Willy Walsh resignation

[Tharggy]

I'm amazed it hasn't been raised yet on this Board.

I'll get the ball rolling.

To be perfectly honest, I have mixed feelings about this myself.

He was ruthless in carrying out some of the more obvious changes that had to be made to bring the company back to profitability. There was no rocket science involved (to quote Mike O'Leary) but somehow Willy fooled a lot of people into thinking that only HE could have done it.
I'm often amazed at the naiivete! He certainly had the press in his back pocket.

Having been given carte blanche by the events of 9-11 to carry out the drastic surgery required, he has ran out of ideas now that some vision is called for.

This has always been a trait of Semi-State Aer Lingus management (of which Willy is a product).

Success could have generated tremendous goodwill among the Staff, but Willy has always suffered from poor people skills and didn't know how to tap into it, or when to drop the ice cold facade he turns to the world to protect his ego.

Ask any of the people in upper management - if you know them well enough - they'll confide that he's an extremely disliked man even at their level.

Rather than motivation by encouragement or reward - both marks of good leadership - Willy style is one of antagonism and division.
He will not be missed on a personal level.

On the other hand, his myth is such that his departure will indeed colour the opinions of the Money Men who might have backed his management team and invested in Aer Lingus. Its now up to the government to stop dragging their heels and come up with some plans.

I'm not hopeful.

There is one more aspect to this which I'm not happy with.
He has 'resigned' but remains in place until May?
This may indeed be another turn of the screw to force a decision by the government on fleet expansion monies.

But if they have accepted his resignation, and it really IS final, I think its untenable that he remains in his job for 6 months.

The rumours are already doing the rounds that he is getting involved in another project which will compete with Aer Lingus.

At the very least we can expect to see him join a competitor.
Meanwhile he has his hands in the till and in the machinery of ALT.

This is a clear conflict of interest! Again.

He already got away with that once (the failed MBO suggestion) and now he's at it again?

I think he should be told GO NOW.

As General De Gaulle once said 'The graveyards are full of indespensible men'.

 

[Albert Rosenfield]

You make him sound like Kaiser Soze.

Everyone feared him. Nobody liked him. He used to be just like us but then went bad and joined them. It was rumoured that if you crossed him he would demote not just you, but your colleagues in the cabin and even the staff down the back, he would let the air out of the tyres of your plane and burn your passengers luggage. Then he would arrange for one of his BA buddies to accidentally drop his landing gear on your Aunties house in London.

 

[Tharggy]

Yep, thats him alright!
Total Barsteward. :lol

 

[purple]

So what's next Tharggy?
He may not have been God almighty but he was in the right place at the right time and didn't drop the ball. With Bertie's declaration of socialism and wee Seamus off to pasture the chances of real decisions being made about Aer Lingus seem further away than ever (at least 'till after the next election).

 

[shnaek]

Would you have kinder words from him if he had allowed the company to go bankrupt like other European airlines did? His plan might not have been rocket science, but you have to give him credit for it. Most good plans seem obvious in hindsight. I can bet that he isn't the looser in this, but a government who are totally unable to make decisions will lead to some loosers alright. And we can all guess who they'll be.

 

[Tharggy]

Purple, thats why I said I'm in two minds over this.

I've continually said on this BB - I think to the surprise of my detractors - that I agreed with...indeed badly wanted...to see Aer Lingus privatised, because successive Irish governments have bungled and frustrated its operation for decades. This fiasco is yet another clear illustration of it.

I am sorry that his departure may damage the 'standing' of the company, but I really have to ask why he did it...if he cares as much as he has always said he does about the future of Aer Lingus. He walked himself into this.

Why did he engineer himself into a direct confrontation with Bungling Bertie? First the MBO, then that incredible ammount demanded for fleet replacement.
Did he think he could browbeat him as easily as he browbeats the staff?

Bertie has been browbeaten quite a bit by another leading light in Irish aviation (need I say who) and I don't think he likes it, so surely it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that he wouldn't take it from a public servant (like Willy Walsh).

Perhaps Willy let the Mick O'Leary impersonation go a bit too far on this occasion.

Mind blowingly poor judgement from a man who is supposed to be a genius in business!!

Would you have kinder words from him if he had allowed the company to go bankrupt like other European airlines did?

Shnaek I already wrote that there was a well-spring of goodwill that existed among the majority of the staff, but Willy refused to tap into it. That kind of thing didn't fit into the MOL book of airline management which Willy was applying diligently.

There's an old saying...a house divided against itself will not stand. If Willy had used that goodwill, if he'd been trusted or liked by his staff, there would be mass demonstrations to the Dail today decrying the governments poor handling of this. He could have mobilised North County Dublin to his support if he'd just been a better leader and showed a little respect for people.

Nobody was asking for a hug and a kiss from Willy for doing their job, but steamrolling everyone out of his path so he could make a blatant grab for the company was stupid and insulting to ordinary employees.

His plan might not have been rocket science, but you have to give him credit for it. Most good plans seem obvious in hindsight.

I would credit him with one thing...he was well on the way to engineering SIPTU out of the picture at the airport, and given their idiocy down the years that was a good thing. Of course, he was using company/taxpayer funds to do it...80 Million the cost of the redundancy package for 1,300 of their members!

a government who are totally unable to make decisions will lead to some loosers alright. And we can all guess who they'll be.

I didn't vote FF. Don't blame me.

One last point.
Willy's myth is such that the public have been led to believe that without him the company will falter today and collapse tomorrow, and nobody can replace him.

Thats just rubbish.

Aer Lingus is a completely different company to what it was 2 years ago, the changes are largely irreversible.

Who will replace him?

You may not know this, but Ireland has (for a small country) a relatively enormous reputation in the aviation sector worldwide. This island has produced many very talented people in this business. I know of a dozen names, people you haven't yet heard of, who could step into Willys shoes tomorrow and do a fantastic job.

What Aer Lingus needs is a Richard Branson, not another Mick O'Leary.
But most of all - it needs the government off its back.

 

[Tharggy]

Strong rumour circulating at the airport this evening that Willy has been awarded the DCM by Bertie.

DCM = Don't Come Monday.

Second strong rumour is that Séamus Kearney (one of his two management buddies) is being offerred the top job.

Perhaps Mr.Kearney might relish the idea of being number 1 at Aer Lingus instead of number 2 or 3 to Willy at some foreign carrier.

Interesting to see the outcome of this one.

 

[darag]

i thought the mbo thing was a bit out of order but i'd give the guy a lot of latitude for turning the company around. first of all it's not like it would have happened without him. quite a few european national airlines have gone to the wall in the last couple of years and others are only barely surviving. i came across an article in an american business magazine which held up aer lingus as the star national or ex-national airline in europe and praised the business strategy. basically the guy has turned a public asset from a money black hole into a something producing very significant profits. this has benefited the country and the public significantly but he has received very little acknowledgement

as for the bitching about him that he was a cold fish or an ego - so what? he wasn't being paid to be popular. he was hired to turn around the airline and he did this. i'm just worried that bertie wants someone who will be more jocular and popular with the aer lingus staff instead of someone who can run a profitable airline.

 

[Tharggy]

Darag, Willy modelled himself on Mike O'Leary because he wanted to emulate his success.

O'Leary modelled his BUSINESS on Southwest airlines, the first and most succesful LOCO carrier in the US.

The CEO and driving force behind Southwest was Herb Kelleher...a man who is regarded as a hero and a father figure by his employees.
There are better paying employers in the US aviation sector, but Southwest is the most popular employer with its staff.

POPULAR DOES NOT EQUAL WEAK.
Lets get away from this crap notion that only BASTARDS can run a succesful company. Why do you choose to believe that? Do you work for one yourself? Would you like to?

O'Leary modelled his business on Southwest, but not his personality. O'Leary adopted the persona of his own boss, and owner of Ryanair - Tony Ryan. Another well known bully.

Along comes Willy with the idea of converting Aer Lingus into a LOCO carrier - and who's model does he adopt? Why the O'Leary model of course, because Ryanair is the most succesful carrier in europe.

However, he forgot to leave out the Ryan persona, and thats what ultimately sunk him.
Arrogance is not becoming to a civil servant.

Tony Ryan is due credit for having ploughed millions of his own money into the nascent Ryanair, and he is free to put whoever he likes into its driving seat, and to tell him how to run it. Its a private enterprise.

But Willy Walsh put NO money into Aer Lingus and still thought he could tell the owner (the Irish government and taxpayers) how to run it to suit himself and his buddies millionaire ambitions.

..it's not like it would have happened without him.

Have you forgotten that Willy Walsh was the COO of the management team that presided over Aer Lingus for 3 years before 9-11?
Or that Willy Walsh was in the management ranks for 15 years before that?

Do you think Willy bore any of the responsibility for the pathetic state of the company over those 18 years? Or is he only responsible when things are going good for him?

Willy did nothing but seize an unusual opportunity provided by the events and aftermath of 9-11.

I think poor old Osama Bin Laden is not getting his due credit for the turnaround at Aer Lingus. And I'm not joking!

 

[piggy]

Willy did nothing but seize an unusual opportunity provided by the events and aftermath of 9-11.

I think poor old Osama Bin Laden is not getting his due credit for the turnaround at Aer Lingus. And I'm not joking!

As darag already said "quite a few european national airlines have gone to the wall in the last couple of years and others are only barely surviving".

Seeing and seizing business opportunities is usually considered the sign of a very competent leader.

 

[Tharggy]

What business opportunities has he seized Piggy?
Please list them so we know what you mean.

 

[piggy]

What business opportunities has he seized Piggy?
Please list them so we know what you mean.

I'm not as familiar with the airline industry as you are so I'm sure you can tell us what "unusual opportunity" he seized that other European airlines could not after the events of 911?

If those airlines had the same "carte blanche" after 911 why didn't they have the same success? Just a thought.

 

[Albert Rosenfield]

Newspeak

Willy did nothing but seize an unusual opportunity provided by the events and aftermath of 9-11

I take it by this you mean he seized it in a much better way than the management teams of Swissair and Sabena did. It was so easy and yet those management teams failed.

Or that Willy Walsh was in the management ranks for 15 years before that?

I thought he was a pilot before he moved over to the dark side ? If 15 years is the kind of timescale that EI staff hold grudges for then it's a little bit scary.

However, he forgot to leave out the Ryan persona, and thats what ultimately sunk him

When did we ever hear Willie Walsh talking or behaving like that ? And since when was he sunk ? He left of his own accord not because his entire staff claimed to dislike him but because he was not able to get proper support from the owner of the company. He had done what he could and could make no further progress.

The revolution will be complete when the language is correct.

The past only exists in the human mind. The human mind is infinitely malleable.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Tharggy]

Re: Newspeak

I take it by this you mean he seized it in a much better way than the management teams of Swissair and Sabena did. It was so easy and yet those management teams failed.

In the case of Sabena, that company never made a single profit from the day it was founded...unlike Aer Lingus.
It had lived entirely on government handouts, year on year... unlike Aer Lingus.
The workforce in SABENA would not co-operate with the changes required when the crunch came. They still expected to be bailed out....unlike Aer Lingus.

Aer Lingus staff took the pain yet got no thanks for their part in the turnaround...only "Willy did it. Him alone."

In the case of Swissair...did you know the two were linked? Swissair had bought Sabena around 1998.
They were then dragged under by its collapse.

I thought he was a pilot before he moved over to the dark side ?

Yes, he joined as a cadet co-pilot.
Within 6 months he had been threatened with firing because he was the most junior pilot in the company and his services were no longer needed. The pilots association (IALPA) fought to save his job (bad move in retrospect).

As a result of their efforts he was redeployed into an office job for a year and he realised he had no future in being the most junior pilot for the next 20 years. He set about protecting his interests by striving for a ground based management job and trying as hard as he could to spit on our profession for the next 15 years.

Willy is still all about protecting his own interests.

If 15 years is the kind of timescale that EI staff hold grudges for then it's a little bit scary.

Grow up.

When did we ever hear Willie Walsh talking or behaving like that ?

The staff hear it every day.

And since when was he sunk ? He left of his own accord

Yeah...right....

not because his entire staff claimed to dislike him but because he was not able to get proper support from the owner of the company.

He couldn't get any support from the owner?
Since when was it ever different? Those are the constraints this company has always had to work under, and why it has always struggled to get by.

The revolution will be complete when the language is correct.

That cuts both ways I presume?

Piggy, I'm waiting for that list.......

 

[piggy]

Re: Newspeak

Piggy, I'm waiting for that list.......

Hi Tharggy,

I already clarified that I was referring to the "unusual opportunity", as you put it, that Willy Walsh was presented with.

It was actually me who was asking you this question as you raised it.

In particular I'm just wondering what "unusual opportunity" Willy was able to seize that other European airlines which have been alluded to already did not?

Here's my post:

What business opportunities has he seized Piggy?
Please list them so we know what you mean.

I'm not as familiar with the airline industry as you are so I'm sure you can tell us what "unusual opportunity" he seized that other European airlines could not after the events of 911?

If those airlines had the same "carte blanche" after 911 why didn't they have the same success? Just a thought.

From what you said about Sabeena - "In the case of Sabena, the workforce would not co-operate with the changes required" it sounds like Sabeena managemnet were unable to get their staff to make the necessary changes. Would it be fair to say that Willy Walsh was successful in getting his staff to make the necessary changes then?

Aer Lingus staff took the pain yet got no thanks for their part in the turnaround...only "Willy did it. Him alone."

I'm not sure of the point you're making here but perhaps I'm missing it. CEO's generally accept both the adulation and criticism for how they steer a company and how things go financially. It's not a phenomenon that you only find in the airline industry.

 

[Tharggy]

Re: Newspeak

Sorry Piggy, I didn't answer your question because I thought you were being facetious.

Let me spell it out if I really must.
The 'unusual opportunity' Walsh had after 9-11 was the opportunity to do whatever the hell he liked without let or hinderance from the unions, the workforce, or the government.

Thats a scenario most Irish managers would have wet dreams about.

Would it be fair to say that Willy Walsh was successful in getting his staff to make the necessary changes then?

I think it would be fairer to say Aer Lingus employees were ultimately more realistic and flexible than SABENA's employees. Walsh did not 'LEAD' anyone to making this choice...rather, he threatened, terrorised and bullied, in the style of O'Leary.

CEO's generally accept both the adulation and criticism for how they steer a company and how things go financially.

Really? Its my experience in Aer Lingus that management usually accept the adulation when things go well, and blame the workforce when things go wrong.
In fact, that's a pretty common trademark of Irish management. >D

As a wider example, do you think the CEO of ENRON was good at taking the blame when things went wrong?

Play the Enron Blame Game!
Who destroyed America's seventh-largest company?
Point the finger at your favorite culprit.
By David Plotz


Who destroyed Enron? It depends who you ask.

Enron's board of directors faults Arthur Andersen's sketchy bookkeeping.
Andersen passes the bucks (billions of them) to rogue auditor David Duncan.
Duncan fingers Enron's management for hiding losses in dubious off-the-books subsidiaries.
Enron management whacks former Chief Financial Officer Andrew Fastow for setting up the sleazy subsidiaries.
Fastow shrugs the responsibility up the hierarchy to former CEO Kenneth Lay.
Lay complains that business journalists are persecuting Enron.
Those journalists, in turn, push some guilt for the Enron debacle onto giddy stock analysts who didn't understand the company they were touting.
The stock analysts hide behind the excuse of the dot-com boom, which befuddled everyone. … And that's not to mention President Bush, Congress, the bankers, the lawyers, and so many other potential culprits.

http://slate.msn.com/?id=2061470 (LINK)

Have you played the Enron Blame Game yet?
Its the game halfway down that linked page.
Try it, its FUN!

 

[darag]

Re: Newspeak

i don't get your logic tharg. i know about the southwest model. it's existence doesn't prove that it is not possible to run a profitable airline without being sociable with your staff, does it? ryanair would seem to be a perfectly profitable low cost airline without having regular staff group hugs. and that was my point; he wasn't being paid to be popular with the staff or massage middle managers' egos.

the facts as i see it are simple. aer lingus and most other european airlines were in serious This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language from before 9/11. walsh takes over and makes radical changes in aer lingus; most other airlines bumble along as before. aer lingus is now robustly profitable while most of the other european airlines are still in a This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language state and some are gone completely. it's ludicrous to claim there's no causal relationship between these events or that aer lingus's turnaround was just down to "luck".

you ask what did the staff get out of it? their jobs for one thing or
alternatively, like a friend of mine, unbelievably generous severance
packages. seems like a reasonable deal.

it seems you don't like his personality. to be honest, that's just your opinion and you know the cliche about opinions. until you present some actual evidence that he was incompetent or provide some other RATIONAL explanation (besides just "luck") for what has happened to aer lingus since he took over, i will continue to admire what he has achieved in turning aer lingus from a basket case into a profitable airline.

 

[Tharggy]

Re: Newspeak

Hi Darag.
2:53AM?
Did you enjoy the Askaboutmoney night out? :lol

I don't get your logic tharg. i know about the southwest model. it's existence doesn't prove that it is not possible to run a profitable airline without being sociable with your staff, does it?

Forgive me, but with so many double negatives in there I can't quite figure out your logic either.

ryanair would seem to be a perfectly profitable low cost airline without having regular staff group hugs.

When Ryanair first started they rode on the back of a wave of goodwill from their staff. Ryanair used to throw monthly parties for them...did you not know about that? Ryanair was BIG into group hugs mate! It kept the company safely non-unionised. All was grace and light.

Of course when they got a firmer foothold the party ended.
The staff began to realise they were being paid 20% less than the industry norm. O'Leary put on the poor mouth, but also baldly told the workers to FECK OFF if they didn't like it (a common management concept in Celtic Tiger Ireland, one you subscribe to I see).

Around this time Ryanair was organising its flotation, and had to reveal its books to the stock markets. Suddenly the truth came out. Facts such as that while Ryanair was claiming to have made a modest 5M IEP profit in 1995, O'Leary and the two sons of Tony Ryan shared a bonus payment of 5M IEP...equivalent to 32% of the staff wage bill for the year (16M IEP). The following year (1996) their bonus was 8.9M IEP, almost half the annual wage bill of 20M IEP.

In 1997 O'Leary was the only Director and was paid a bonus of 9.8M IEP, more than 40% of the wages paid to all the staff. Over 3 years he had received bonuses of 17M IEP and owned 18% of the airline. If only half of his 1997 bonus had been shared with the staff they'd each have received 7000 IEP extra.

O'Leary's greed caused uproar among the underpaid staff and led to a strike which closed Dublin airport for several days in January 1998 (gee...I though Ryanair don't have strikes...they're non-unionised!). Maybe he should've tried hugs...at least they're cheap!

A pay deal was struck and the strike ended, but that wasn't the end of Ryanairs staff troubles. You may or may not be aware of it, but Ryanair staff are now (furtively) joining unions, and confrontation is brewing again. The reason? O'Learys continued chomping at the few remaining working conditions they have, and his continued chopping away at their sub standard salaries.

So you see Darag, its too early to say Ryanair is as succesful as Southwest without resorting to group hugs.
O'Learys greed, and obsession with attacking his own staff, has kicked open the door for the unions. [broken link removed] Things are changing behind the scenes at Ryanair.

I recommend you get a copy of Siobhan Creaton's book 'Ryanair' and educate yourself a little.

you ask what did the staff get out of it? their jobs for one thing

2000 at Aer Lingus LOST their jobs when Walsh took over, and another 1300 are to lose their jobs in the next few months. Six months earlier he had been telling the media the company was definitely not overstaffed.

or alternatively, like a friend of mine, unbelievably generous severance packages.

Nevertheless I actually agree with the necessity for those job cuts. My question as someone who is staying is...Where did the money come from for these 'generous severance packages'? Damned if I didn't pay for them...and more to come in future!

until you present some actual evidence that he was incompetent

I never actually called him 'incompetent', did I? Stop putting words in my mouth!
I would call him an OPPORTUNIST, an EGOMANIAC and a BAD LEADER.
But if you insist, how about his bungled attempt to wrest the company into his private ownership. His blatant little stroke backfired on him. I'd call that incompetent.
He thought he could mix it with the Big Dogs and got shot down in flames.

or provide some other RATIONAL explanation (besides just "luck" ) for what has happened to aer lingus

Where did I mention LUCK? Unless you think it was LUCKY that 9-11 happened? Strange....:rolleyes

i will continue to admire what he has achieved in turning aer lingus from a basket case into a profitable airline.

Yes, I too wish him all the best in his future endeavours. :rollin

 

[Tharggy]

Re: Happy Clappy Airlines

well whaddya know...perfectly timed to back up my comments about growing unrest at Ryanair, this is from todays Irish Times:

A number of senior Ryanair pilots have made a complaint about victimisation in the workplace to the Labour Relations Commission (LRC).

The complaint stems from the actions of the airline's senior management, who are seeking to persuade the pilots to accept terms and conditions attached to their training to fly new aircraft.

Ryanair has told the pilots that they will have to pay €15,000 to complete this training if the airline is forced to deal with a trade union over the next five years.

Ryanair has been notified of the complaint and will be invited to attend a hearing at the LRC on the issue. A spokesman for the airline said it was in correspondence with the LRC and would make no further comment.

A number of other pilots at the airline are also believed to be considering a similar claim.

The victimisation complaints have arisen as the airline has begun to offer its senior captains conversion training courses to fly its new Boeing 737-800 aircraft. Earlier this month Ryanair's head of operations, Mr David O'Brien, wrote to these individuals to offer the training course and stated that the offer was conditional upon their "understanding and acceptance" of a number of conditions.

In this letter, seen by The Irish Times, Mr O'Brien states that the training programme will cost €15,000, a sum he said was "modest" in the context of pilots' income, and that Ryanair would write off this debt if they agreed to certain conditions.

The pilots must remain working at Ryanair for five years and he warned that they would have to repay the full training costs if they were represented by a trade union or staff association. "We wish to remind you that should this policy be altered and Ryanair be compelled to engage in collective bargaining with a pilot association or trade union within five years of commencement of your conversion training, you will be liable to repay the full training costs." The letter continues: "Naturally this does not and will not affect your right to freely join any trade union or association of your choice."

Mr O'Brien states that, should the pilots decline this offer, they could be facing redundancy when the existing Boeing 737-200 fleet is phased out in Dublin. They were given seven days to accept the airline's offer or it would immediately lapse. Mr O'Brien signed off by congratulating the pilots on being selected for this training, adding: "We look forward to working with you."

Prior to receipt of this letter, the pilots had attended a meeting with senior Ryanair management where management had outlined a number of "consequences" if they were to opt to be represented by a trade union or association in their dealings with the airline.

According to sources, the consequences included no share options or pay increases, no promotions in Dublin, payment for future recurrent training, the cancellation of staff travel when in uniform, being required to take annual leave in blocks of five days only and possible redundancies. The pilots were told that if the IALPA didn't "go away", the €15,000 conversion training fee would become a mandatory up-front charge.

The victimisation complaint will be heard in private by a rights commissioner who will issue recommendations. This process will go ahead even if Ryanair refuses to attend.

Either party can appeal those recommendations within six weeks to the Labour Court and if upheld the recommendations are binding. Either side can then apply to the Circuit Court to seek the enforcement of the recommendations.

And then this. All in one day

A complaint regarding the alteration of contracts of employment at Ryanair will be moved to the Labour Court.

The complaint, which was initially lodged by the Irish Airline Pilots Association, a division of the IMPACT trade union, at the Labour Relations Commission (LRC) has progressed to the Labour Court, which could issue a binding decision.

The union wants to reach agreement that pilots will be supplied with full particulars of their contract of employment in accordance with the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994. It also wants to ensure that contracts of employment cannot be altered other than by agreement.

This week Ryanair chief executive Mr Michael O\'Leary said he would not let the Labour Court impose conditions on the airline and that he would mount a constitutional challenge to the Act.

Two weeks ago Mr O\'Leary wrote to Mr Declan Morrin, LRC director of advisory services, after it had notified the airline of the complaint. In the letter, seen by The Irish Times, Mr O\'Leary said Ryanair would not participate in the proposed procedure and said IMPACT and IALPA had no basis for making the application.

\"We will not allow a trade union, which primarily represents the pilots of our main competitor, to impose effective union recognition through the back door of the Labour Relations Commission, using what is clearly an unconstitutional process,\" he stated.

Mr O\'Leary warned the LRC that, unless it received confirmation that this \"unwarranted and unconstitutional interference\" would cease by November 22nd, Ryanair would initiate legal proceedings to challenge the constitutionality of the 2001 Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act and its 2004 Amendment.

\"This challenge will, when successful, prevent any further interference by trade unions and the Labour Relations Commission in the affairs of high-pay, non-union multinational companies like Ryanair,\" the letter stated.

Mr O\'Leary said that, if the airline did not receive such confirmation from the LRC, High Court proceedings would follow without further notice. Yesterday, a Ryanair spokesman said its position remained unchanged.

The IALPA case is being taken under the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004, a measure which emerged from discussions between the social partners on the issue of union recognition.

 

[onekeano]

Re: Happy Clappy Airlines

This post will be deleted if not edited immediately Tharggy,

For someone who is slagging Derag about the 2.53am posting you're not far off that yourself.

Is there any chance of you getting rostered again to that we can get back to more managable postings?

Roy