Ryanair loses legal bid to identify website critics

[cargo boy]

A snippet of commentary from the judgement in the case regarding Warwick Brady:

Mr. Brady said he was very surprised at the sort of attitude of the people who signalled a preference to go back to Dublin once offered. I wondered at his surprise in the light of the sneering disregard of the tone of the letter of 30th June 2004 addressed to the pilots seen, in my opinion, wholly inappropriate to the discourse of industrial relations [T.2 p.109/110]. It indeed might have a resonance to the terms of inquiry of the police officers in the questioning in the play Assinamali.

Hmm... does that not remind you of "sneering" and "disregard" that is so inherent in Leo's posts? Perhaps it is a quality required of Ryanair management wannabes. Maybe there'll be a position for a Swiss national based in Germany some time in the near future.

This bit in reference to the above mentioned letter:

The context in which the tension between the Plaintiff and the captains/pilots (in Dublin) or who may have wished to be transferred to Dublin to fly the 737-800s was that the only terms which Ryanair would tolerate were their own (not such as might have been consensually agreed between the company and the individual pilots). These dictated or non-negotiable terms were set out in the letter dated 12th November 2004 addressed to the pilots:-

"Dear ...

We are pleased to offer you a place on a conversion training course for a Boeing 737-800. This offer is conditional on your understanding and acceptance of the following conditions:

1. A position on the B737-800 based in Dublin will only be offered after you have successfully completed the conversion training programme and the relevant regulatory authority has endorsed your pilot's licence. The cost of this training programme is £10,000 (€15,000) and payment of these training costs is required prior to commencement of training. Since your gross total remuneration from Ryanair is over [ ] (putting you in the top two percent earners in Ireland) this training cost in modest in the context of your substantial income.

3. However Ryanair proposes to defer payment of training costs for a period of five years from commencement of conversion training. Payment will become due immediately if either of the following two conditions materialises before the end of the five year period;

(a) You leave Ryanair's employment within five years of commencement of your conversion training then you will be liable to repay the full training costs, which amount to Stg£10,000 (€15,000). Repayment will not apply to pilots who reach normal retirement during the five year period.

(b) It has been Ryanair's policy - for so long as our people deal directly with the company - that pay will be better, pay increases higher, and training costs shall be met by the company. We wish to remind you that should this policy be altered and Ryanair be compelled to engage in collective bargaining with any pilot association or trade union within five years of commencement of your conversion training, then you will be liable to repay the full training costs. Naturally this does not and will not affect your right to freely join any trade union or association of your choice.

4. Ryanair will write off this debt in full at the end of this five year period provided that neither of the events specified at 3(a) and 3(b) have materialised.

5. If you decline this offer of conversion, then you will continue to operate on the B737-200 fleet. However, it is envisaged that the 200 fleet will be phased out over the next number of years, and if there is no suitable alternative work available at that time such as 737-800 series flying at one of our other bases then you will be given notice of redundancy.

6. This offer is available for acceptance by you for a seven day period. The offer automatically lapses at 17:30 on 19th November 2004. You may confirm your acceptance of this offer, by signing this document and returning the original by hand to the undersigned before 17:30 on Friday, 19th November next.

Finally, congratulations on your selection for conversion training and we look forward to working with you.

David O'Brien
Director of Operations."

In short the pilots not only were given a Hobson's choice, but in respect of condition 3(b) a pilot through no act or default on his part could suffer the loss of €15,000. The letter is evidence as to its being written and its contents but not necessarily the veracity of the contents and in particular I had no evidence as to whether the reference to the gross total of remuneration referred to in paragraph 2 is comparable to a base information. It may be that in certain categories the gross total of remuneration for certain Ryanair pilots may exceed that in other airlines, I am not aware of the fact either way but even if it does, evidence as to its true worth as to whether sums have to be allowed for meals, uniforms, periodic in-service training, meals away from home allowances, et cetera. However, it is not an issue that requires determination in this case.

...However, it seems both irrational and unjust that the actions of third parties when a trained pilot could not control their actions should in effect be penalised by an alteration by Ryanair engaging at a future date in collective bargaining "with any pilot association or trade union." In my judgment this is a most onerous condition and bears all the hallmarks of oppression.

[cargo boy]

With reference to Warwick Brady and Eddie Wilson:

Mr. Wilson through some Iscariot or Iago had a password to the REPA website and this secured access to it since in or about 10th/14th December 2004, and Ryanair have been able to monitor it to date on whatever frequency is chosen. It was the wish of the Plaintiff that the anonymity of the informer of the password be protected (a marked contrast in attitude to the supposed disloyalty to the company of those who used the website) - it was not an issue and is not an issue that I have to decide and I did not insist on an answer to the enquiry. Like Mr. Brady, Mr. Wilson too swore that he did not know who left excerpts from the website on his desk. I have great difficulty in believing this evidence from either.

When Mr. Wilson came to give evidence on what Mr. O'Brien's reputed response to a phone call from Mr. Brady concerning the alleged threats was, there is not only a difference as between Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Brady, but also between Mr. Wilson and Mr. O'Brien. I find it impossible to know who is telling the truth on the stated/reputed response of "don't provide me with names but we will instigate an investigation immediately." In many other cases such differences on such a detail might be of little account, but in the instant case it is a matter of importance for it is the point from which the 'Goss investigation' begins in earnest. Altogether from reflecting no credit on the "open culture" said by Mr. Wilson to exist and which Ryanair is imbued [T.3 p.47 q.63 l.6], it betokens a mindset with a predisposition to subject Captain Goss to an investigation without any fair or reasonable bases. If industrial relations in Ryanair had become fraught in late November/early December 2004 and thereafter, its origins, appear to me, are unburdened by integrity.

A judge with a particularly good insight methinks.

My emphasis and italics

[cargo boy]

And the judges' coup de grace:

Regrettably, but without hesitation, I find as a fact that on a conspectus view of the evidence as a whole in this case "fairness" did not seem to come into the reckoning of the Plaintiff in its dealings with the Defendants on the issues raised in and by this case. In summary, in the words of Isabella in Measure for Measure Act II.2: "Oh, it is excellent to have a giant's strength; but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant."

Now, if only Leo could learn how to use quotations and relate them to the discussion. I fear that we are about to be overwhelmed with yet more of his blustering attempts to show how "learn'd" he is... NOT! It will, no doubt, only serve to highlight the wisdom of a judge as opposed to an "Iscariot" or a "Iago"!

[buttline]

Conclusion

So, in simpler language, the Judge said that Ryanair management are liars and bullies. Sounds pretty spot on to me.

I lasted barely 6 months as a Ryanair pilot before they made me so sick to my stomach I had to leave. Each time I read the latest condescending, sneering and propagandistic memo from DOB or EW, it provoked something between disgust and anger within me - not good before you go and operate a flight with 189 passengers on board.

Why oh why can't they just realise that you can have a very profitable airline without treating everyone (customers, staff and vendors) like dirt?? I just can't understand it - it doesn't make business sense.

Congratulations to all involved. I wish you all at Ryanair and REPA the very best for the future.

[Boy]

It gets worse for Ryanair - is the tide turning?

The following is from the Sunday Independent - not normally an organ to willingly criticise Ryanair. The tone towards Ryanair and its practices has clearly changed ....

Ryanair case crash lands spectacularly in the High Court

RYANAIR'S Michael O'Leary describes himself, with accuracy, as an "obnoxious little b****x".

Last week, in a startling (and so far under-reported) judgment, the High Court made findings about Ryanair executives that are far more serious than that.

Ryanair isn't just a company that makes millions from air transport - it's a massive economic and political presence in any country in which it chooses to operate. The High Court judgment of Mr Justice Thomas Smyth illuminates that company in a way not previously seen.

It was a small legal action - hardly more than a technical motion. It led, in the words of the judge, to the giving of "false evidence" under oath by two Ryanair executives.

Ryanair was a failing company in the early Nineties, then it studied and adopted the business model of a US carrier, Southwest Airlines. The policies of short haul, fast turnaround, secondary airports, no tickets, cutting frills, a single aircraft model (it cuts costs for spare parts and maintenance) all were taken from Southwest.

O'Leary modelled his publicity-hound image on that of Southwest's founder, Herb Kelleher.

One aspect of Southwest Airlines that wasn't imported to Ryanair was its relentlessly-friendly style. Instead of Southwest's slogan, "Spreading the luv !", Ryanair adopted a bullying manner and an often gratuitous aggression. When Belgian authorities demanded that Ryanair repay a couple of million euro, O'Leary's response was to write back with a suggestion that they "f**k off". It wasn't enough to sidetrack travel agents, O'Leary wanted to "take the f**kers out and shoot them".

O'Leary guessed that customers didn't care about abuse, as long as the price was right - and many do indeed find the aggression absolutely appropriate in this tigerish age. The company became huge. Assertions that Ryanair isn't as cheap as it likes to claim were drowned by a relentless stream of free publicity, as Clongowes old boy O'Leary played the anti-establishment rebel for an accommodating media.

Customers who sought a refund for one reason or another, were treated to O'Leary's response: "What part of 'no refund' don't you understand? You are not getting a refund, so f**k off".

The aggression, not surprisingly, carried over into staff relations.

From 1999, Ryanair began retraining pilots on bigger Boeing planes, the 737-800 instead of the 737-200. This led to an ultimatum to Dublin pilots. Ryanair would pay the €15,000 cost of the retraining - but should "Ryanair be compelled to engage in collective bargaining with any pilot association or trade union within five years of commencement of your conversion training, then you will be liable to repay the full training costs".

If pilots didn't accept this offer, they would become redundant as the Boeing 737-200 was phased out. They had seven days to decide.

"It seems both irrational and unjust," Judge Smyth said, that pilots should be penalised to the extent of €15,000 for the actions of third parties over which they had no control.

"In my judgment this is a most onerous condition and bears all the hallmarks of oppression."

In September 2004, pilots set up a closed website, Ryanair European Pilots Association (REPA). This is a forum within which pilots who are spread geographically can meet electronically to frankly discuss relations with their employer. A password is needed to enter the website.

Within three months, in the words of Judge Smyth, "some informer or traitor amongst the pilots" gave Ryanair the password. (The judge also used the words 'Iscariot or Iago' to describe the management-friendly pilot.) From December 2004, Ryanair has monitored the private discussion. And this led to the legal action that resulted in last week's judgment.

To maintain confidentiality, the pilots use pseudonyms in the website discussion. Ryanair wanted to identify the pilots. The company chose remarks made by a pilot - "considered slashing their tyres" - as the basis for a legal claim. The company alleged that this referred to pilots overseas who might accept the offer and move to Dublin. And this was evidence of intimidation. And Ryanair had a duty of care to its staff to investigate such threats.

So, Ryanair made a "sole discovery" motion, asking the High Court to order REPA to disclose the identity behind a number of pseudonyms.

Having heard the evidence, Mr Justice Smyth concluded that there was no threat or intimidation. A reference to slashing tyres was "weak adolescent street humour", quickly sidelined and withdrawn, in a private gripe among a staff suffering from frustration.

Judge Smyth quoted evidence of Mr Warwick Brady, Ryanair's Deputy Director of Flight Operations, that a Captain Gale "received warnings not to go back to Dublin to fly and be based there".

The judge found that this was one of two pieces of evidence from Mr Brady that "I consider to be false".

The judge was impressed by the pilot allegedly intimidated, Captain John Gale, who gave "clear, unequivocal evidence" that he "was never warned or threatened". After examining Ryanair's claims, Judge Smyth said he was "quite satisfied" that the alleged threats, intimidation and warnings "did not exist".

Judge Smyth rejected the evidence of Ryanair's head of personnel, Eddie Wilson, as "baseless and false".

He went further. "The pleaded concern and invocation of the statutory duties" to protect its staff from bullying and intimidation, "was to lend a facade of concern" to Ryanair's action against the pilots.

"It is a feigned exercise," he found, designed to divide the loyalty of the pilots.

RYANAIR swore on oath it wanted to investigate the identity of the pilots on the website in order to protect other staff.

"The real as opposed to the putative purpose of any investigation," said Judge Smyth, "was to break whatever resolve there might have been amongst the captains to seek better terms." And, in particular, "a very reasonable and justifiable concern" about the "take it or leave it" offer, which could cost the pilots €15,000 each.

The judge concluded that Ryanair "is entitled to loyalty from its workforce, but not supine deference".

The High Court is a busy place. People queue to have the court rule on life-changing issues. And, Judge Smyth concluded from the evidence, a major company used the court in a "feigned exercise" to achieve its commercial ends.

And, he found, in the process, two of its executives gave "false evidence".

Judge Smyth (as judges are sometimes wont to do) quoted Shakespeare: "Oh, it is excellent to have a giant's strength; but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant."

Ryanair uses its giant's economic strength to demand best terms from those with whom it does business. It also uses its political strength. It is currently mobilising customers in Poland in a writing campaign to force the government to build a new airport at Modlin, north of Warsaw.

In Ireland, it regularly buys adverts attacking politicians (very sensitive people as elections loom) - always with a commercial end in sight. It has funded parties, including the PDs.

That powerful and politically-active company has been found to have mounted a "feigned" legal action under a "facade of concern" for its staff.

Questions arise: if two executives gave "false evidence" were they each engaged in a solo run? Or did they discuss their evidence? Was anyone else involved in such a discussion?

Are there any consequences for what the judge has found transpired?

Will Ryanair appeal? Will it accept the judgment and maybe even apologise for wasting the court's time in mounting what Judge Smyth called a "feigned" legal action?

Or will the company simply respond to the High Court with the same answer it gives to those of its customers who seek a refund?

Gene Kerrigan

[fmgc]

Why oh why can't they just realise that you can have a very profitable airline without treating everyone (customers, staff and vendors) like dirt?? I just can't understand it - it doesn't make business sense.

Because the head honcho just doesn't let his brain think that way.

[cargo boy]

So that means they can't sue anyone for telling the truth which is...

Ryanair is an opressive and obnoxious employer managed by bullies and liars.

It would seem that this message has been preached on this website for many years. I wonder what took the media so long to figure out what we, as pilots, already knew.

It just goes to show you why the likes of Leo Hairy Camel is so obnoxious when he types his defence of his "lying and bullying" managers methods. What more would you expect from an Iscariot and an Iago.

[adolf hucker]

Next time I walk into a bar and find myself standing next to a gent wearing the garb of a High Court Judge and a small name badge 'Mr Justice Smythe', I might have to break the habit of a lifetime and buy the dude a drink.

As a current FR pilot, I can confirm that M'Lud has hit the nail squarely on the head regarding the fact that Ryanair management are not over-burdened with integrity. The fact that he has identified them as (unconvincing) liars has also not come as a great surprise but is, in any case, a most gratifying observation.

Can't wait for the next lunatic memo from DOB proclaiming Ryanair's great victory at the High Court. Come on Comical Ali, you know you want to send us all a memo.

[niknak]

We must be one of the few airports that, allegedly, have told OlearyAir to **** off....

[sky9]

I don't know how it works in Ireland but the FOD in the UK is a named and approved person on the AOC.

It might be a bit of a problem to the IAA to have someone who was named as giving "false evidence" in such a position, but there again possibly it won't.

[A330busdriver]

Sky9,

As one who has dealt with the IAA for many years, I can assure that this would cause them not a shred of concern. As an organisation they lack integrity and is full of ex EI and FR management bods.

There was a time that one joked about it being the downtown office of an airline, but that joke has long died with the stark reality that they are little else.

[BEagle]

An official announcement from Leo, the camels' hairy hole:

[ZQA297/30]

Kindly lay off Baghdad Bob.
His tongue was firmly in cheek, and his occasional cheeky smile was proof of that.

To put the Camel in the same class is a gross insult to Bob, unless of course the Camel is approaching the cheek from the other end.

[RAT 5]

I hear Alistair Cambell is currently without fulltime employment. Perhaps his past skills(?) might be called up on? It would be fascinating to find out how victory could be grasped from the jaws of defeat. Surely there has to be some response to the judgement, even if it is only an apology? (Woops; just found a toungue in my cheek.)

[buttline]

Not cool?

Don't want to be all P.C. here but I whince when I read the word Pikey so often in posts about RYR...
I've always found the Irish to have very good manners and charm in spades. Ryanair management culture is not representative of the Irish IMHO.
One of the most suprising things about RYR (to a Brit ex-RYR pilot) is that they treat their Irish pilots the worst of all. The Dublin pilots have been the strongest rock in fighting the management oppression within the company and the rest of us owe them a great debt of gratitude. (Which I think is best repaid by joining IALPA / BALPA and forcing union recognition on RYR - go on - it'll be highly entertaining at least!)

[ScotPilot]

Well done BALPA!

[Revolutionarry]

Freedom Of Speech

Thank god for freedom of speech and long may it be defended against all commers. I believe and insist that we can all say exacly what we want about anything, and anyone who doesnt agree with us can say so, so long as the 'harm' principal is not violated.

If a big company such as Ryanair feels that it's actions are morally defensible, then why does it have to go to court in the first place.

It seems to me that Ryanair doesnt like freedom of speech very much, which puts them on roughly the same moral ground, as many other repugnant organisations and individuals.

Like all great dictators, and dogs, it will have its day and be kicked to the kerb, nothing lasts forever, people will only tolerate cheap and nasty until they can afford better, and they wont tolerate expensive and nasty at all.

Devious and snide tactics always rebound in the end. Honesty and quality have no betters. That is my opinion.

[fmgc]

What goes around comes around................eventually.

[Oilhead]

No paragraph 2?

I noticed in that letter to pilots it goes from para 1 directly to para 3 - typo or is there a missing paragraph? It would be hard to top what is already in that letter.

Just curious..... Oilhead - R1200GS

[Flying Microphone]

just catching up with this thread...

Still no news of court costs then?