Case of Aer Lingus pilot sacked over campaign on alleged ‘toxic fumes’ is longest WRC hearing

The case of an Aer Lingus pilot sacked for a social media campaign on alleged “toxic fumes” on airliners has now become the longest-running employment rights case since public hearings began at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC).The pilot, veteran Airbus A320 captain Tom O’Riordan, is pursuing complaints of whistleblower penalisation, unfair dismissal and non-payment of wages against Aer Lingus Ltd at the WRC, following his dismissal in 2024. O’Riordan has told the tribunal the airline “knowingly” directed him to operate what he argues was an unsafe Airbus A320, EI-DEN, on an empty ferry flight from Heathrow to Dublin on 5th June, 2023, and that he suffered a brain injury as a result. He was sacked after the company decided he had committed “serious gross misconduct” by taking to social media with what he called “campaign of awareness” about alleged “toxic fumes”. READ MOREAer Lingus, through its lawyers, has strongly denied that O’Riordan, or any of his colleagues, or the public, were ever put at risk. O’Riordan concluded his evidence on his sixth day in the witness chair on Monday, in what has now become the longest-running employment rights case at the WRC since 2021 in terms of hearing days.Under cross-examination on Monday, O’Riordan told the WRC was making “protected disclosures” to “the general public and to Aer Lingus crew” when he wrote about “oil suspected of damaging fertility and the unborn child”. Soaring energy costs and why ‘we can’t protect everyone from the impact of war’“To the public in general, rather than any specific member of the public,” said Tom Mallon, appearing instructed by Arthur Cox LLP for the airline. “Yes, that’s my evidence,” he said. Mallon also questioned O’Riordan about his decision to picket Aer Lingus’s corporate headquarters at Dublin Airport on 26th February, 2024. O’Riordan confirmed that he was in uniform and had a placard made. “I engaged in a peaceful protest, yes,” O’Riordan said. Nobody asked him while he was outside the offices to stop and he ceased his protest around 10.30am, after about an hour and a half of picketing, he said. When Mallon put it to O’Riordan that he was subject to “three successive disciplinary processes”, O’Riordan replied: “That appears to be correct.” “I communicated in advance to Aer Lingus that he outcome of all these procedures would be predetermined, and I was not attending,” he said. He said before the disciplinary process, the airline’s chief pilot, John Kelly, had threatened action against him, while its human resources director, Sharon Morris, “threatened me and bullied me and tried to coerce me into stopping my campaign on social media”. “Your behaviour, it was made clear to you, was unacceptable,” Mallon said. “All my actions, interactions and correspondence in regard to toxic fumes are related to public and crew health and safety,” O’Riordan said. “And the company made it clear to you on numerous occasions that was unacceptable,” Mallon said. “That’s an unlawful direction,” he said. “That’s a matter for the adjudication officer,” Mallon said. “I would contest it,” O’Riordan said. O’Riordan confirmed he attended meetings in relation to the first of the three disciplinary processes, but did not engage further until it came time to appeal his dismissal to the airline’s chief operating officer, Adrian Dunne, who upheld the sanction. The second disciplinary process concluded O’Riordan’s posts on the ToxicAer accounts were “overwhelmingly negative” and in breach of Aer Lingus social media policy, Mallon said. O’Riordan said the social media policy “had only been created on 6th June [2024]” and was “interjected” during the disciplinary process. The complainant’s counsel, David Byrnes, appearing instructed by Setanta Solicitors, said his client was “not aware” of the outcome of the first disciplinary process because he had been cut off from his work emails when it was given. “Did you receive notice of the outcome of the first disciplinary?” adjudicator Aideen Collard asked the complainant.“No, I did not,” O’Riordan said. Asked when he saw it for the first time, he said: “Here in the WRC, I believe.” O’Riordan was excused shortly after that. Collard adjourned after telling Aer Lingus’s legal team it could have a week to decide whether to call more witness evidence concerning the company’s sick pay scheme before she hears closing arguments in December. That will bring to an end what has become the longest case to run at the WRC since the tribunal was first required to convene hearings in public in 2021. Monday was noted to be the 20th day of evidence over a 25-day run of hearings, spread over nearly two years. O’Riordan’s complaints against Aer Lingus Ltd are under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977, the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, and the Payment of Wages Act 1991.