Coughlan V O'Leary

[Zapatista]

Last summer Ryanair had 28 aircraft based in Dublin airport. Now they have 15. Last year they had 4 in Shannon. Shortly they will have only one (he promised to create 2,000 jobs there only 4 years ago). Spare us the Michael O'Leary wants to create jobs bullshit.

Aer Lingus recently moved their line maintenance into hanger 6. Shortly they will move all of their operations section and probably then will move their entire Head Office block into Hanger 6.

They acquired the lease fairly when it was offered. SRT were known to be leaving a year ago and he stayed quiet.

Imagine if Texaco promised to create jobs if the Tainiste threw Shell out of the Corrib Gas Field? That is the sort of petty tripe O'Leary is up to. Amazing how some people lick it up though.

Missing the point I think. Is pride of place and lack of trust in O'Leary a good enough reason to rule out a possible 300 jobs? The alternative if it doesn't is that we still don't have the jobs.

[Hardy]

As Muppet says, I seriously doubt there ever were 3 jobs, never mind 300. O'Leary never once addressed the government's response that they'd build him a hangar anywhere he wanted it or Shannon Development's "we'll do whatever you want in Shannon for 300 jobs". It was just another PR stunt, at the expense of the despair of 300 out-of-work people.

The telling point is that he was able to run absolute rings of PR around the government and that hapless she-gurrier of a minister. Of course, the media won't bother with the follow-up and pursue the question of why the "300 jobs" are now going abroad, when he was offered a new, free hangar at a site of his choice to keep them in Ireland.

The main headline slot on the evening news is probably worth twenty times a paid ad in the break and lasts for ten times as long and O'Leary gets it free every time. Ryanair must be the only company that gets all of its TV advertising free. You have to grudgingly admire that.

[AZOffaly]

I'd love to see O'Leary getting a good grilling. For example I'd love to ask him a simple question. If Shannon could build you a hanger exactly like Hanger 6, why do you not want to use it?

O'Leary is a master manipulator of the media, and uses emotive terms like creating jobs etc, when he couldn't give a continental about anybody else but himself. He'll go wherever he gets the cheapest, or best sweetheart deal, and he should be honest about that instead of portraying himself as some sort of benevolent leader.

As muppet says, O'Leary has no problem jeapordising jobs in Shannon by moving planes out of there, reducing routes etc etc because he feels he can drive cheaper bargains in other airports. That's his prerogative of course, but if he's going to be hard nosed like that on one hand, he can't be pretending to be Saint Vincent de Paul on the other.

[Zapatista]

That's all true but again I think it's missing the point. O'Leary is under no obligation to provide jobs. He is full of shit most of the time. He has the chips though. He doesn't need to explain why he wants hanger 6 as he has to provide for nobody and is answerable to nobody on it. Coughlan on the other hand is obliged to provide jobs and is answerable to us. She is employed by us to do this. O'Leary's personality is niether here nor there. If Coughlan is factoring in O'Leary's personality then that is a failure on her part. O'Leary has set out his terms and it's up to the state to meet them if we want these jobs. We also need to be carefull that O'Leary isn't pulling a fast one here to benefit himself if it means gambling on a situation were we have nothing to lose and 300 jobs to gain then we should meet his demands.

[AZOffaly]

That's true too Zap, but the question of 'why hanger 6' needs to be asked of O'Leary. If a hanger just as good can be built for him, why is that a non runner? Could it possibly be that he wants to prove he's the big dick around the place by getting Aer Lingus moved to accomodate him? Perish the thought.

In my opinion the win win scenario is that a hanger is built for him that he can use for the heavy maintenance, and Aer Lingus can continue with their own plans for Hanger 6 in Dublin.

Why is that a non-runner to O'Leary?

[thebigfella]

That's all true but again I think it's missing the point. O'Leary is under no obligation to provide jobs. He is full of shit most of the time. He has the chips though. He doesn't need to explain why he wants hanger 6 as he has to provide for nobody and is answerable to nobody on it. Coughlan on the other hand is obliged to provide jobs and is answerable to us. She is employed by us to do this. O'Leary's personality is niether here nor there. If Coughlan is factoring in O'Leary's personality then that is a failure on her part. O'Leary has set out his terms and it's up to the state to meet them if we want these jobs. We also need to be carefull that O'Leary isn't pulling a fast one here to benefit himself if it means gambling on a situation were we have nothing to lose and 300 jobs to gain then we should meet his demands.

I think he does, why is it a dealbreaker if he doesn't get hanger 6? A hanger that Aer Lingus, one of his rivals has a 20 year lease on.

[Zapatista]

That's true too Zap, but the question of 'why hanger 6' needs to be asked of O'Leary. If a hanger just as good can be built for him, why is that a non runner? Could it possibly be that he wants to prove he's the big dick around the place by getting Aer Lingus moved to accomodate him? Perish the thought.

In my opinion the win win scenario is that a hanger is built for him that he can use for the heavy maintenance, and Aer Lingus can continue with their own plans for Hanger 6 in Dublin.

Why is that a non-runner to O'Leary?

I don't know but at a guess it could be just that hanger 6 creates a problem and gives him the profile he craves. He might just be acting the bollix because he can. He might just be trying to piss off FF or Aer Lingus but the bottom line is that he can do that if he wants. Coulghan can't/shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water on this. Maybe Coulghan is right and the maybe the jobs are never going to be there anyway, I don't know. It just seemes to me that the only problem is that O'Leary is a p***k which isn't a good enough reason to prevent the jobs from happening.

If the FF arrogance up against O'Leary's arrogance is the problem then that's not good enough.

[Zapatista]

I think he does, why is it a dealbreaker if he doesn't get hanger 6? A hanger that Aer Lingus, one of his rivals has a 20 year lease on.

Maybe it's because he is acting the p***k. If the Government wanted to they could change the lease agreement.

[Denn Forever]

Would the DAA build him a new hanger in Dublin?

I would say he wants a hanger in Dublin as it is a pretty big hub for Ryanair.

[Billys Boots]

To me it looks like an attempt to destabilise Aer Lingus (again).  It's pretty clear that he doesn't really want or need Hangar 6 - so they key question is: what does he want or need?

[turk]

That's true too Zap, but the question of 'why hanger 6' needs to be asked of O'Leary. If a hanger just as good can be built for him, why is that a non runner? Could it possibly be that he wants to prove he's the big dick around the place by getting Aer Lingus moved to accomodate him? Perish the thought.

In my opinion the win win scenario is that a hanger is built for him that he can use for the heavy maintenance, and Aer Lingus can continue with their own plans for Hanger 6 in Dublin.

Why is that a non-runner to O'Leary?

There was a guy on newstalk the other day - he was a former SR technics/Team aer lingus technician and he explained why Hangar 6 would be most suitable for Ryanair. I think it is due to the size of the planes and the level of repairs that can be carried out there as opposed to the other ones. I suppose these hangars aren't just big haysheds.

[Zapatista]

There was a guy on newstalk the other day - he was a former SR technics/Team aer lingus technician and he explained why Hangar 6 would be most suitable for Ryanair. I think it is due to the size of the planes and the level of repairs that can be carried out there as opposed to the other ones. I suppose these hangars aren't just big haysheds.

Heard that. He also explained why 3&4 wouldn't be suitable.