Pilots union vote no confidence in Aer Lingus chief executive and COO 

The vote follows a recent incident that led to the suspension of an Aer Lingus pilot

It is understood that the union is awaiting communication from Aer Lingus' chief executive, Lynne Embleton, who could be added to the no-confidence motion if she does not respond to the union's request to meet on Monday. File Picture: Steve Parsons/PA Wire

Aer Lingus pilots have unanimously passed a motion of no confidence in their chief executive and chief operating officer following an incident last week that led to the suspension of a pilot.

An extraordinary general meeting of Aer Lingus members was convened on Monday evening to discuss safety concerns among pilots, following what the Irish Airline Pilots Association (Ialpa) described as an interference from senior non-flying management.

Ialpa initially asked members to vote on a motion stating that Aer Lingus pilots "in their professional capacity as frontline guardians of aviation safety for all and in their promotion of safety first at all times, have no confidence in chief operations officer Adrian Dunne”.

The no-confidence motion was then extended to CEO Lynne Embleton, after it was confirmed she would not attend an urgent meeting with the union on Monday. 

More than 300 of Aer Lingus' 850 pilots attended the EGM in Dublin on Monday, which Ialpa said was a "very good" turnout given that up to 400 pilots were flying while the meeting took place.

The unanimous vote of no confidence follows an incident that took place last week between Aer Lingus senior management and a pilot.

The pilot was flying an aircraft from Barbados to Manchester last week. There were two pilots on the plane, as well as off-duty cabin crew members, known as "positioning crew." 

The flying of the positioning crew is quite rare, as off-duty cabin crew will usually stay overnight in the arriving destination after working a long-haul flight. There were no commercial passengers on board the flight. 

The captain of the Aer Lingus aircraft instructed the crew to sit in economy class. The union argues that this was done to ensure the load of the aircraft was balanced and was thus considered a safety measure, which comes under the remit of the pilot.

Under EU aviation laws, the flight commander is the sole person responsible for the safety of the aircraft and everyone on board.

At some stage in the flight, the cabin crew manager asked the captain to move the positioning crew from economy to business class. When the pilot refused, the cabin crew manager complained to Aer Lingus.

It is understood that senior management emailed flight operations in Dublin, who sent an electronic message to the aircraft instructing the captain to move all positioning crew to business class. The captain did not comply with this instruction. 

Once the flight landed in Manchester, the captain filed a report to a safety manager detailing the incident. Shortly after, a member of human resources at Aer Lingus contacted the captain to inform him that he had been suspended.

In a letter to members, Ialpa said the purpose of the EGM was to discuss "safety concerns of Aer Lingus pilots and the interference from senior, non-flying management, the head of crew operations and cabin crew operational managers in the operation of an aircraft while in flight."

The positioning crew on the flight did not take part in the cabin crew strike at the Aer Lingus Manchester base from October 30 to November 2, as they were not members of the trade union Unite.

"The Aer Lingus pilot members of IALPA in their professional capacity as frontline guardians of aviation safety for all and in their promotion of ‘safety first’ at all times, have no confidence in Chief Executive Officer Lynne Embelton and Chief Operations Officer Adrian Dunne," the union said on Monday evening.

In a statement to the Irish Examiner, a spokesperson for Aer Lingus said: "The motions discussed at the IALPA EGM on 10th of November have no effect. 

"However, the decision of the IALPA Executive to propose such motions to its membership was entirely inappropriate. There are two separate ongoing processes underway, a safety investigation following receipt of a safety report and a fact finding process following concerns raised by an employee. 

"Both of these processes are being run in accordance with the procedures applicable to them and it is important that the confidentiality and integrity of the processes are not subject to any outside interference. The IALPA EGM and the motions proposed represent an attempt to interfere in these processes.”