LCR23203

PARTIES:

DIVISION:

SUBJECT:

Nominations process for the Irish representative positions on the Ryanair European Works Council.

BACKGROUND:

This dispute could not be resolved at local level and was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Workplace Relations Commission. As agreement was not reached, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court on 29 October 2025 in accordance with Section 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.

A Labour Court hearing took place on 02 December 2025.

Union Arguments

• Provision for Special Negotiation Bodies and European Works Councils is provided for under the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act, 1996. The legislation is clear that they are separate entities, and the SNB ceases to exist once its function concludes
• The EWC proceeded on the 12th November, with EWC representatives from other countries seeking that Ryanair open a nomination process for the lrish representatives on the EWC. By the EWC meeting proceeding on 12th November, it saw lrish employees' rights for selection and election onto the EWC refused outright. This contravenes the principles of the EWC and its procedures and contravenes the principles of due procedure.
• To refuse members a vote on the lrish representatives contravenes the legislation and actively prohibits members' right to determine their own EWC representatives.

Employer Arguments

• Ryanair wrote to all its SNB Representatives March 2025 noting that the EWC would likely be established under the Subsidiary Requirements and proposed the SNB Representatives would remain as EWC Representatives. The SNB Representatives agreed to this proposal. The then existing SNB Representatives therefore, by agreement, formed the initial EWC Representative body. Fórsa seeks to usurp this legitimate decision by the SNB members
• There are currently two EWC Representatives for Ireland on the EWC. These two Representatives were duly elected to the SNB in 2022 through a nomination and election process following all legal requirements
• it is not for the central management of Ryanair or Fórsa to try and appoint new or additional representatives on to an established and functioning EWC or to unilaterally dictate term limits. These are matters for the EWC.

RECOMMENDATION:

The issue in dispute between the parties and referred to the Court is the nominations process for the Irish representative positions on the Ryanair European Works Council. The Union in their submission stated that the Employer had refused to commence a process for opening nominations for the two Irish representative positions on the Ryan Air European Works Council (EWC) despite a request from the Union and had instead indicated their intention to have the representatives who were elected to the Special Negotiating Body (SNB) in October 2022 take up those roles. The Union believes this is contrary to the requirements of the EWC Directive and Irish legislation. The Union submitted that the SNB had never met and that the three-year period for the negotiation of an EWC came to an end on 12 May 2025 at which point the SNB automatically dissolved. The EWC was established in May 2025 with its first meeting scheduled for 12 November 2025.

The Union first wrote to the Employer on 14 March 2025 seeking to have a discussion about the Ryanair EWC in advance of any correspondence issuing to SNB members. On 14 April 2025 the European Transport Workers Federation wrote on behalf of all its affiliates looking to engage with Ryanair because the EWC fell to be established under the subsidiary requirements. The Employer did not agree to that meeting.

There was engagement between Forsa and the Employer, but they would not agree to the Unions request to appoint the Union’s nominees or to hold an election. Forsa set out in its submission what it believed to be clear breaches and noncompliance with the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act,1996 by the Employer. It also raised concerns about the election process that had taken place in 2022 but accepted that it had not formally raised these issues at that time.  The Union indicated that it was its understanding that in other jurisdictions elections to the Employer EWC had occurred.  Forsa requested that the Court find in favour of their claim that either the two union representatives be appointed as the Irish representatives of the Ryanair EWC, or that an agreed nomination and election process be outlined and triggered as soon as possible.

The Employer in their submission stated that the SNB process was conducted in 2022 without challenge and that the Employer’s European Works Council was established in May 2025. In March 2025 while the SNB remained extant it wrote to all its SNB representatives noting that the EWC would likely be established under the Subsidiary Requirements and proposing that the SNB Representatives would remain as EWC Representatives. The SNB representatives agreed to the proposal with none objecting or opting to step down.  The existing SNB representatives 16 employee representatives from 11 countries form the employee representatives on the current EWC.

At the EWC meeting held on 12 November 2025 the issue of term limits for EWC members and future election processes were discussed and there is a plan to review these matters and revert to central management on their preference for when the next election/ nomination cycle takes place. The Employer submitted that it was not for them or the Union to try and appoint new or additional representatives to an established and functioning EWC or to unilaterally dictate term limits. In line with the relevant legislation, that’s a matter for the EWC to consider and agree with central management.

The Court, in the course of the hearing, reminded the parties that the referral to it was under the Industrial Relations Act and that in such a case it is not open to the Court to make findings that the interpretation of, or application of, a different statute is right or wrong. That can only be done in the method provided for by that piece of legislation, which in this case is not an Industrial Relations referral to the Labour Court. The Court having spoken to the parties both jointly and separately notes that no collective agreement existed that required the Employer to consult on these issues. However, in the interest of good Industrial Relations the intention to request SNB members to stay on should have been flagged in advance with the Union. Going forward the Court recommends that the Employer use its regular meetings with the Union to keep it informed of relevant developments regarding the election/nomination cycle of the EWC.

The Court so recommends.

	Signed on behalf of the Labour Court
	Louise O'Donnell
FC	______________________
17 December 2025	Deputy Chairman

NOTE

Enquiries concerning this Recommendation should be in writing and addressed to Ms Fiona Corcoran, Court Secretary.