Ryanair loses legal bid to identify website critics
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It brings a tear to your eye. All those people doubting BALPA should take a close look at how well they have done in very trying circumstances. They and their counterparts at REPA took an enormous risk on behalf of their members. Like many pilots who care deeply about our industry, I would like to congratulate them on a job well done.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: essex
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not a win. Nothing has been gained by the Pilot group. All we have done is fend of an attack by the “Management”. This case should never have been brought before the court. Ryanair could never win it with the evidence they presented and as for committing perjury, should these people be managing a multinational company that relies the honesty of its staff to run a SAFE operation. Why was this money wasted in this way? Who will pay for this gross mismanagement. The only way to prevent a repeat of this is to make individuals personally responsible. MOL appointed these people to increase the revenue of the company. They have failed someone must carry the can. In my opinion this should go right to the top but I doubt it will.
1 million euros for this case. 1 million for the John Goss case. This wipes out all the savings from : uniform/tea/coffee/hotels/ids and much more in one go. Nice work boys!
1 million euros for this case. 1 million for the John Goss case. This wipes out all the savings from : uniform/tea/coffee/hotels/ids and much more in one go. Nice work boys!
Paxing All Over The World
essexboy you are correct but nothing will change. The actions taken by mangement will have been with the approval of MoL. I say that because MoL is the ultimate control freak and nothing happens without his say so. That does not mean that he gave specific instructions for these specific actions but he hired and trained people who learnt the way he wants things done. Therefore, nothing will change because it is MoL's way of running the company.
Nothing can change in the future because the basic operation of the company is long since established. It is correct that they lost this one but they will not change because it is not within their ability to change. They are locked deeply into their view of how to run the company and (as I have said before) even after MoL is gone - nothing will change. Even if the company were to become financially vulnerable - they will not change.
Nothing can change in the future because the basic operation of the company is long since established. It is correct that they lost this one but they will not change because it is not within their ability to change. They are locked deeply into their view of how to run the company and (as I have said before) even after MoL is gone - nothing will change. Even if the company were to become financially vulnerable - they will not change.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Thrid rock from the sun
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What will change
Onething will change....The underling management of MOL will realise that they are now individually responsible for their actions and words. The collective shafting is now a dangerous game. There will be no MOL to protect them for a Judges penalty.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... the real purpose was to "break the resolve" of the pilots to seek better terms and conditions.
It all seems to have been a multi-faceted and massive own goal. For example, four members of mangement, including two senior members have had their behaviour and honesty questioned. I think that this must begin to have an impact on what they say and do - at least it will if they have any wit (which, it must be conceded, does not always appear to be the case).
These executives also have an important role to play in front of various hearings and tribunals where the honesty of what they have said and written had already been agressively questioned - even before the judge spoke - by Ryanair pilots.
Were these executives to leave Ryanair the stain of the finding will follow them - forever.
In addition the campaign against Captain Goss has now been untangled and the cynicism of Ryanair actions in pursuing an innocent man are laid bare. This, for me, has been the real shocker. The basis on which the airline pursued this man was close to zilch - in effect it was a rumour which, it is hinted, might even have originally come from a management source.
What never seems to change for FR management is their boundless self-confidence and almost pathological self-belief. Will this win out over the truth yet again in the future? The answer is no longer quite so clear as it might have appeared in the past.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus made a statement recently, about thier own plights, which seems appropriate to this situation:
"We have shot ourselves in both feet with one bullet."
"We have shot ourselves in both feet with one bullet."
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Thrid rock from the sun
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time for a rethink Leo
Now may be time for a rethinkon current legal actions pending. Do you want to cost the company MILLIONS Mick, perhaps its time the board kicked you up the backside and put manners on you, seeing as you have yet to learn some !!!!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Up In The Sky...
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Management? More like clowns! Capt's receive snotty letters for not being at the top of fuel savers and not doing CDA approaches. Tea, coffee, uniforms etc all gone.
Lost cost? Are you sure seems to be VERY high cost! Lawyers and court settlements are not cheap. So all the hard work of the already whipped employees buys the laywers another 1m euro house, well done MOL!
No doubt he'll get the mil back by further cuts!
What a joke, if any other employee was responsible for this much loss they'd be booted out!
Lost cost? Are you sure seems to be VERY high cost! Lawyers and court settlements are not cheap. So all the hard work of the already whipped employees buys the laywers another 1m euro house, well done MOL!
No doubt he'll get the mil back by further cuts!
What a joke, if any other employee was responsible for this much loss they'd be booted out!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: eire
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAXboy - I have to disagree. If there is one thing that can be taken for granted, it is most certainly that MOL - if not all of his selected minions - is a shrewd and clever character. Maybe only recently has the penny begun to drop that certain management practices are not, shall we say, the most productive in the long term - and the short term is ending. I think that what will happen depends largely on MOL's own future desires. If he wishes to pursue an alternative path on the way to (yet more) riches - or simply a more relaxed lifestyle, and the accolytes are left in charge, I think that yes, you may be right. Due to their own rigorous selection and training, they probably lack the collective ability and initiative to change horses sucessfully - even if the obvious need for a change in tactics were perceived. My fear is that they would likely, suddenly faced with unaccustomed decision-making authority and responsibility, feel slightly out of depth and simply apply the old same ole same ole with more force - just to make up for the instability of the new ground.
If, however, FR's helm still holds professional interest for MOL, he might just find an incredible challenge in reinventing a more productive - and potentially long-lived, management (and corporate) culture. A man's real measure is not simply in seeing that change is needed, but in ensuring that said change occurs. Having single-mindedly created the most successful aviation story in at least 30 years, the real challenge now, is to convert that force-fed and fiery birth, infancy and adolescence, into a more mature personality that can survive the type of geographic expansion that now lies at the doorstep. One strong-willed and forceful personality can horsewhip a small organization into the type of rapid expansion which FR has enjoyed, but a different style is now needed if this vibrant youngster is not to burn out just when the borders of Europe are eached.
If married life hasn't yet dulled his edge, I think it wholely possible that Michael might be the only person capable of accomplishing the type of gear change required for FRs longer term potential. The question is: Is MOL still up for this possibly more demanding challenge?
If, however, FR's helm still holds professional interest for MOL, he might just find an incredible challenge in reinventing a more productive - and potentially long-lived, management (and corporate) culture. A man's real measure is not simply in seeing that change is needed, but in ensuring that said change occurs. Having single-mindedly created the most successful aviation story in at least 30 years, the real challenge now, is to convert that force-fed and fiery birth, infancy and adolescence, into a more mature personality that can survive the type of geographic expansion that now lies at the doorstep. One strong-willed and forceful personality can horsewhip a small organization into the type of rapid expansion which FR has enjoyed, but a different style is now needed if this vibrant youngster is not to burn out just when the borders of Europe are eached.
If married life hasn't yet dulled his edge, I think it wholely possible that Michael might be the only person capable of accomplishing the type of gear change required for FRs longer term potential. The question is: Is MOL still up for this possibly more demanding challenge?
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Octopussy2 I read it on the REPA site. BTW, the judgment is long but quite an interesting read. They also provide a pdf download - the pdf file is about 1mb. However, all of this is on the actual site. All I can suggest is to try REPA by sending an e-mail using info on their "Contact Us" page (www.repaweb.org). Maybe they would send you a copy.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A new broom
Following Sandman's comments, I think there is an alternative view to his conclusion that MOL is the only person the carry the Ryanair story forward.
Frequently in other business types an entrepreneur starts something up, grows it through energy and sheer force of will to a certain level, and then passes the reins to someone else. The new boy is a different type of character, one who is good at process and integration because these are what are required in a new business rather than smashing down the walls for the initial land-grab.
I have read somewhere (but can't for the life of me remember where) some comment that non exec directors at Ryanair were privately (or not, if it's in the public domain) considering whether MOL was the right man to continue leading the company. A change might be in the best interests of the future growth of Ryanair now that it is a firmly established leading player in the low cost business. That was recently and before last week's judgement. If true, it can only enhance their view that maybe it's time for change at the top.
He'd go with all the accolades they could shower on him, but he'd go becuase his job, with his skill-set, was done. Time for a steady hand on the tiller.
Finger crossed...
Frequently in other business types an entrepreneur starts something up, grows it through energy and sheer force of will to a certain level, and then passes the reins to someone else. The new boy is a different type of character, one who is good at process and integration because these are what are required in a new business rather than smashing down the walls for the initial land-grab.
I have read somewhere (but can't for the life of me remember where) some comment that non exec directors at Ryanair were privately (or not, if it's in the public domain) considering whether MOL was the right man to continue leading the company. A change might be in the best interests of the future growth of Ryanair now that it is a firmly established leading player in the low cost business. That was recently and before last week's judgement. If true, it can only enhance their view that maybe it's time for change at the top.
He'd go with all the accolades they could shower on him, but he'd go becuase his job, with his skill-set, was done. Time for a steady hand on the tiller.
Finger crossed...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Around and about
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you start at the top and read your way all the way through, this thread really does make for good (even exciting) reading. A great story unfolds, the good guys are easily identified and the bad guys are equally obvious (I like simplicity!). “Good” triumphs over … “whatever” … and we even get a sense that there is yet more to come. Maybe we could get a TV series out of this, something like: “Ryanair, the unending saga”!?!
One thing is clear, it is all going in the right direction. Well done to all concerned. Finish the job.
One thing is clear, it is all going in the right direction. Well done to all concerned. Finish the job.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More from de judge ....
Hot from the press .... Mr. Justice Smyth has spoken again. The record of the hearing on costs in the REPA case has been published (this was a week later than the verdict). I have cut and pasted some that may make some readers here smile. Here is Mr. Justice Smyth on various subjects:
On Ryanair’s “lack of candour”:
"Where internally on the Plaintiff's team the lack of frankness arose is irrelevant for present purposes, there has been a failure of candour with the Court. The fact is that there were consequences of the lack of frankness with the Court, which was moved to make the order, and an onerous order, for discovery and the Defendants were put to an undue and unfair trouble and expense, and I cannot, with equanimity, express other than disapproval of such conduct.
It is, I regret to note, all of apiece with the approach of the Plaintiff towards the Defendants and others to whom I have referred in my judgment. The Plaintiff's conduct of the litigation as a whole, and discovery in particular, was unreasonable, and in its prosecution oppressive."
On Ryanair's “unreasonableness”:
In my judgment, there was unreasonableness of a high degree by the Plaintiff, and I do not consider it merely to have been wrong in hindsight. In the instant case, the Defendants made a real effort to find a reasonable solution to the contested facts that led them to the formulation of a case by referring same to the Labour Relations Commission. The invitation was not merely refused; it was rejected.
On his duties as a trial judge:
I am mindful of my animadversions as a trial judge and the necessity to be temperate in language. On the other hand there are occasions, of which this is regretfully I think the second in my career as a judge I have had to do so, to say things that I found extremely difficult but which could not be left unsaid. There are times when one must say out boldly and without equivocation matters that cannot be pleasant for the hearer or recipient of the expression of view or a finding of fact or an inference drawn from the findings of fact.
On the “investigation” of Captain John Goss:
It seems to me that the questions on the evidence before me, there was no basis for the Goss investigation ….
On Ryanair’s attitude to Discovery:
The disparity between what was sworn to for discovery purposes and what was sworn in court was a serious matter. It went to the essential relief being sought by the Plaintiff. Someone had clearly forgotten Cordelia's reflection in King Lear, Act 1, Scene 1:
"Time shall unfold what pleated cunning hides;
Who cover faults, at last shame them derides."
On his judgment re costs:
In my judgment and without any sense of doubt, although perhaps the human being should always have some doubt, but to the extent that I can be as certain as a judge can be, I have no doubt that this is a case in which solicitor-and-own-client costs should be awarded to the Defendants.
Now, I am quite conscious that it is a serious order to make. It was intimated, as I say, to me earlier on that this would be done almost immediately the case was over. I have had to think about it. I have to re-read sections of the transcript again. I have very carefully considered every submission that was made. I read them all. I read all the authorities in full. Nonetheless, I have come to this conclusion, and it is a firm and unequivocal conclusion. That will be my order, and this would include the costs up to today's date.
All I can say is .... Whot a Judge!!
On Ryanair’s “lack of candour”:
"Where internally on the Plaintiff's team the lack of frankness arose is irrelevant for present purposes, there has been a failure of candour with the Court. The fact is that there were consequences of the lack of frankness with the Court, which was moved to make the order, and an onerous order, for discovery and the Defendants were put to an undue and unfair trouble and expense, and I cannot, with equanimity, express other than disapproval of such conduct.
It is, I regret to note, all of apiece with the approach of the Plaintiff towards the Defendants and others to whom I have referred in my judgment. The Plaintiff's conduct of the litigation as a whole, and discovery in particular, was unreasonable, and in its prosecution oppressive."
On Ryanair's “unreasonableness”:
In my judgment, there was unreasonableness of a high degree by the Plaintiff, and I do not consider it merely to have been wrong in hindsight. In the instant case, the Defendants made a real effort to find a reasonable solution to the contested facts that led them to the formulation of a case by referring same to the Labour Relations Commission. The invitation was not merely refused; it was rejected.
On his duties as a trial judge:
I am mindful of my animadversions as a trial judge and the necessity to be temperate in language. On the other hand there are occasions, of which this is regretfully I think the second in my career as a judge I have had to do so, to say things that I found extremely difficult but which could not be left unsaid. There are times when one must say out boldly and without equivocation matters that cannot be pleasant for the hearer or recipient of the expression of view or a finding of fact or an inference drawn from the findings of fact.
On the “investigation” of Captain John Goss:
It seems to me that the questions on the evidence before me, there was no basis for the Goss investigation ….
On Ryanair’s attitude to Discovery:
The disparity between what was sworn to for discovery purposes and what was sworn in court was a serious matter. It went to the essential relief being sought by the Plaintiff. Someone had clearly forgotten Cordelia's reflection in King Lear, Act 1, Scene 1:
"Time shall unfold what pleated cunning hides;
Who cover faults, at last shame them derides."
On his judgment re costs:
In my judgment and without any sense of doubt, although perhaps the human being should always have some doubt, but to the extent that I can be as certain as a judge can be, I have no doubt that this is a case in which solicitor-and-own-client costs should be awarded to the Defendants.
Now, I am quite conscious that it is a serious order to make. It was intimated, as I say, to me earlier on that this would be done almost immediately the case was over. I have had to think about it. I have to re-read sections of the transcript again. I have very carefully considered every submission that was made. I read them all. I read all the authorities in full. Nonetheless, I have come to this conclusion, and it is a firm and unequivocal conclusion. That will be my order, and this would include the costs up to today's date.
All I can say is .... Whot a Judge!!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Camel jockey
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flight international
European Ryanair pilot union 'a step closer' after Irish court internet forum privacy ruling
Pan-European union representation for Ryanair pilots took a step closer to reality last week after Ireland's highest court upheld the privacy rights of the airline's union's internet discussion forum.
Ryanair European Pilots Association (REPA) was established by the airline's pilots in 2004 and draws resources from the British Air Line Pilots Association (BALPA) and the Irish Air Line Pilots Association (IALPA). Ryanair had sued the association over anonymous comments posted by users of its website -all Ryanair pilots- claiming a campaign of harassment. The Irish High Court found in favour of the association and its members' rights not to be identified and late last week ordered the low cost carrier to pay €1 million ($1.3 million) to the two pilot unions to cover legal costs.
REPA says it does not "yet" offer legal representation to its members, who must seek recourse through national courts with national pilots unions. However, this case has given the association a credibility boost as it moves forward. The membership of REPAweb.org is approaching 600, it says.
BALPA says the REPA website was launched to enable Ryanair pilots exchange views on the carrier’s move to make individual pilots responsible for repaying the €15,000 training costs associated with the operation of larger Boeing 737-800s in the event the airline enters union negotiations within five years.
Ryanair says it took legal action in order to identify “just three individuals who had made anonymous postings on the REPA website advocating threats, including the slashing of car tyres, against specific Ryanair employees who had accepted posts in Dublin”.
It adds: “Had Ryanair not taken action to identify and prevent the publication of these threats, Ryanair may have been accused of allowing its employees to be bullied or intimidated by these pilot trade union activists.”
BALPA claims that Justice Thomas Smyth dismissed Ryanair’s request because the evidence surrounding it was “baseless and false”.
Union chairman Mervyn Granshaw adds: “The judge’s comments that the management style of Ryanair bears all the hallmarks of oppression were spot on and should sound another warning to governments, regulators, investors and the travelling public.”
A Ryanair spokesman says the carrier is “disappointed” with the High Court ruling, and is considering appealing the decision.
Pan-European union representation for Ryanair pilots took a step closer to reality last week after Ireland's highest court upheld the privacy rights of the airline's union's internet discussion forum.
Ryanair European Pilots Association (REPA) was established by the airline's pilots in 2004 and draws resources from the British Air Line Pilots Association (BALPA) and the Irish Air Line Pilots Association (IALPA). Ryanair had sued the association over anonymous comments posted by users of its website -all Ryanair pilots- claiming a campaign of harassment. The Irish High Court found in favour of the association and its members' rights not to be identified and late last week ordered the low cost carrier to pay €1 million ($1.3 million) to the two pilot unions to cover legal costs.
REPA says it does not "yet" offer legal representation to its members, who must seek recourse through national courts with national pilots unions. However, this case has given the association a credibility boost as it moves forward. The membership of REPAweb.org is approaching 600, it says.
BALPA says the REPA website was launched to enable Ryanair pilots exchange views on the carrier’s move to make individual pilots responsible for repaying the €15,000 training costs associated with the operation of larger Boeing 737-800s in the event the airline enters union negotiations within five years.
Ryanair says it took legal action in order to identify “just three individuals who had made anonymous postings on the REPA website advocating threats, including the slashing of car tyres, against specific Ryanair employees who had accepted posts in Dublin”.
It adds: “Had Ryanair not taken action to identify and prevent the publication of these threats, Ryanair may have been accused of allowing its employees to be bullied or intimidated by these pilot trade union activists.”
BALPA claims that Justice Thomas Smyth dismissed Ryanair’s request because the evidence surrounding it was “baseless and false”.
Union chairman Mervyn Granshaw adds: “The judge’s comments that the management style of Ryanair bears all the hallmarks of oppression were spot on and should sound another warning to governments, regulators, investors and the travelling public.”
A Ryanair spokesman says the carrier is “disappointed” with the High Court ruling, and is considering appealing the decision.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Camel jockey
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
poet's corner
Sorry to beat you to the (sucker) punch minuteman, but as most of the readers of this site will have trouble obtaining the transcript of the hearing i couldn't let the words of Judge Smyth go un-spoken (un-written as it were). No doubt the camel jockey has access to the site but in-case he hasn't gotten around to reading it all yet, and figured out he is batting for the wrong team (he say"s tongue in cheek).
QUOTE
"Time shall unfold what pleated cunning hides;
Who cover faults, at last shame them derides."
QUOTE
"Time shall unfold what pleated cunning hides;
Who cover faults, at last shame them derides."