IATA GC Gary Doernhoefer on Successfully Mixing Work with Pleasure
IATA's new general counsel mixes a passion for flying with a love of the law.
August 19, 2010 at 08:00 PM
6 minute read
Gary Doernhoefer spends a lot of time on airplanes. That's inevitable for the general counsel of an airline industry association with headquarters in Montreal and Geneva and offices in 60 countries. Add in a commuter marriage to an Ohio college professor currently teaching in Stockholm, and you can see the frequent flyer miles piling up.
But Doernhoefer isn't complaining. Being up in the air is just fine with him.
In April, Doernhoefer became general counsel of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which represents 230 airlines worldwide. It is his second GC position: Previously he was general counsel of Orbitz, the travel website. He honed his skills in aviation law in his first in-house job at American Airlines, as an antitrust attorney.
Doernhoefer fell in love with flying when a high school teacher who had a private plane taught a ground school class as an elective. But it wasn't until he had finished law school and was an associate in Mayer Brown's Denver office that Doernhoefer had the time and money to take flying lessons.
Later, at Denver law firm Davis Graham & Stubbs, with his pilot's license in hand, Doernhoefer represented the Colorado Airport Operators' Association. It was the first step in putting together his passion for flying with his love of the law, which would shape his career ever after.
Q: When did you decide to go in-house?
A: [While at Davis Graham & Stubbs] I decided to get serious about being a lawyer in the aviation industry. So I got a job with American Airlines in 1992.
Q: What was it like working at American?
A: The airline industry attracts very bright people. So you have smart clients and really talented colleagues, which makes it a very attractive place to work. And the issues are really cutting edge. Within a few years I was working on the defense of an alleged price-fixing scheme, industry-wide, using the computer systems to signal one another.
Q: What did you learn there?
A: As an antitrust lawyer you are forced to understand the operations of the business as well as the applicable law, which gets you deeply into how the business is run. It moved me into doing more international transactional work from the antitrust side, as American started doing code-sharing arrangements with airlines around the world.
Q: What else did you do at American?
A: American moved me to Washington, as the lawyer assigned to the government affairs office but more in a lobbying capacity. I had to learn the other half of the game. One half is talking to the lawyers and understanding the legal issues. The other half is what is happening politically at the same time. That set me up perfectly for the role at Orbitz.
Q: What challenges did you face as the first general counsel at Orbitz?
A: Orbitz was created by the five largest airlines at the time and almost immediately was under investigation by the Justice Department about whether it created an antitrust issue to have five direct competitors owning a means of selling their product. I had the perfect combination of airline, antitrust and government affairs experience that it desperately needed in its general counsel in the early years. We went through a three-year struggle to put to rest the questions raised about Orbitz, including three congressional hearings about whether Orbitz should exist, as well as DOJ investigations, DOT investigations and state attorneys general investigations.
Within nine months of clearing all that we went public, and within 10 months of that we were sold to Cendant Corp. in a public tender offer.
Q: What happened after the tender offer?
A: Five of us former Orbitz executives created Accertify Inc., which has had a Cinderella story of success in the area of combating credit card fraud for online merchants. The only downside for me was the legal work was not very exciting. It was the same software licensing agreement 45 times. No litigation, no government investigations, no major employee issues.
Q: Why did you take the GC job at IATA?
A: Aviation law has always been a very interesting area for me, and for the first time in my career to be able to take that completely global–the combination of those two things was irresistible.
Q: What is the role of IATA?
A: It really divides into two functions. One is a traditional trade association role. We have a dynamic director-general who takes on issues on behalf of the industry on a global basis. A great example is the recent volcano eruption. Our position has been that the governments and air traffic management in Europe overreacted, closing vast stretches of airspace that was unaffected by the ash cloud and disrupting air traffic across Europe.
In addition, we have a huge financial component.
Q: What is your biggest challenge as GC?
A: The challenge is the global scope of IATA. We have physical offices in 60 countries around the globe. We function in an international way like very few other organizations around the world. One group of issues is the day-to-day support of members in disputes with travel agents in Bangkok or Latin America. The other issues involve the services we provide in the legal area for our membership.
Q: As the new GC, what are your goals?
A: In the past two years, IATA experienced a strong shift from an
organization that enjoyed immunity from antitrust in many jurisdictions around the world to an entity that just complies and does not have immunity. The legal department had its hands full with a tremendous cultural shift and a weak economic environment, so a lot of initiatives were put on hold. As a result, I have a lot of challenges just modernizing the department–deploying modern contract management and matter management software solutions, and figuring out how to keep track of dispute resolution in 60 countries. The second goal is
establishing good relationships with the membership. Opening up those lines of communication early is very important.
Q: Do you still fly your own plane?
A: When I took the job with American Airlines, my wife looked at me and said, “We could spend $80 an hour to fly in a little tiny plane that is so loud we have to wear headsets and smells like aviation fuel and goes 120 miles per hour, or we could travel to an airport and fly anywhere they fly for free.” That pretty much killed my hobby. But it is one of the dreams I have for retirement that keeps coming back, so I am pretty sure I will do that.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhite Castle GC Becomes Chain's First President From Outside Family
Beyond the Title: Developing a Personal Brand as General Counsel
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250