Ryanair loses legal bid to identify website critics
just three individuals
"We were going to victimise, bully an ruin the carreers of just three individuals, so why all the fuss?"
Well, that's alright then...
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EssexBoy, I would like to reply (and in no way criticize) your comment.
I think your comment has a lot of validity and I respect your opinion completly. But I would like to point out that there is more to this, in my opinion, than meets the eye.
The Dublin pilots are taking the company to court because they believe they were "bullied" into new terms and conditions which were not as agreed in their employment contract (which will be different to your contract if you joined in this decade). As you pointed out this case was taken as a "side issue" by the company. This case can be viewed as a either an attempt by the company to prevent pilot association members from "bullying" colleagues OR an attemot to slow down and hamper the progress of the action taken by the pilots against the company. Whichever view you take on this is actually irrelevent.
The fact which is important to the OVERALL issue is that a judge has made clear and unambiguous statements which now become facts by virtue of them appearing in a judgement.
He has made statement (or indeed JUDGEMENTS) on the company's approach to resolving the conflict, the companies handling of the Goss case and the companies reliability as witnesses.
These statements can be presented as fact in the main case. As such it has now become, as a direct result of this judgement, very likely that the Dublin pilots will win their main case against the company.
This result of a win in the main case will open the doors for the rest of FR pilots to take an action against the company if they feel their terms and conditions have been erroded illegally and with the aid of "bullying" tactics.
So, in fact, it could be argued that the case may well result in the reinstatement of uniform/tea/coffee/hotels/ids.
I do not which to take what you said out of context so I should not ignore that you were actually talking about profit rather than the benefits. It is debateable as to who actually initiated the losses. IE should the pilots have not taken an action because it would be expensive even though they felt unfairly treated OR did the company incur these costs through mistreatment of staff.
Just points for you to ponder. Not meant to be critcal of you (just argumentative) because I think you made very valid points
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”.
The Dublin pilots are taking the company to court because they believe they were "bullied" into new terms and conditions which were not as agreed in their employment contract (which will be different to your contract if you joined in this decade). As you pointed out this case was taken as a "side issue" by the company. This case can be viewed as a either an attempt by the company to prevent pilot association members from "bullying" colleagues OR an attemot to slow down and hamper the progress of the action taken by the pilots against the company. Whichever view you take on this is actually irrelevent.
The fact which is important to the OVERALL issue is that a judge has made clear and unambiguous statements which now become facts by virtue of them appearing in a judgement.
He has made statement (or indeed JUDGEMENTS) on the company's approach to resolving the conflict, the companies handling of the Goss case and the companies reliability as witnesses.
These statements can be presented as fact in the main case. As such it has now become, as a direct result of this judgement, very likely that the Dublin pilots will win their main case against the company.
This result of a win in the main case will open the doors for the rest of FR pilots to take an action against the company if they feel their terms and conditions have been erroded illegally and with the aid of "bullying" tactics.
This wipes out all the savings from : uniform/tea/coffee/hotels/ids and much more in one go. Nice work boys
I do not which to take what you said out of context so I should not ignore that you were actually talking about profit rather than the benefits. It is debateable as to who actually initiated the losses. IE should the pilots have not taken an action because it would be expensive even though they felt unfairly treated OR did the company incur these costs through mistreatment of staff.
Just points for you to ponder. Not meant to be critcal of you (just argumentative) because I think you made very valid points
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: right behind you
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Believe that having read the judges full findings.that this is a very significant finding for all pilots in ryanair and for other working in industries throughout ireland.Read the detail and bear in mind that judges do not usually make such black and white findings.There is huge precedent here,which in itself is outstanding.
The only way that this finding will become insignificant for ryanair pilots is if they choose now to let their fight for proper treatment stop following the next finding in the intimidation case.
Attacks by management is par for the course when working in ryanair,so this action had to be shown in a court of law exactly what it was,an attack on the right to free speech and an attempt to degrade human rights,so that a few fat cats could continue to line their pockets unhindered.
The only way that this finding will become insignificant for ryanair pilots is if they choose now to let their fight for proper treatment stop following the next finding in the intimidation case.
Attacks by management is par for the course when working in ryanair,so this action had to be shown in a court of law exactly what it was,an attack on the right to free speech and an attempt to degrade human rights,so that a few fat cats could continue to line their pockets unhindered.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: essex
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bomber, Your points are well made. When I first commented I had not realized the magnitude of the defeat that the management had suffered and the consequences this will have on the up coming disputes. As you pointed out I was looking at direct profit in terms of pilot advancement rather than the precedent that this case sets and how the judiciary will view the company in the future. Thank you for your comments
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Thrid rock from the sun
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irelands Highest Court?
Once again incorrect reporting.............Irelands Highest Court is not the High Court, where the case was heard, It is the Supreme Court. So if he can wrangle it, MOL can go there on appeal...........I say if he can wrangle it because the Judge knocked an appeal on the head. But I assume they can still apply to the Courts for leave to appeal !!!!!!
Of course they might have SWALLOWED enough Judgement for a while.
Of course they might have SWALLOWED enough Judgement for a while.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: EuroZone
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are very few grounds on which an appeal of the judgement to the Supreme Court can be made. Essentially the only appeals to the Supreme Court in such a case can be on the grounds of either the judge erred in law or the law contravenes some element of the constitiution.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: right behind you
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will be no appeal.At the most management may try to appeal costs,which will not get them anywhere.To appeal the case of trying to identify those who post on www.repaweb.org ,in order to persecute them,would be a further waste of money as the judge gave repa legal right to delete any information relating to the website.That is my reading of the judgement.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Around and about
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Word now has it that no appeal was lodged by Friday, which seems to have been the deadline.
The judge apparently gave them absolutely nothing by way of "face saving" - no leave to appeal, no injunction against deleting the database and no hold on the costs order pending an appeal. He apparently told them that they had to try in the Surpreme Court if they wanted anything. He just 100% wiped them - not even a single crumb of comfort!
The judge apparently gave them absolutely nothing by way of "face saving" - no leave to appeal, no injunction against deleting the database and no hold on the costs order pending an appeal. He apparently told them that they had to try in the Surpreme Court if they wanted anything. He just 100% wiped them - not even a single crumb of comfort!
