View Full Version : Shannon Airport Discussion
I'd personally love to work in a basement.
So what was actually the agreement agreed by the union was more training, a review of staffing levels and a review of health and safety issues and implications. Also, not included in that report, was Aer Lingus agreeing to follow the IR procedures in future, something they didn't in that case iirc.
Dotsy
16/08/2007, 12:41 PM
You can be guarenteed that if they shut down a branch and moved it north of the border, making everybody resign and then re-apply for their same job for less money/conditions, the unions would do something about it
The Aer Lingus pilots in Shannon are not losing their jobs. I haven't heard anything to suggest that. There is going to be a reduction in ground/support staff because the aircraft won't be located there anymore but AFAIK the pilots will still be employed but on different routes.
What is the difference between what Aer Lingus are doing and what many other private companies have done previously when shutting down here and moving facilities to other countries. It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that in this case the workers can effectively hold the public to ransom.
OneRedArmy
16/08/2007, 12:58 PM
I'd personally love to work in a basement.Baggage handler effectively work in a basement anyway, or certainly in areas with limited space and light so it hardly makes a difference.
The point is that rather than trying to negotiate on H&S or working conditions they simply stuck their hands out like they usually do....
Dodge
16/08/2007, 12:59 PM
What is the difference between what Aer Lingus are doing and what many other private companies have done previously when shutting down here and moving facilities to other countries
Nothing, and I'd support them too
Lionel Ritchie
16/08/2007, 1:00 PM
What is the difference between what Aer Lingus are doing and what many other private companies have done previously when shutting down here and moving facilities to other countries. It wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that in this case the workers can effectively hold the public to ransom.
Maybe the difference is something to do with the government holding, on all our behalf, 25% of the shares (which they were warned would not be enough) to ensure that the countries strategic infrastructural interests, national and regional, were protected after privatisation.
Bald Student
16/08/2007, 1:17 PM
to ensure that the countries strategic infrastructural interests, national and regional, were protected after privatisation.Did they, from what I remember of the news at the time the reason they held the 25% share was to stop a hostile takeover from another airline, like what happened to eircom?
I thought it was the whole "in the national interest" thing myself
I see O'Dea is all over the place spreading the same lies about why they needed to Privatise in the first place. It was not illegal under EU Law for the Government to invest in Aer Lingus - it's illegal to give a subsidy or a loan that has no chance of being repaid, it's not illegal for a Government to invest/ loan to a state company in which realistically they could expect a return (i.e. a highly profitable airline!).
I'd personally love to work in a basement.
So what was actually the agreement agreed by the union was more training, a review of staffing levels and a review of health and safety issues and implications. Also, not included in that report, was Aer Lingus agreeing to follow the IR procedures in future, something they didn't in that case iirc.
They are baggage handlers. How much training do you require to do load baggages from a different location? Why did they want E1,000 is they claimed it was H&S related?
BTW if rumours are true the baggage handlers in Dublin Airport probably earn more than the pilots.
No Health & Safety issues (http://www.travelindustrydeals.com/news/3113)
BTW if rumours are true the baggage handlers in Dublin Airport probably earn more than the pilots.
:rolleyes:
OneRedArmy
16/08/2007, 3:01 PM
I see O'Dea is all over the place spreading the same lies about why they needed to Privatise in the first place. It was not illegal under EU Law for the Government to invest in Aer Lingus - it's illegal to give a subsidy or a loan that has no chance of being repaid, it's not illegal for a Government to invest/ loan to a state company in which realistically they could expect a return (i.e. a highly profitable airline!).AFAIK no airline has ever been profitable over any sustained period in history.
They have usually been ridiculously loss-making.
Last few years may be a new dawn with Ryanair etc but....
John83
16/08/2007, 3:03 PM
AFAIK no airline has ever been profitable over any sustained period in history.
They have usually been ridiculously loss-making.
Last few years may be a new dawn with Ryanair etc but....
It's anecdotal, but I've heard that AL made a profit 10 years in the last 11.
Aer Lingus investor relations (http://www.aerlingus.com/cgi-bin/obel01im1/Corporate/ir_overview_about_ei.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@20914195 04.1187276806@@@@&BV_EngineID=cccladdlkfhdkllcefecfigdffgdfkl.0&P_OID=-536880593&Category=0)
Maybe the difference is something to do with the government holding, on all our behalf, 25% of the shares (which they were warned would not be enough) to ensure that the countries strategic infrastructural interests, national and regional, were protected after privatisation.
As you say a 25% shareholding cleary isn't enough to force a private company to pursue such a strategy when it is more profitable for them to move assets elsewhere.
The fact that they have a 25% shareholding doesn't make a difference in reality so again why is this situation different (as far as the unions are concerned) to other companys relocating out of Ireland.
The fact that they have a 25% shareholding doesn't make a difference in reality so again why is this situation different (as far as the unions are concerned) to other companys relocating out of Ireland.
You realise this union only deals with pilots don't you?
You realise this union only deals with pilots don't you?
Yes I do. The pilots that are not actually be made redundant due to the ending of the LHR routes but will be re-rostered to other routes within the airline.
I don't recall other unions going down this route when other companies have relocated part of their operations outside the state. Where are the unions protesting/striking about the Shannon Airport staff other than the Aer Lingus pilots that are actaully going to loose their jobs because of this move.
Why is Aer LIngus and specifically their pilots such a special case. As you yourself said the Government's 25% shareholding doesn't give them enough influence to change what are business decisions made by a private company.
And as for the 70 FF councillors and TD's who had a meeting yesterday to show their opposition to this what the feck did they expect. It doesn't take a degree in business to see that this could happen and they are members of the party that effectively opened the door to this. A bunch of hippocrites the lot of them. But I bet you they will still get voted back in the next time around.
Yes I do.
Then why say this
I don't recall other unions going down this route
If they're different unions they have different objectives. Why shouldn't the union fight to protect their members interests, even if other unions don't do it?
Then why say this
If they're different unions they have different objectives. Why shouldn't the union fight to protect their members interests, even if other unions don't do it?
Dodge
What I don't understand is what interests are the pilot's union protecting here. The Shannon pliots are not loosing their jobs over this. There is no change AFAIK in their terms and conditions, pension entitlements etc.
Aer Lingus is setting up an operation in another jurisdiction and paying their staff their differently, the same way companies that operate all over the world in different countries do. Pay and renumeration in each country is based on local conditions. Why do Aer Lingus pilots in the Republic have a problem with this.
I have sympathy for the ground workers at Shannon who will loose their jobs when the routes go to Belfast. THey are the ones who will suffer most from this decision not the pilots.
If they're different unions they have different objectives. Why shouldn't the union fight to protect their members interests, even if other unions don't do it?
I think the AL unions are entitled to do whatever they want to do. However they deserve no more special treatment than any other group of workers in the State. The unions should remember that they have already benefited from privatisation (they now own part of AL) but their strikes will affect their profits & dividends.
I think the state may be retaining its share as part of the Open Skies agreement as AL have to stay in Irish ownership?
Aer Lingus is setting up an operation in another jurisdiction and paying their staff their differently, the same way companies that operate all over the world in different countries do. Pay and renumeration in each country is based on local conditions. Why do Aer Lingus pilots in the Republic have a problem with this.
Good point. This is a legal requirement of Multinationals. Employees must be employed by local companies e.g. Multinational Ireland Ltd. I would assume there is an Aer Lingus UK Company.
I would guess that the AL pilots are concerned that AL will expand across Europe with new hubs. New employees will be employed from those countries so they will therefore be on lower wages (e.g. European Hub in Poland.) I have experience of unofficial outsourcing myself.
OneRedArmy
16/08/2007, 4:15 PM
The way I see it IMPACT see this as the thin end of the wedge. Start off with a few pilots in Belfast on a bit less money, before you know it you've a load of Eastern European pilots based at a true low cost hub on half the money and new Irish pilots can't get "decent" paid work. Ie similar to the Irish Ferries example mentioned earlier.
As for FF, I'm delighted to see them in another ridiculous, yet complete foreseeable quagmire. This is what happens when you let morons (O'Dea typifying them) into power.
Did they think AL were going to come over all benevolent and semi-state just because they still own a minority shareholding?:rolleyes:
The way I see it IMPACT see this as the thin end of the wedge. Start off with a few pilots in Belfast on a bit less money, before you know it you've a load of Eastern European pilots based at a true low cost hub on half the money and new Irish pilots can't get "decent" paid work. Ie similar to the Irish Ferries example mentioned earlier.
As for FF, I'm delighted to see them in another ridiculous, yet complete foreseeable quagmire. This is what happens when you let morons (O'Dea typifying them) into power.
Did they think AL were going to come over all benevolent and semi-state just because they still own a minority shareholding?:rolleyes:
But the Irish hubs will be staffed by locally based pilots who will continue to benefit from the local wages, terms and conditions etc. That is where the pilots unions have a part play. If the routes out of Dublin/Cork/Shannon are profitable they will stay here and will be staffed by Irish recruited pilots. That's how private companies operate. Surely the pilots knew this when they took shares as part of the privatisation.
Lionel Ritchie
19/08/2007, 9:40 AM
Did they, from what I remember of the news at the time the reason they held the 25% share was to stop a hostile takeover from another airline, like what happened to eircom?
...for fear that an airline behind such a takeover would sell, move or otherwise dispose of assets like the Heathrow landing slots. Pretty much exactly what Aer Lingus themselves are doing.
So do we have to wait for Aer Lingus to move on Dublins Heathrow slots before the state decides it's time to intervene? As things stand there's little point I can see in the state having any stake in the airline at all.
The fact that they have a 25% shareholding doesn't make a difference in reality so again why is this situation different (as far as the unions are concerned) to other companys relocating out of Ireland.
Question for me? Well I didn't raise any points about the unions but I'll chuck in a speculation that it's about protecting their terms of employment. Belfast rates today Bratislava rates tomorrow?
Newryrep
19/08/2007, 3:39 PM
The original crux of the matter has been lost - what is Shannon worry ?
loss of the slots to a world hub or loss of slots to the UK ? as there could be solutions to either
As regards Aer Lingus, pensions are a ticking time bomb, companies are changing them as they appear to be unsustainable . It was not envisaged that people would live that long after retirement.
Within reason local pay and conditions seem reasonable to me, for years there has been a London weighting due to the cost of living. I personnally dont think its unreasonalbe.
OneRedArmy
20/08/2007, 12:32 PM
...for fear that an airline behind such a takeover would sell, move or otherwise dispose of assets like the Heathrow landing slots. Pretty much exactly what Aer Lingus themselves are doing.
So do we have to wait for Aer Lingus to move on Dublins Heathrow slots before the state decides it's time to intervene? As things stand there's little point I can see in the state having any stake in the airline at all.
Question for me? Well I didn't raise any points about the unions but I'll chuck in a speculation that it's about protecting their terms of employment. Belfast rates today Bratislava rates tomorrow?3 flights a day to Shannon are not in the national interest. Thats the long and the short of it.
Great article in yesterdays Tribune parodying the same thing going on in the UK and the laughability of expecting the whole Cabinet, including the Taoiseach, to end their holidays to address it. The article also rubbished the "research" produced by IBEC and the pro-Shannon lobby about the claimed economic damage the withdrawal would cause. Eg. over 50% of respondants said the loss of the Heathrow route would negatively impact their ability to ship cargo.............when Aer Lingus stopped shipping cargo on its European flights years ago :rolleyes:
Also, Belfast International's catchment area takes in all of Donegal and some of Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Louth as well, which further complicates the Goverments position as they can't be seen to favour one area over another.
Lionel Ritchie
20/08/2007, 9:33 PM
3 flights a day to Shannon are not in the national interest. Thats the long and the short of it.
So says you ORA. It's a profitable, well subscribed route is it not?
Great article in yesterdays Tribune parodying the same thing going on in the UK and the laughability of expecting the whole Cabinet, including the Taoiseach, to end their holidays to address it. . Then they were comparing an apple with an orange and furthermore a big apple with a small orange and further again I think you and the Tribune know that.
The article also rubbished the "research" produced by IBEC and the pro-Shannon lobby about the claimed economic damage the withdrawal would cause. Eg. over 50% of respondants said the loss of the Heathrow route would negatively impact their ability to ship cargo.............when Aer Lingus stopped shipping cargo on its European flights years ago :rolleyes:. You're not going to get me sticking up for IBEC. Those fcukers want it both ways and anyways the whole time.
One of the annecdotes I heard that convinced me it was wrong that these flights were being cut -for I can only ask you to take my word for it that I didn't instinctively think it was a big deal -was told by an American tourist.
He comes over to this neck of the woods on golf holidays so he's the type of high spend per head tourist that the "hospitality sector" (for whom I've no love incidently as I think they offer a product that's as often as shoddy as it is pricey) keep telling us is the way tourism here has to go.
I can't remember where he said he was from but it wasn't one of the Aer Lingus serviced US hubs. He flys from the US to Heathrow and transfers through to Shannon and from there makes his way to the golfclubs of Lahinch, Adare, Killarney, Waterville etc...
You make it more difficult for the likes of him to spend his money in this region and he won't come. "Sure he can fly into Dublin" I hear a throng say. The research is there -Americans who fly into Dublin by and large don't go far beyond it. Is that we want? More Dublin-centric concentration of visitors.
Anyway ...just an annecdote.
Also, Belfast International's catchment area takes in all of Donegal and some of Sligo, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Louth as well, which further complicates the Goverments position as they can't be seen to favour one area over another.
I'll give you Donegal but you are seriously reaching with the rest for anything other than cheaper package holidays to the Costas. At the northernmost tip of Monaghan you're about equidistant between Dublin and Belfast Airports. In anywhere in Louth but half a mile offshore of the Cooley Peninsula you're a 40-45 minute drive from Dublin Airport. It's a trip I make from Co. Monaghan fairly frequently.
Sligo and Leitrim are as much In Shannons catchment as they'd ever be in Belfasts.
gael353
20/08/2007, 10:08 PM
3 flights a day to Shannon are not in the national interest. Thats the long and the short of it.
Your one short my friend its four (4) flights to shannon and just on a little side runner lads. 3 years ago i flew dublin madrid with aer lingus, it flew into one of the good terminals 1 or 2 not sure. Last year i was over again this time i might have well landed in north africa such was the distance of the terminal (4) from the other infastructure links. To my surprise the aircraft alongside of me was a ryanair flying to shannon :eek: The point being aer lingus have been selling off their valuable slots at international airports for some time now doing the cheap ryan air thing. If a replacment carrier on the very profitable Shannon Heathrow route can be found i say **** aerlingus. They shall pull out the atlantic routes as well in march but i will miss the rather athletic attractive air hostess living down the road from me ;)
OneRedArmy
21/08/2007, 7:27 AM
So says you ORA. It's a profitable, well subscribed route is it not?
Whats that got to do with the national interest? :confused:
Another extremely critical report in todays Indo saying that the only reason that this story got oxygen is because we're in the middle of silly season when there's nothing else to write about.
As for your American tourist example, he can fly to one of the US destinations served out of Shannon and go that way, and save 4 or 5 hours. Anyone who travels long-haul regularly avoids Heathrow like the plague when they can.
I can't remember where he said he was from but it wasn't one of the Aer Lingus serviced US hubs. He flys from the US to Heathrow and transfers through to Shannon and from there makes his way to the golfclubs of Lahinch, Adare, Killarney, Waterville etc...
Easy. He can fly to Cork. For every problem there is a solution. :cool:
Lionel Ritchie
21/08/2007, 9:51 AM
Whats that got to do with the national interest? :confused:
.I believe I said strategic infrastructral interest, regional and national. They're asset stripping infrastructure from the midwest. I note you don't contest that it's a well subscribed profitable route ...not that I think that should be the be all and end all either.
Another extremely critical report in todays Indo saying that the only reason that this story got oxygen is because we're in the middle of silly season when there's nothing else to write about. ...that's very naive of you if you genuinely believe that ...and why the hell should I give a flying one what anyone in the Indo is saying anyway?
The only "silly season" relevance in all of this is Aer Lingus timing of the announcement as they wanted as many of the dail and cabinet away on holidays as possible to minimise the risk of a concerted political reaction. If it had gone just a little more smoothly for them I strongly suspect Corks Heathrow slots would be gone by now too.
As for your American tourist example, he can fly to one of the US destinations served out of Shannon and go that way, and save 4 or 5 hours. Anyone who travels long-haul regularly avoids Heathrow like the plague when they can.
...He probably can ...he just most likely won't.
The only "silly season" relevance in all of this is Aer Lingus timing of the announcement as they wanted as many of the dail and cabinet away on holidays as possible to minimise the risk of a concerted political reaction. If it had gone just a little more smoothly for them I strongly suspect Corks Heathrow slots would be gone by now too.
Concerted political reaction? Are FF capable of that? O'Dea changes his mind on the importance of it during an interview - he certainly doesn't see it as a big enough issue to give up his merc if the Government don't save the route...
monutdfc
21/08/2007, 10:23 AM
Concerted political reaction? Are FF capable of that? O'Dea changes his mind on the importance of it during an interview - he certainly doesn't see it as a big enough issue to give up his merc if the Government don't save the route...
I think it is hilarious watching O'Dea squirm! Can;t wait for Cullen to be wheeled out, since it was him who went on about the strategic value of the government stake.
Ryanair have really thrown the cat among the pigeons now with their increased stake; correct me if I am wrong, but in round figures the shareholdings are:
Ryanair 30% (29.4% to be exact)
Govt 25%
Employees 20%
Pilots 2.5%
Denis O'Brien 2.5% (?)
Other investors 20%
Corporate governance has its rules here, and minority shareholders have rights, but the government can easily overturn the decision with the shareholding split as it is given Ryanair's public pronouncements.
(Pure speculation here, but my guess is that this was a sweetheart deal promised by Bertie at some point in the northern talks)
OneRedArmy
21/08/2007, 10:42 AM
(Pure speculation here, but my guess is that this was a sweetheart deal promised by Bertie at some point in the northern talks)I severely doubt this.
About 3 months ago it was announced Belfast and Birmingham had been shortlisted as they two possible locations for a new AL hub outside RoI.
I've no doubt Belfast International (a privately owned airport by a foreign listed firm) put together a great package and the NI Executive may have given some kind of support but to say that its Bertie's decision is preposterous.
Its in the interests of Shannon-backers to spread this but the idea that a publicly listed firm make a major policy decision based on the will of the Taoiseach is beyond belief.
What you are saying is that the key stakeholders in AL, all who are shareholders and are rewarded for profit maximisation threw this out the window at the behest of a little gift to the North as thanks for peace? :rolleyes:
Why can't people get it into their heads that Aer Lingus are moving to Belfast because they can make more profits?!
You don't have to agree with it, but I can't see why people are stupid enough to believe the crap the Shannon lobby are continuing to spew out...
OneRedArmy
21/08/2007, 11:01 AM
I believe I said strategic infrastructral interest, regional and national. They're asset stripping infrastructure from the midwest. I note you don't contest that it's a well subscribed profitable route ...not that I think that should be the be all and end all either.In a publicly listed company profit maximisation generally is the be all and end all!
We're back to the uselessness of the Government's minority holding.
Lionel Ritchie
21/08/2007, 11:34 AM
Concerted political reaction? Are FF capable of that? O'Dea changes his mind on the importance of it during an interview - he certainly doesn't see it as a big enough issue to give up his merc if the Government don't save the route...
Completely agree with you in relation to FFs reaction and the lack of backbone in any of their ranks. But if this had been announced while the dáil was sitting it'd have seen the government hauled over the coals.
Aer Lingus timed the announcment to minimise reaction to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monutdfc
(Pure speculation here, but my guess is that this was a sweetheart deal promised by Bertie at some point in the northern talks)
I severely doubt this.
Agree with you again. This has sweet feck all to do with the Peace Process, restoring devolution or any other similar.
Why can't people get it into their heads that Aer Lingus are moving to Belfast because they can make more profits?! Three in a row we agree on. Where I reckon we differ is on the whether or not they should be allowed just up stumps and go ...or particularly whether they should be allowed take the Heathrow slots with them. The prevention of such moves was Martin Cullens stated reason for the government retaining the 25%.
John83
21/08/2007, 11:36 AM
...the government can easily overturn the decision with the shareholding split as it is given Ryanair's public pronouncements...
The Tribune said that you'd need 75% of the shareholders to overturn the board's decision. (Sounds like a strange figure to me - I'm only repeating what I read).
monutdfc
21/08/2007, 12:28 PM
I think it is hilarious watching O'Dea squirm!
He'll be incandescent after reading Fintan O'Toole in today's Irish Times:
According to O'Toole (and he puts forward a reasoned argument), O'Dea's stated position is unconstitutional!
OneRedArmy
21/08/2007, 12:38 PM
Agree that watching O'Dea squirm is the main positive out of all of this.
How the man can take his current position is beyond me..... The duplicity of many of this FF govt is absolutely staggering. No surprise really, but they continue to plumb new depths.
All this talk of Govt "buying" Heathrow slots is ridiculous. If thats the desired aim, much quicker and more efficient to renationalise Aer Lingus (not that I'd particularly agree with that).
You forgot Willie O'Dea wasn't actually in the cabinet that made the decision to Privatise Aer Lingus and he most definitely wasn't one of them wheeled out to defend, and Tony Killen wasn't part of that Government either. It was all the fault of the last Rainbow...
OneRedArmy
21/08/2007, 1:01 PM
You forgot Willie O'Dea wasn't actually in the cabinet that made the decision to Privatise Aer Lingus and he most definitely wasn't one of them wheeled out to defend, and Tony Killen wasn't part of that Government either. It was all the fault of the last Rainbow...
:confused: Formal decision was taken in 2005 iirc and O'Dea's been in Cabinet since 2004.
It may have been a broad policy objective going back before the last Govt but I'm fairly sure it went to Cabinet in 2005.
:confused: Formal decision was taken in 2005 iirc and O'Dea's been in Cabinet since 2004.
It may have been a broad policy objective going back before the last Govt but I'm fairly sure it went to Cabinet in 2005.
But you'd swear otherwise by the reaction of the two of them in particular. Whatever about no mark back benchers and councillors, those two were at the heart of Government when the decision to privatise was made, and remain at the heart of Government now when the Government could use it's stake to save all known life forms on the Western Seaboard.
But you'd swear otherwise by the reaction of the two of them in particular. Whatever about no mark back benchers and councillors, those two were at the heart of Government when the decision to privatise was made, and remain at the heart of Government now when the Government could use it's stake to save all known life forms on the Western Seaboard.
FF are bored with being the Government so they want to be the Opposition too. FG & Labour can be disbanded so can have 1 party state...
Jerry The Saint
21/08/2007, 5:21 PM
O'Dea would be feck all use as a Defence Minister if we ever have an actual Armageddon. :eek:
I'd rather have Bruce Willis in charge of things.
OneRedArmy
21/08/2007, 5:22 PM
O'Dea would be feck all use as a Defence Minister if we ever have an actual Armageddon. :eek:
They could dust off that photo of him pointing the gun at the camera.
That would scare off superpowers.
Lionel Ritchie
21/08/2007, 8:06 PM
Easy. He can fly to Cork. For every problem there is a solution. :cool:
If Aer Lingus board get their way there won't be any Heathrow-Cork flights soon enough either.
mypost
22/08/2007, 9:45 AM
Just listening on Morning Ireland, to some FFers from Co. Clare who had a meeting in Ennis last night. They're "outraged". That's it ...that's all. Oh... and they want "action" (don't we all ;) )
Couldn't even bring themselves to forward so much as an empty threat to resign their seats, break away as some quasi-Independent rump... Nothing. More hot air than when Richard Branson goes flying.
But the mid west region is well served by their FF reps because they're "outraged".
Heard other politicians on the airwaves last week, saying that this could bring down the government in the autumn. :D
No chance whatsoever. If anything was shown by the last election, it shows that the public don't care about Shannon, the poor transport/infrastructure, the health crisis, e-voting fiasco, the rising inflation levels, etc, but showed that the only thing that mattered was how much they have in their pocket at the end of the week.
Despite leading one of the worst-performing governments in recent history, 78 FF TD's were elected in May, which says it all.
John83
22/08/2007, 9:59 AM
If Aer Lingus board get their way there won't be any Heathrow-Cork flights soon enough either.
Is there any basis for that, or are we just throwing around idle accusations now?
If Aer Lingus board get their way there won't be any Heathrow-Cork flights soon enough either.
Nice way to deflect the topic... :rolleyes:
The fact is golfers & other tourists can still get to the South West.
OneRedArmy
22/08/2007, 10:16 AM
Has anyone reconciled Ryanair's long-stated position on pressuring Aer Lingus to sell all its Heathrow slots and using its voting block to hold and EGM to make Aer Lingus retain its Shannon-Heathrow flights?
John83
22/08/2007, 10:23 AM
Has anyone reconciled Ryanair's long-stated position on pressuring Aer Lingus to sell all its Heathrow slots and using its voting block to hold and EGM to make Aer Lingus retain its Shannon-Heathrow flights?
Yeah, no one actually expects them to be at anything here but **** stirring.
exiled_gufc_fan
22/08/2007, 10:32 AM
What crisis? :mad:
People in the mid-west obviously need to get their heads around what it means when a Company is floated on the Stock Exchange.
Writing a report on the upcoming EGM for some of our institutional investor clients with Aer Lingus holdings will be interesting - I wonder if house style will allow me to use the words "****-stirring" when talking about Ryanair? Maybe if it appears in the press I can quote it.
Besides - who'd want to use Heathrow anyhow - they are losing a lot of luggage down a black hole lately. They seem to find it about six weeks after you come back from holiday.
Maybe you are better off flying via Paris after all.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.