Airline captain in toxic fumes claim has ‘defamed’ Aer Lingus, barrister claims

A dismissed Aer Lingus captain who claims he was poisoned by “toxic fumes” on a flight from London to Dublin three years ago, leaving him with brain damage, is set to open a claim for whistleblower penalisation and other alleged employment rights breaches against the airline.
A barrister acting for Aer Lingus has said the pilot had “defamed” the airline and senior members of its management team – and told the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) that there is “absolute and unreserved denial” that passengers or crew had been exposed to any safety risk.
The pilot, Tom O’Riordan, has lodged claims under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, the Payment of Wages Act 1994, the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005 and the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 against Aer Lingus Ltd, and represented himself at a preliminary case management hearing on Monday.
He told the hearing that he had suffered “chronic fatigue syndrome and brain damage” as a result of “exposure to toxic fumes” on a flight from London Heathrow to Dublin Airport.
He claims he made a series of protected disclosures in connection with “fumes and falsification of reports” on various dates in correspondence with members of management at the airline, in letters to the Health and Safety Authority, the Minister for Transport, the Air Accident Investigation Unit, the Oireachtas and in posts on social media.
Mr O’Riordan’s case is that the reduction of his sick pay to 75 per cent of his salary in January 2024 and then the withdrawal of sick pay in April this year, as well as the disciplinary proceedings against him which led to his dismissal last month, amounted to whistleblower penalisation.
Tom Mallon BL, appearing for the airline instructed by Ailbhe Moloney of Arthur Cox solicitors, said: “Insofar as he wants to rely on the protected disclosure, he’s got to prove it, but I accept he made reports. Whether they constitute protected disclosures is a technical matter I’m not going to get into now.”
“We do accept he made reports. We say we dealt with them,” he added.
“It is absolutely disputed, unreservedly disputed that Captain O’Riordan or anybody else, and in particular passengers, were put at any risk. There is no evidence of that, and we will be challenging it absolutely 100 per cent. Insofar as an issue arose, it was properly looked into and the proper steps were taken,” Mr Mallon said.
He added that Mr O’Riordan had “criticised, denigrated and defamed Aer Lingus and senior members of its staff” and that was what had led to his dismissal.
“There is absolute and unreserved denial of any wrongdoing or any exposure to danger of cabin crew or passengers. My client will meet the allegations in the safety report … meet them head-on and face them down,” he said.
In clarifying the outline details of the case, adjudicator Aideen Collard put it to Mr O’Riordan that he had been asked by Aer Lingus to “desist from posting online” in the course of highlighting his concerns, which the complainant confirmed.
He also agreed that he had gone on hunger strike and staged a protest at Aer Lingus’s main offices on 26 February 2024 wearing his uniform and displaying placards.
Addressing the pay complaint, Mr Mallon said the pilot was “paid everything in accordance with his contract”. Mr O’Riordan said he had been “treated unfairly compared to people in the same role” and that he would be calling a named colleague to support a claim that he should have received his full salary while out sick.
Ms Collard said she would ask the WRC’s scheduling team to provide for five consecutive hearing days directly after the Christmas break.
She has also given a direction to the media not to report the names of any witnesses giving evidence in the case, other than the complainant.
Ms Collard said she would identify them by reference to their role if she was to be the decision-maker in the matter and said she expected the press to “follow suit”.