.
However, the judge made an order requiring Ryanair to reinstate Captain Goss to flying duties.
Ryanair's argument that the suspension was made for operational and safety reasons was not accepted by the High Court.
However, the judge said his order was not inhibiting the company from suspending Mr Goss solely on bone fide safety grounds corroborated by appropriate evidence.
He also warned that if his order is breached, and if he found contempt, it would take an awful lot to convince him that jail was not appropriate.
In a statement today, the airline said it was in continuing discussions with Captain Goss about his return to flying duties.
Ryanair said it would not comment further on this matter, which remains the subject of ongoing legal proceedings.
No spokesperson from IALPA was available for comment.
Ryanair pilot John Goss, whose suspension from flying duties triggered a bid to jail Michael O'Leary for contempt of a court order, has still not been reinstated to his flying roster.
Two weeks ago, Mr O'Leary escaped a possible prison sentence for contempt on a legal technicality.
Captain Goss's union, the IALPA, had alleged in court that Ryanair was in breach of a previous court order restraining it from holding a disciplinary meeting regarding the pilot.
At the time, Mr Justice White did not make any determination on the substantive row between the pilot and the airline, which has been scheduled for a full hearing on May 31.
However, the judge made an order requiring Ryanair to reinstate Captain Goss to flying duties.
Ryanair's argument that the suspension was made for operational and safety reasons was not accepted by the High Court.
However, the judge said his order was not inhibiting the company from suspending Mr Goss solely on bone fide safety grounds corroborated by appropriate evidence.
He also warned that if his order is breached, and if he found contempt, it would take an awful lot to convince him that jail was not appropriate.
In a statement today, the airline said it was in continuing discussions with Captain Goss about his return to flying duties.
Ryanair said it would not comment further on this matter, which remains the subject of ongoing legal proceedings.
No spokesperson from IALPA was available for comment.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: oxfordshire. uk
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanairpilot quote:
no, honestly, thanks for that a320. thanks to you we'll be able to solve all the problems now.
yours indebtedly, etc, etc
------------------------
Ryanairpilot, This isn’t about instant solutions right now – an attitude ascribed to toddlers in highchairs; it is about understanding the issues and being prepared to be effective if the worst comes to be worst. If, God forbid, a Ryanair pilot’s family and friends find themselves fighting an unjust charge of pilot error, and if you were one of them, you would be glad of some help. Similarly should you (if you are a pilot) or your colleagues are injured as a result of management malpractice, you'd be glad that someone had thought through the issues.
Today the MEPs in our midst will be voting. Some of them object to having working hours limited – this has the potential to increase pilot hours. This is a sop to the ‘market forces’ managers. In reality it means workers are open to being coerced into working extended hours and of being bullied. This is known in Europe as ‘the British Disease’.
Are you OK with that?
PPRuNe seems to have various functions and sounding off is one of them; it gives instant gratification and often brings a smile to what is a serious subject - thankfully. Another, longer term function is to aid the understanding so that activists can organize their thoughts. If MPs understand the issues they are better equipped to help – and let’s face it, there are few who even attempt to understand the aviation safety issues.
It seems to me that what A320 was doing was bringing a balance of these two functions into this thread. Both are OK, so don’t knock it. OK!
no, honestly, thanks for that a320. thanks to you we'll be able to solve all the problems now.
yours indebtedly, etc, etc
------------------------
Ryanairpilot, This isn’t about instant solutions right now – an attitude ascribed to toddlers in highchairs; it is about understanding the issues and being prepared to be effective if the worst comes to be worst. If, God forbid, a Ryanair pilot’s family and friends find themselves fighting an unjust charge of pilot error, and if you were one of them, you would be glad of some help. Similarly should you (if you are a pilot) or your colleagues are injured as a result of management malpractice, you'd be glad that someone had thought through the issues.
Today the MEPs in our midst will be voting. Some of them object to having working hours limited – this has the potential to increase pilot hours. This is a sop to the ‘market forces’ managers. In reality it means workers are open to being coerced into working extended hours and of being bullied. This is known in Europe as ‘the British Disease’.
Are you OK with that?
PPRuNe seems to have various functions and sounding off is one of them; it gives instant gratification and often brings a smile to what is a serious subject - thankfully. Another, longer term function is to aid the understanding so that activists can organize their thoughts. If MPs understand the issues they are better equipped to help – and let’s face it, there are few who even attempt to understand the aviation safety issues.
It seems to me that what A320 was doing was bringing a balance of these two functions into this thread. Both are OK, so don’t knock it. OK!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: the forest from which little acorns do big oak trees grow.
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gorgophone
wow,no,honestly, thanks for that too.
not sure which particular tangent you've launched yourself off on but as regards my previous post and the issues within ryanair, you'll find, if you bother to ask, that we are deadly serious.
OK!
wow,no,honestly, thanks for that too.
not sure which particular tangent you've launched yourself off on but as regards my previous post and the issues within ryanair, you'll find, if you bother to ask, that we are deadly serious.
OK!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/0510/ryanair.html
Ryanair pilot renews legal action
10 May 2005 15:27
Lawyers for Ryanair pilot John Goss have indicated to the High Court that they wish to renew their application for the imprisonment of airline boss Michael O'Leary for an alleged contempt of a High Court Order.
Two weeks ago the High Court ordered Ryanair to restore Captain Goss to flying duties.
Today, Mr Justice White was told that the captain has had three medicals and he is still not back on the flying roster.
Later today the court will be asked to give the go ahead for an application of attachment and committal to be heard on Thursday.
Ryanair pilot renews legal action
10 May 2005 15:27
Lawyers for Ryanair pilot John Goss have indicated to the High Court that they wish to renew their application for the imprisonment of airline boss Michael O'Leary for an alleged contempt of a High Court Order.
Two weeks ago the High Court ordered Ryanair to restore Captain Goss to flying duties.
Today, Mr Justice White was told that the captain has had three medicals and he is still not back on the flying roster.
Later today the court will be asked to give the go ahead for an application of attachment and committal to be heard on Thursday.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to the High Court on Thursday
Looks like it's "see you in court" (again) for Michael O'Leary this Thursday (12th May)...
From the website of the public service broadcaster, RTE
Ryanair pilot renews legal action
10 May 2005 17:17 [GMT+1]
A new application for the jailing of Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary and two other senior executives for the alleged breach of a High Court order will come before the court on Thursday.
Ryanair pilot John Goss has served notice of new proceedings claiming that Ryanair is in contempt of a court order made two weeks ago directing that he be restored to full flying duties with the airline.
He is seeking the jailing of Chief Executive Michael O'Leary, Head of Flight and Ground Operations David O'Brien and Chief Pilot Ray Conway.
In his affidavit in court today, Captain Goss stated that he did not believe Ryanair has any bone fide reason for preventing him return to flying duties.
He said he believes the real motivation before the company refusal is that Ryanair and in particular Michael O'Leary will go to any lengths to ensure that a message is sent out to pilots and other employees that any person who challenges the Ryanair industrial relations and anti-trade union employment policies will suffer as a result.
In court today Mr Justice Barry White granted lawyers for Mr Goss leave to bring their application on Thursday [12th May]
(Edited to carry updated report)
Shamrock 602
From the website of the public service broadcaster, RTE
Ryanair pilot renews legal action
10 May 2005 17:17 [GMT+1]
A new application for the jailing of Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary and two other senior executives for the alleged breach of a High Court order will come before the court on Thursday.
Ryanair pilot John Goss has served notice of new proceedings claiming that Ryanair is in contempt of a court order made two weeks ago directing that he be restored to full flying duties with the airline.
He is seeking the jailing of Chief Executive Michael O'Leary, Head of Flight and Ground Operations David O'Brien and Chief Pilot Ray Conway.
In his affidavit in court today, Captain Goss stated that he did not believe Ryanair has any bone fide reason for preventing him return to flying duties.
He said he believes the real motivation before the company refusal is that Ryanair and in particular Michael O'Leary will go to any lengths to ensure that a message is sent out to pilots and other employees that any person who challenges the Ryanair industrial relations and anti-trade union employment policies will suffer as a result.
In court today Mr Justice Barry White granted lawyers for Mr Goss leave to bring their application on Thursday [12th May]
(Edited to carry updated report)
Shamrock 602
Last edited by Shamrock 602; 10th May 2005 at 16:41.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: oxfordshire. uk
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryanairpilot
I’m on your side. I believe that you are deadly serious – so you should be – but how does “thanks to you we'll be able to solve all the problems now” contribute to A-3TWENTY’s post?
Cargo Boy talked about corporate culture and safety. My post of 6th May refers to bullying ie MOLs behaviour and lack of Regulation.
Today, MEPs who have little knowledge of aviation matters will take a vote that will influence pilots’ jobs.
Far from being a tangent this, I argue, is central to how we are going beat attitudes like those exhibited by MOL. That is, through political means – and that means educating our MEPs as well as local MPs
And while I’m at it, all the best to Captain John Goss – hang on in there! I’d fly with you any day.
I’m on your side. I believe that you are deadly serious – so you should be – but how does “thanks to you we'll be able to solve all the problems now” contribute to A-3TWENTY’s post?
Cargo Boy talked about corporate culture and safety. My post of 6th May refers to bullying ie MOLs behaviour and lack of Regulation.
Today, MEPs who have little knowledge of aviation matters will take a vote that will influence pilots’ jobs.
Far from being a tangent this, I argue, is central to how we are going beat attitudes like those exhibited by MOL. That is, through political means – and that means educating our MEPs as well as local MPs
And while I’m at it, all the best to Captain John Goss – hang on in there! I’d fly with you any day.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: USA/Ireland
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lionel Hutz gives free legal advice.
Reinstate that Pilot, Mr O'Leary.
You are in a lot of trouble if you don't.
Disclaimer.
Lionel Hutz is not connected in any way with any of the belligerents in this action.
Lionel Hutz is a person with some legal knowledge.
Lionel Hutz does not care whether Mr O'Leary goes to jail or not, but is of the opinion that he will if he continues in his present vein.
The Battle is lost Michael.
Reinstate that Pilot, Mr O'Leary.
You are in a lot of trouble if you don't.
Disclaimer.
Lionel Hutz is not connected in any way with any of the belligerents in this action.
Lionel Hutz is a person with some legal knowledge.
Lionel Hutz does not care whether Mr O'Leary goes to jail or not, but is of the opinion that he will if he continues in his present vein.
The Battle is lost Michael.
Last edited by Lionel Hutz; 10th May 2005 at 21:39.
Seriously, why not make a year of prison mandatory for new CEO's? I think it would be fair that it count against their future offenses too. Besides, all the CEO's who get out of prison don't seem to be too interested in screwing people in the ass anymore. Coincidence?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Dublin
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More detail on the contempt proceedings
Whether or not the pigs take to the air, tomorrow's proceedings at the Four Courts in Dublin look like they will be interesting 
Here's a more detailed report of yesterday's hearing (Tues 10th May), from The Irish Times (normally accessible with subscription only).
Shamrock
Ryanair pilot seeks jail order against O'Leary
Irish Times, Wednesday 11th May 2005
The High Court will tomorrow [Thursday 12th May] hear a fresh bid to jail Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary for allegedly failing to obey a court order directing the airline to restore a senior pilot to flying duties.
Leave was given by Mr Justice Barry White yesterday to lawyers for pilot John Goss to bring an application tomorrow for the attachment and committal [i.e. jailing] of Mr O'Leary, Ryanair director of flight and ground operations, David O'Brien and the airline's chief pilot, Ray Conway.
An order may also be sought for the sequestration of the assets of Ryanair.
The judge granted leave after being told by Hugh Mohan SC, for Capt Goss, that Ryanair, despite a court order of April 27th last directing the company to restore Mr Goss to flying duties, was still refusing to allow Mr Goss to resume flying, although Mr Goss had been certified as fit to fly by doctors.
The judge heard that Mr Goss had also been assessed as not suffering from any stress such as to impair his ability to fly. The doctors who had examined him included a medical examiner used by the Irish Aviation Authority to assess the suitability of pilots to fly.
Mr Mohan noted that when the High Court had on April 27th last made a mandatory order directing that Mr Goss be restored to flying duties, Mr O'Leary had said in radio interviews that same evening that Mr Goss would be returned to flying duties as soon as possible. Counsel also told the court that Ryanair had sent two letters yesterday seeking to dissuade the bringing of the latest contempt proceedings.
In an affidavit, Mr Goss said he believed Mr O'Leary would go to any lengths to ensure a message was sent out to other pilots and employees that any person who challenged Ryanair's industrial relations and anti-trade union employment policies would suffer.
Mr Goss has alleged in proceedings initiated last February that Ryanair is conducting a campaign of bullying and harassment against him because he is seeking to use normal industrial relations procedures in his dealings with the airline, and to have his concerns represented by the Irish Airline Pilots' Association.
Ryanair has denied those claims. A full hearing of Mr Goss's challenge to disciplinary procedures taken against him has been fixed for May 31st.
On April 27th last, an application by Mr Goss to jail Mr O'Leary and Mr O'Brien was deferred when the judge found that a secretary within the company, rather than they personally, had been served with notice of contempt proceedings. It was submitted at that hearing that Ryanair had breached an order made in February restraining the airline from conducting a disciplinary hearing with him.
However, also at the April 27th hearing, Mr Justice White granted a mandatory injunction compelling Ryanair to reinstate Mr Goss to his flying duties.
Mr Goss had taken those earlier contempt proceedings after Ryanair, in a letter of April 12th last, said that in its view it was sensible and operationally appropriate that he should not engage in full-time duties and he was suspended on full pay until the legal action fixed for May 31st (of Mr Goss' challenge to disciplinary proceedings against him) and any subsequent disciplinary process was concluded.
Yesterday, Mr Mohan told Mr Justice White that regretfully his client still had not been rostered to fly and that was why the contempt proceedings were being brought. In an affidavit, Mr Goss said that on May 3rd last he had attended a meeting with Capt Conway and the chairman of Ryanair's air safety committee, Michael Horgan. Mr Goss was accompanied by Turlough O'Neill, a Ryanair colleague.
Mr Conway said the meeting was exploratory and was to discuss the position with regard to Mr Goss's return to flight duties and that no decision would be made at the meeting to allow him return to flying duties.
Mr Goss said he was astonished and very disappointed to hear this as he had obtained the court order allowing him return to flying duties.
Mr Conway said he agreed with the decision of Mr O'Brien in relation to Mr Goss' suspension and that there were flight safety implications due to what Mr Conway had referred to as "escalating legal and industrial issues."
Mr Conway said he had not been aware of Mr O'Brien's decision to suspend Mr Goss from flying duties until the day of the hearing of the previous court application on April 21st, and that he had not reviewed the file until after the making of the April 27th court order, Mr Goss said.
Mr Goss said he had informed Mr Conway that he was ready to go back flying to which Mr Conway replied that he, Mr Conway, wished to "disengage from the legal process" and that he had to observe the protections that were in place for flight safety implications.
Following further correspondence, he had received a letter from Mr Conway dated May 5th informing him it was impossible to assign Mr Goss to flying duties. In the letter, Mr Conway referred to having allegedly consulted with two unnamed international experts. Mr Goss said Mr Conway had not stated those persons' areas of alleged expertise.
Mr Conway did not make any reference to Mr Goss's previous medical certification of fitness to fly, nor did he explain the basis for his opinion.
© The Irish Times
Here's a more detailed report of yesterday's hearing (Tues 10th May), from The Irish Times (normally accessible with subscription only).
Shamrock
Ryanair pilot seeks jail order against O'Leary
Irish Times, Wednesday 11th May 2005
The High Court will tomorrow [Thursday 12th May] hear a fresh bid to jail Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary for allegedly failing to obey a court order directing the airline to restore a senior pilot to flying duties.
Leave was given by Mr Justice Barry White yesterday to lawyers for pilot John Goss to bring an application tomorrow for the attachment and committal [i.e. jailing] of Mr O'Leary, Ryanair director of flight and ground operations, David O'Brien and the airline's chief pilot, Ray Conway.
An order may also be sought for the sequestration of the assets of Ryanair.
The judge granted leave after being told by Hugh Mohan SC, for Capt Goss, that Ryanair, despite a court order of April 27th last directing the company to restore Mr Goss to flying duties, was still refusing to allow Mr Goss to resume flying, although Mr Goss had been certified as fit to fly by doctors.
The judge heard that Mr Goss had also been assessed as not suffering from any stress such as to impair his ability to fly. The doctors who had examined him included a medical examiner used by the Irish Aviation Authority to assess the suitability of pilots to fly.
Mr Mohan noted that when the High Court had on April 27th last made a mandatory order directing that Mr Goss be restored to flying duties, Mr O'Leary had said in radio interviews that same evening that Mr Goss would be returned to flying duties as soon as possible. Counsel also told the court that Ryanair had sent two letters yesterday seeking to dissuade the bringing of the latest contempt proceedings.
In an affidavit, Mr Goss said he believed Mr O'Leary would go to any lengths to ensure a message was sent out to other pilots and employees that any person who challenged Ryanair's industrial relations and anti-trade union employment policies would suffer.
Mr Goss has alleged in proceedings initiated last February that Ryanair is conducting a campaign of bullying and harassment against him because he is seeking to use normal industrial relations procedures in his dealings with the airline, and to have his concerns represented by the Irish Airline Pilots' Association.
Ryanair has denied those claims. A full hearing of Mr Goss's challenge to disciplinary procedures taken against him has been fixed for May 31st.
On April 27th last, an application by Mr Goss to jail Mr O'Leary and Mr O'Brien was deferred when the judge found that a secretary within the company, rather than they personally, had been served with notice of contempt proceedings. It was submitted at that hearing that Ryanair had breached an order made in February restraining the airline from conducting a disciplinary hearing with him.
However, also at the April 27th hearing, Mr Justice White granted a mandatory injunction compelling Ryanair to reinstate Mr Goss to his flying duties.
Mr Goss had taken those earlier contempt proceedings after Ryanair, in a letter of April 12th last, said that in its view it was sensible and operationally appropriate that he should not engage in full-time duties and he was suspended on full pay until the legal action fixed for May 31st (of Mr Goss' challenge to disciplinary proceedings against him) and any subsequent disciplinary process was concluded.
Yesterday, Mr Mohan told Mr Justice White that regretfully his client still had not been rostered to fly and that was why the contempt proceedings were being brought. In an affidavit, Mr Goss said that on May 3rd last he had attended a meeting with Capt Conway and the chairman of Ryanair's air safety committee, Michael Horgan. Mr Goss was accompanied by Turlough O'Neill, a Ryanair colleague.
Mr Conway said the meeting was exploratory and was to discuss the position with regard to Mr Goss's return to flight duties and that no decision would be made at the meeting to allow him return to flying duties.
Mr Goss said he was astonished and very disappointed to hear this as he had obtained the court order allowing him return to flying duties.
Mr Conway said he agreed with the decision of Mr O'Brien in relation to Mr Goss' suspension and that there were flight safety implications due to what Mr Conway had referred to as "escalating legal and industrial issues."
Mr Conway said he had not been aware of Mr O'Brien's decision to suspend Mr Goss from flying duties until the day of the hearing of the previous court application on April 21st, and that he had not reviewed the file until after the making of the April 27th court order, Mr Goss said.
Mr Goss said he had informed Mr Conway that he was ready to go back flying to which Mr Conway replied that he, Mr Conway, wished to "disengage from the legal process" and that he had to observe the protections that were in place for flight safety implications.
Following further correspondence, he had received a letter from Mr Conway dated May 5th informing him it was impossible to assign Mr Goss to flying duties. In the letter, Mr Conway referred to having allegedly consulted with two unnamed international experts. Mr Goss said Mr Conway had not stated those persons' areas of alleged expertise.
Mr Conway did not make any reference to Mr Goss's previous medical certification of fitness to fly, nor did he explain the basis for his opinion.
© The Irish Times
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fakepilot's suggestion that all CEOs should be sent to prison is an interesting one. In fact, it would be good for their health: as Ernest Saunders proved, after a stay in prison it is in fact possible to recover from terminal Alzheimer's Disease!