Discrimination

[Wrathmonk]

BBC News - RAF nurse Wendy Williams wins sexism tribunal (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23053008)

Anyone else hear the sound of floodgates opening as all those who feel they were overlooked for a particular job, command appointment or promotion due to their age/sex/branch/trade etc take the MOD to tribunal or is this one really a 'one-off' that was clear cut?

[Bob Viking]

I love stories like this. They purport to highlight endemic discrimination because a lady was passed over in preference to a man. It seems to me that she was passed over because she was a nurse instead of a doctor. That is perhaps still discrimination, but in the medical world maybe that's just the way things need to work to get things done.
The other bit I love is the reporting of this:

...'low number of women in top ranks overall - amounting to between 1% and 1.3% of the total.'

I'm sure it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that there aren't as many women in the RAF as there are men and that, since many of them will take time off or even terminate their careers to have children, they may not have the length of career to reach the lofty heights. Maybe also it's due to the fact that to reach that rank you needed to have joined decades ago when equal opportunities weren't as well considered.
Times have changed now and I think the interests of women are very well looked after in the RAF (doesn't it keep winning female employer of the year?!) but do we really think we should now promote people because they are women? I hate this EO rubbish. Why can't we live in a world where the best person gets the job rather than filling quotas? Maybe the female Gp Capt was the best person in this instance and if that's the case she deserves to win her case and I sympathise wholeheartedly. I just wish it wasn't fought from a sexual discrimination standpoint.
I also note that there is a very low percentage of senior officers called Bob. Maybe it's time I launched a lawsuit of my own.
BV:ugh:

[CoffmanStarter]

More detail here ...

The panel also included scathing criticism of several senior officers, including Air Vice-Marshal Chris Morris who gave the promotion board a "partisan and not unbiased" assessment of Group Capt Gaffney, who was under his command at the time.

Air Vice Marshal Mike Lloyd, who is now retired but was in charge of RAF personnel at the time, was also criticised for his lack of knowledge of discrimination legislation, something the tribunal found "incredulous".

BFBS News (http://www.bfbs.com/news/raf-nurse-wins-sexism-case-against-mod-63889.html)

[racedo]

Asks a real question about whether someone in the RAF should have a title such as Group Captain be it male or female if they have never flown.

[lj101]

A bit like having navigators in charge of pilots!

It's like herding cats.

[racedo]

A bit like having navigators in charge of pilots!

Unfair that one, as Nav not only tells Pilot where to go, Nav also shows him how to get there quickly :E

[Union Jack]

.... something the tribunal found "incredulous".

Almost as incredulous as I am that an industrial tribunal should have any say whatsoever in what is essentially a Service decision.

On this basis, and with his disabilities, Nelson should have been made an Admiral of the Fleet at a much earlier stage, as opposed to having to settle for being a mere Vice Admiral and a Viscount at the time of Trafalgar.

I trust that the "Group Captain" feels duly pleased with herself for apparently showing the Royal Air Force, which has almost certainly already afforded her the opportunity to advance herself a great deal further than she might have done in civilian life, in a relatively poor light.

Jack

[Pontius Navigator]

Asks a real question about whether someone in the RAF should have a title such as Group Captain be it male or female if they have never flown.

Brigadier without a Brigade?

[Melchett01]

The tribunal, led by employment judge Veronica Dean, ruled that Gp Capt Williams was not only equal to Gp Capt Gaffney, but should have been considered as the RAF's "properly preferred candidate"

Really? Why? I smell something fishy, and I'm not talking about contents of Baldrick's apple crumble. What is this case really about? Is it about a Dr beating a Nurse to a promotion or is it about a man beating a woman to a promotion? It's difficult to tell from the partisan reporting that smacks of a mix of positive discrimination and a sense of "I've been a Gp Capt for longer than you so it must be my turn".

So what exactly made Gp Capt Williams the properly preffered candidate? At that level, you are in the General Duties field and it's open competitione across the Services. Length of time in rank is irrelevant if there is a high flyer coming up the tracks fast behind you.

[muttywhitedog]

She's been in since 1984 and only has 3 medals?

[500N]

What is the first medal ?

It is some sort of Cross but couldn't find it.

[JFZ90]

looks like they went through their previous staff appraisals and decided hers had 'higher marks'.

interested to know if there was an interview - if not it looks like they were on thin ice and walked into it.

if there was an interview then the reviews should not be the deciding factor surely?

[air pig]

500N; The medal is a Royal Red Cross (RRC), awarded for excellence in Military nursing in UK Forces. Lower award is Associate Royal Red Cross (ARRC).

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

"Air Vice Marshal Mike Lloyd, who is now retired but was in charge of RAF personnel at the time, was also criticised for his lack of knowledge of discrimination legislation, something the tribunal found "incredulous"

I thought that Mike Lloyd was AOC 22 Trg Gp.

Duncs:ok:

[Waddo Plumber]

" something the tribunal found "incredulous". " Incredulous doesn't mean unbelievable, it means unbelieving. What are tribunals coming to?

[smujsmith]

So, reading the article in the papers the suggestions seem to be;

1. The man selected for the job had 3 years less time in service than she had.

2. There is a low level of sex equality in high level positions in the RAF.

Not one mention of simple facts like, winning the promotion on merit or higher level of qualifications. I know my head is on a chopping block here, but can someone tell me why "equality" has to be a prime factor in selecting people for jobs ? Surely all that does is try and satisfy demand for biased recruiting, in favour of female candidates. In my day, any woman told she had been given a job " because she was a woman" would have told them where to put the job. Maybe being an old bloke brings this sort of thinking to mind. Any post should be filled by the best "person" for the job. It seems to me that in this case of sour grapes and a bit of free publicity.

Smudge

[Two's in]

If the post really does prefer Doctors over Nurses then that should be documented and made clear to all candidates upon consideration. Unless of course it's one of those unwritten rules of the Forces Promotion Mysogony Club that sweet little things like this shouldn't worry their pretty little heads over. She called them on it and they got caught with their d!cks in the mangle - good for her. It's not 1853 and the Crimea you know.

[500N]

"but can someone tell me why "equality" has to be a prime factor in selecting people for jobs ?"

Because the loony, latte sipping left where everyone wins, no one loses
but we want all the perks but non of the had work deem it to be the way !


Same as we have a PM in Aus who got the pre selection because of
"quotas" and has done such a fine job no woman will be voted to
high office for years !

[MATELO]

I look forward to the next case....

"Gp Capt Gaffney sues for unfair dismissal"

[NutLoose]

They obviously thought she would be better suited to nurse her disappointment.




I know, hat coat time..

[OutlawPete]

Until the RAF gets itself bang up to date with modern employment legislation by hiring a few employment specific lawyers (good ones are like hens teeth) it will continue to get handed its arse on a plate over cases like this.

The HR world is full of many pitfalls and a few seemingly experienced officers will get eaten alive by the boys (and girls) who know their stuff. Moan about it sure, but it's now the law of the land (thanks Tony) and civvy street wised up to this kind of thing year's ago. Time the RAF did too.

[500N]

Outlaw

Or just specify / be more specific re the criteria to hold the position ?

[Roadster280]

Brigadier without a Brigade?

Don't start that one. Army ranks work fine, for the most part.

Lt Cols command regiments
Colonels command not very much any more
Brigadiers command brigades
Major Generals command divisions
Lt Generals command Corps
Generals command armies.

RAF ranks seem a rank behind.

Flt Lts command not very much.
Sqn Ldrs command flights.
Wg Cdrs command squadrons
Gp Capts command stations (ie wings)
Air Cdres command not very much
AVMs command Groups
After that, it gets a bit obscure.

[CoffmanStarter]

Spot on OutlawPete ...

[OutlawPete]

500N

Yes, that would be the logic to draw from this particular case. They devil as always is in the detail though, be specific but it must be non discriminatory. The key is being good at it without offending someone who may be inclined to apply, hence the need for expert assistance. With employment law the Armed Forces are operating in unfamiliar territory. And I'm sad to say that in many cases it is essentially an arse covering exercise.

[Big Bear]

Sqn Ldrs command flights


Erm... does that mean I'm misemployed?

Roadster, there are plenty of Sqn Ldrs commanding Sqns in the RAF, just not the flying ones.

Bear

[500N]

Outlaw

OK, thanks and agree.

I was thinking along the lines of because this is a medical position,
in this case it would be easier to write restrictive criteria - ie must
be a Doctor.

[airborne_artist]

Staying on the right side of employment law is actually quite easy. Follow the required processes to the letter, and have a paper trail that shows you have done so.

[Jumping_Jack]

Flt Lts command not very much.
Sqn Ldrs command flights.


This may be true of our aircrew brethren but as a Flt Lt I commanded a Flight; at Sqn Ldr I commanded a Sqn. :ok:

[Wensleydale]

Reminds me of the old Officers' Command Course at Henlow. The discipline/legal lessons started with the offence of theft of a chicken and went through each stage of the process of charging the miscreant up to court martial. The events were acted out for us on stage by the Di-Staff followed by explanation and discussion. At the initial hearing, the station Medical Officer gave evidence as a junior officer - at each subsequent hearing he appeared promoted by one rank. The final joke was at the court martial where he out-ranked everybody in the court. (Much play made about who saluted who).

[CoffmanStarter]

Pilot Officers try to command themselves as I seem to recall :ok:

[Training Risky]

Unbelievable.

How does a civilian employment tribunal have the power to make judgements on a military internal process.

How many unsuccessful candidates at OASC will now see this as a green light to sue because although they have a First from Cambridge and perfect aptitude scores, they porked the interview and screwed the hangar tasks: "But I was qualified for the job and the process was too subjective!"

The rot started when we allowed women to compete on equal terms in the military. Life was simpler when the WAAFs knew their limits and acted accordingly!:mad:

[technophobe]

What I find confusing is the apparent non-sequitur from finding the assessment subjective to concluding that there was discrimination based on the individuals' sex. I have no problem accepting that the process was subjective, having observed promotion boards (and received the debriefs on why I had narrowly missed out again) I can see the potential there, particularly when it boils down to 2 people and the inevitable reading between the lines but why does this subjectivity lead to an assumption that it is because she is a woman not that it is because she is a nurse etc etc?

[OutlawPete]

Unbelievable.

How does a civilian employment tribunal have the power to make judgements on a military internal process.

How many unsuccessful candidates at OASC will now see this as a green light to sue because although they have a First from Cambridge and perfect aptitude scores, they porked the interview and screwed the hangar tasks: "But I was qualified for the job and the process was too subjective!"

The rot started when we allowed women to compete on equal terms in the military. Life was simpler when the WAAFs knew their limits and acted accordingly!:mad:

TR, military internal processes are covered by the same laws, its that simple. Or actually it isn't and the scenario you propose about the potential for the OASC candidates entering into a legal process because he/she wasn't selected is a very realistic possibility if one doesn't have ones house in order before one tells said candidate thanks but no thanks.

With many things in life its more about how its done not necessarily why. You can still refuse to accept an applicant because you don't feel they would fit with your business. What you can't do is say I didn't hire him because I didn't like the look of him.

[Finnpog]

The military was found wanting in this case.
In the same way that the other threads on Airworthiness state, there needs to be a transparent and auditable record / paper trail to demonstrate fairness in the process.

With the same gay abandon, the Star in charge of personnel had not a clue about the law in relation to personnel and HR matters.
The biggest issue - No winners!
This leaves a mist of sleaziness about the process, where the complainant comes out if this being criticised for being 'difficult' - even though she has a case; the other candidate is tarnished with going forward wearing a cloak of being the second-best candidate but got the job because he has a meat and two veg, and the inspirational leadership of the RAF look like a bunch of prejudiced cocks (however they have clearly completed their diversity training and are truly 'transformational' in their management style).

This is not about quota setting. It is about a system which cannot evidence that it is not corrupt.

My 2d.

[Photoplanet]

Quote:
"Asks a real question about whether someone in the RAF should have a title such as Group Captain be it male or female if they have never flown."

And then there's the Pilot & Flying Officers in ground branches......

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Remember that leadership training thing with the 3 overlapping circles; task need, team, need and individual need? Now that the Services have become primarily an employment opportunity, the “individual” ring is now the size of a planet and the “task” one the size of a circus tent.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

“task” one the size of a circus tent

..and that's not the only similarity to a circus these days..

lots of clowns, whipped animals jumping through hoops, and the safety net of job security and pensions is looking smaller every day.

[air pig]

Training Risky: The PMRAFNS was not part of the WAAF/WRAF and is still today a separate branch of the RAF as it was from its inception. I remember when us poor males were commissioned into the PMRAFNS, some of the older nursing officers did not know how to take us as until 1981 male nurses belonged to the Med Tech branch but within ten years we did have our first male one star as Matron in Chief/Director Nursing Services, in the form of Air Cdr Bob Williams.

[SOSL]

Unbelievable! Comments from short sighted bigots who seem to have no interest in the development and future success of the RAF.

Gp Capt Williams reached her rank in spite of the prevailing view that nurses above the rank of Sgt were lightweight part-timers.

She probably deserves the promotion because she is probably the best candidate.

Rgds SOSL

[teeteringhead]

I also note that there is a very low percentage of senior officers called Bob. Maybe it's time I launched a lawsuit of my own.
our first male one star as Matron in Chief/Director Nursing Services, in the form of Air Cdr Bob Williams. There's one more for you BV :ok:

[Wrathmonk]

There's one more for you BV

But is this one a "Bob" as in Blackadders "Bob"??;)

[Wensleydale]

Remember that leadership training thing with the 3
overlapping circles; task need, team, need and individual need? Now that the
Services have become primarily an employment opportunity, the “individual” ring
is now the size of a planet and the “task” one the size of a circus tent.




FALA: Functional Approach to Leadership Analysis if I am not mistaken. There is now another ring called "Risk Analysis" - or should that be "Anti-litigation for the Hierarchy"?

[Ken Scott]

In my experience, admittedly an un-scientific assessment, I would say that proportionately more female officers get promoted than male ones so that there seems to be a gender bias in the opposite direction.

In this case the leap to 'gender bias' seems to me, without having seen the evidence, a bit of a stretch as the unwritten job spec preferred a doctor to a nurse so the outcome would presumably have been the same if the nurse had been male. Just because she had been a Gp Capt longer than the successful candidate would be immaterial as the system is not a queue and the extra time in rank could indicate that she had already been passed over as not a high flyer.

All in all though it's an unfortunate outcome for the RAF (& by extension the other 2 services?) as it would seem to establish precedence for future cases so that more money can be diverted from the budget to mollify individual's hurt feelings.

Thinks: must contact my lawyer as I've been the same rank for ages so I must have been overlooked on racial/ gender/ height/ some other pretext.

[Bob Viking]

Ken.
Your last post made me think. A friend of mine was promoted to Sqn Ldr about 4 years ago after spending a mere 4 years as a Flt Lt. I, on the other hand, have been a Flt Lt for 12 years. Since he has a darker skin colour than me I can only assume I have been discriminated against based on my ethnicity. Of course it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he worked his balls off doing umpteen secondary duties and ticked an awful lot of boxes in very short order, while I concentrated purely on flying. It's not my fault. The system is corrupt and unfair. Anyone got the number for a good employment lawyer?
BV

[lj101]

Ken

Stats are here;

http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/UKDS/UKDS2012/pdf/ukds2012r2.pdf

Table 2:7

[Roadster280]

there are plenty of Sqn Ldrs commanding Sqns in the RAF, just not the flying ones.

Fair point, as the number of flying squadrons decreases, the rank misnomers will become less apparent.

[4ROCK]

''The tribunal, led by employment judge Veronica Dean''

As this was a gender discrimination case found in favour of the female with the case being heard by a judge of the same sex (one would assume from the name?) surely there must be good grounds for appeal?..... Although as has already been pointed out it would appear to be an own goal by 'the system' which has caught the RAF with it's trousers round it's ankles.

Group Captain Nurses - how many beds do they command.....?

[5 Forward 6 Back]

OutlawPete, interesting stuff.

TR, military internal processes are covered by the same laws, its that simple. Or actually it isn't and the scenario you propose about the potential for the OASC candidates entering into a legal process because he/she wasn't selected is a very realistic possibility if one doesn't have ones house in order before one tells said candidate thanks but no thanks.

In terms of explaining why a candidate is better, I thought we already did that now? Isn't it like flying training, where we have some measurable standards and can say that someone is a grade 2 while someone else is a grade 3 with some sort of veracity? I guess unless they somehow picked a lower-scored candidate, that'd be quite a robust process.

More to the point, like BV, I want to find out how I sue; I was passed over for a couple of quals and a course that I was definitely well suited to on paper and by most measurable standards. Asked why, turns out my then-Flt Cdr just didn't like me, and said as much when his guard was down at a dining in night....

Anyone know a good no-win no-fee employment lawyer? :E

[Ken Scott]

Lj101: thanks for the stats, a veritable mine of interesting statistics.......(+lies & damn lies)

Fig 2.7 doesn't quite do it as the figures aren't broken down enough. My gut feeling is that proportionally more females make the jump to Sqn Ldr than do their equivalent males & it only gives figures for Sqn Ldr & below. On the face of it ladies make up 17.7% of them but only 7.2% of Wg Cdr & above which would make the RAF discriminatory but there are a host of other factors such as wimmin leaving to have children & their generally shorter careers (they leave once they've bagged their pilot!!)

My interest in the statistics lasted just long enough for me to note that in 2006 the military had a total trained strength of 163 150 ORs & there were 140 2** & above whereas in 2012 the ORs had reduced to 149 100 & the 2** & above had reduced to...........140.

There are quite a few similar stats that show that whilst the number of indians has reduced the number of chiefs, particulalry the more senior ones, has remained largely static. But I won't stretch your patience by quoting them, have a look if you're interested or rain's stopped play at Wimbledon.

[Melchett01]

Unbelievable! Comments from short sighted bigots who seem to have no interest in the development and future success of the RAF.

Damned right - I have no interest in seeing the RAF develop through positive discrimination at the expense of ability. I want to see it develop by the best people getting the right jobs. And if that means, at some point down the line, that a pilot is beaten to a plum job as a VSO by a better non-flyer, or a nurse is beaten to a job by a better doctor then so be it.

As it is, this has story is being peddled during a slow news week as nothing more than a case of sexism to make a political point. The only problem being that reading the press coverage as it is, her argument of I'm a female nurse and I've been a Gp Capt for so much longer than the Gp Capt doctor fatally undermines her case as it goes against the principles of best individual for the job at the time with an implicit suggestion that promotion should be time based.

Without knowing the background of the other individuals involved and how their performance was judged by the relevant board, it is very difficult to make a balanced judgement, not something we are likely to get from a rag that wants to sell copy through sensational stories on a quiet week. But there is absolutely nothing short sighted about pointing out the weaknesses in her case as published or in aguing that the best performer should get the job.

[jayteeto]

I commanded a flying sqn as a sqn ldr. A very small one with six helicopters, but a sqn nonetheless.

[alfred_the_great]

Melchett - it wasn't that, from what I can make out from a combination of press reports.....

She was a Gp Capt, as was the chap; she was a Nurse, the chap a Medical Officer. They were being boarded for a 1* post that is nominally open to any Tri-Service Medical Service member, MO, Nurse or MSO, but is normally filled by a MO.

The MO Gp Capt was selected because it was felt that he would be a 'better fit' against the RN/Army candidates, simply because he was a MO.

PMRAFNS is primarily female, MOs are primarily male (especially at OF5 level); thus selecting someone simply because they are a MO is indirect discrimination, especially when the 1* job is 'open' to Nurses as well, and she met the stated specification.

There is also a wider point that lots of senior jobs are 'advertised' as open to x, y and z, but for historical reasons, only x who has done a, b and c is a realistic candidate. It is here that all the Forces fall down, and I suspect that a SDSR 15 implementation will be to take 1*+ appointment processes away from the individual Services and put them into a civilian run process.

[SOSL]

This has nothing to do with seeing the RAF develop through positive discrimination at the expense of ability.

My comment referred to the majority of postings on this thread which utterly fail in pointing out the weaknesses in her case as published or in aguing that the best performer should get the job.

There is not one single posting which even pretends to adduce her professional suitability (or otherwise). Instead it's mostly at this level:Group Captain Nurses - how many beds do they command.....?

If I posted "Group Captain Pilots - how many aircraft do they command....?" that would be equally meaningless.

Rgds SOS

[Wander00]

Civilians appointing to 1* service posts, that will work well, given civilian lack of understanding of the Services, even amongst MOD civilians

[SOSL]

After I hung up my uniform for the last time and handed in my gas mask etc. I managed to land a contract as a consultant, supporting a civil servant 1*.

I soon learned that he had a very sophisticated and detailed understanding of the Services and he showed it in his actions and decisions.

People in uniform are special and deserve respect, but they don't have a monopoly on understanding.

Rgds SOS

[Bob Viking]

None of us on here have the knowledge to deduce anything about her professional ability. You clearly think she was hard done by but you don't know any better than anyone else whether she was competent to fulfil the role. You just have the biased media story to base your assumptions on.
What you are seeing are opinions based on impressions gleaned from the story. Maybe, just maybe, folks get a little peeved when a race/gender/age... card is pulled out when someone is upset. Maybe it's because some of us don't have a card (white, able bodied, British male for instance) and we're jealous. Maybe we're all bigoted, mysoginist dinosaurs who need to move with the times. Or maybe we've seen too many cases of positive discrimination that we get a bit hacked off by cases like this.
Either way, opinions will vary and unless you sat on the tribunal you have no idea what was really said.
Standing by to be flamed for daring to have an opinion that does not conform to the latest EO directives.
BV:ooh:

[alfred_the_great]

Well, there is very little inherent different to the vast majority of the 1* posts in Defence from their opposite number in Civilian Street (and, frankly, very few Defence wide). Moreover, if we actually knew how to run a HR system, creating the right job specification and recording personal (and personnel) competencies appropriately, matching the two would be a piece of widdle.

Instead we use the old boy system, where we "know" who's best for a job without actually testing that person against other peers, or against those below or above who might be better suited to it. Whilst we're doing this, we use "Career Managers" who have no background in HR, will likely only do it for 18 months - 2 years, and who are not appropriately trained.

And as long as we "Career Manage" like that we will nearly always lose employment tribunals like this, because we don't have a leg to stand on.

[Al R]

Gp Capt Williams, who was supported by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN), said she was pleased with the decision.


I bear her no ill will at all, but if this IS all about equality, and in light of PMRAFNS escaping the incremental pay cuts that will blight their civilian counterparts, I hope that the RCN doesn't expect a quid pro quo if she gets the job..:ok:

Gp Capt Gaffney commanded TPMH Aki I think. I don't know what command experience GP Capt Williams has, but if we were told that an engineer was in line to be CG of the RAF Regiment (it happened quite recently) because his/her overall appraisals were better, would that still make him/her the best candidate for a specialist apt?

I don't know who wins out of this. I wonder too, if equality really is important, just how hard Judge Veronica Dean fought to see her occupational judiciary pension affected to the same extent as that of NHS nurses.

[SOSL]

My post at #41 simply said "she was probably the best candidate" (I just added the bold for emphasis).

My post at #55 was a sort of internal (to this thread) beef about the tenor of the majority of posts aimed with disrespect (sp!) at women/nurses.

I don't think you have to be EO trained simply to respect other human beings!

Rgds SOS

[downsizer]

Stats are here;

http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/U...ukds2012r2.pdf (http://www.dasa.mod.uk/modintranet/UKDS/UKDS2012/pdf/ukds2012r2.pdf)

Some of those equipment stats showing the kit in 2000 vice the kit now make for depressing reading...:(:sad:

[Twon]

There seem to be comments and the case itself sugesting that AMP and COS Pers should probably have - shock, horror - personnel experience (HR, Personnel branch background?). We seem to do this with every other specialisation but bizarrely feel that our Senior HR/Personnel officer does not have to have any actual previous experience of the HR field (commanding a Sqn/Stn is not the same thing as having specialist knowledge).

Controversial but would this help towards solving some of the issues raised here?

[SOSL]

Good point TWON. Current Air Sec (AMP) is a supplier (or is it Logistics Officer?).

He is actually one of the good guys but I don't think he has any previous professional HR experience.

Rgds SOS

[Q-RTF-X]

RAF ranks seem a rank behind.

Flt Lts command not very much.
Sqn Ldrs command flights.
Wg Cdrs command squadrons
Gp Capts command stations (ie wings)
Air Cdres command not very much
AVMs command Groups
After that, it gets a bit obscure.

Not forgetting the good old days when Sqn Ldrs used to command Britannia aircraft. :E

[GreenKnight121]

For me, at star rank, one's actual medical/surgical skills are basically meaningless... what is needed is administrative and command ability, and a general knowledge of everything dealing with delivery of medical services.

It is here where senior nurses outshine doctors in every respect... in every hospital in the western world the doctors see patients and ply their (usually) narrowly-focused specialty skills, while nurses do the 90%+ of everything else that needs to be done.

Senior nurses oversee the junior staff, organize the wards, ensure supplies are stocked, make sure medications are properly administered (to include correcting doctors' sometimes lethal oversights), schedule use of equipment/rooms/surgical theatres... you get the point. Nurses deal with multiple doctors daily, and are involved with more patients per day than any doctor ever sees.

Doctors see their patients, handle the treatment of their patients, study new developments in their narrow specialty, and do little else.



Disclaimer: during my childhood my family was close friends with several nurses in both clinics and major hospitals... and two of my three nieces are nurses in hospitals (one in the pediatric emergency department in a Des Moines, Iowa hospital and the other as a general charge nurse in a Flint, Michigan hospital.

[OutlawPete]

Commentators here can only speculate as to who is more suited to the position in question. Truth is only those carrying out the selection/interviews actually know and I doubt very much that gender came into it.

What is apparent and unaddressed is that the RAF is still blatantly unaware of the litigation that can follow situations such as this. That is where the risk for reoccurrence is high. The military need to be prepared and advised correctly beforehand and that sadly means professional help that is outwith the skill set it currently has.

[hippocrates]

Greenknight,

Both doctors and nurses give up the majority of their clinical duties to pursue such high ranks in the defence medical services.
Both would have spent years in non clinical command posts including staff college.
They are not front line clinicians.

The doctors and nurses who elect to stay in clinical posts in the roles that you describe would never be in the running for such high ranking jobs.

Hippo

[Tankertrashnav]

Air Vice Marshal Mike Lloyd, who is now retired but was in charge of RAF personnel at the time, was also criticised for his lack of knowledge of discrimination legislation, something the tribunal found "incredulous".


What I find "incredible" is the poor grasp of English of whoever wrote that. The tribunal can find his lack of knowledge incredible, or they can be incredulous about his lack of knowledge, but not the other way round

(Just edited to say that I've just noticed that Waddo Plumber has already made this point, sorry about that)

By the way I wonder what Gp Capt Wendy would have made of the situation which existed when Mrs TTN was a QARANC nursing sister. As a female nurse with an SRN she was automatically granted a commission on entering the service (subject to passing officer training etc) whereas similarly qualified male nurses could only enter as NCOs (same rules applied in PMRAFNS). The court shoe was firmly on the other foot in those days!

[air pig]

TTN: Male nurses from 1980 were able to direct entry into the PMRAFNS as a nursing officer provided they passed SERE at the college of knowledge, graduating either as a Fg Off with three years seniority or Flt Lt. I believe the same happened in the other nursing services.

The court shoe was firmly removed when the guys were directly commissioned, in fact some senior nursing officers did not really appreciate us as equals. The PMRAFNS was the first nursing branch to have a 'male' matron in chief in the form of Air Cdr Bob Williams. A one star post which has been downgraded and I believe the post is held by only one officer between the three services. At present the PMRAFNS again have a male Matron in Chief/Director of Nursing Services.

Regards

Air pig (SERE 175)

[Tankertrashnav]

Thanks for the info air pig. Much to her regret, Mrs TTN's commissioning date predates 1980 by ** years. (Figure redacted on the grounds she'll be less than amused if I give the precise figure ;)).

Judging by the way the QARANC hierarchy ran the show in her day, looked at as an outsider I'd say that getting the blokes in came none too soon!

[ninja-lewis]

Williams v MOD

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/williams-v-mod.pdf

[air pig]

TTN: The PMRAFNS was just the same as the QAs, but Air Cdr Harris was a go ahead lady as the boss (1980 - 83), but the guys did bring a different perspective to the organisation.

Looking at that font of knowledge, Wiki, the Navy have never had a male nurse in charge of its nursing branch and the Army has only had one, who is the present MiC/DNS, the PMRAFNS is now on its second. Junior service but ahead in some ways.

[alfred_the_great]

Having read the report from the ET, all I can say is 'ouch' and I fear that the promotion and assignment system is on it's way to civilian control.....

[Just This Once...]

ATG,

I have taken the time to read it all too and I agree, pretty much everything needs urgent review and amending.

Unbelievable.

[alfred_the_great]

JTO - I would suggest there is now enough precedent to take every failed promotion or assignment to an ET, as the RAF are demonstrably unable to do it properly themselves.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

I've only skimmed it; about to delve in for a closer read.

Initially it looked like it was a case of too much subjectivity, and the unquantifiable feeling that someone would be a better bet against the other services' candidates. I can see how it looks like she was passed over because she was a nurse, but where's the empirical evidence that it was purely down to her being female? I didn't really get the feeling a male nursing officer with the same profile would have necessarily got the job.

[adminblunty]

Career managers/drafters/desk officers don't manage your career, they put bums on seats. You manage your career and no one else. If an Airship thinks you are good they may manage your career for you, whilst you perform. If you subsequently become crap at your job the same Airship will manage it for you in another direction. How do I know, a tour in CinC's office, a tour in a 2*s office and a tour working for ACOS A1 and seeing the posting plot on the way to the CinC's office. I'm sure it ain't changed.

Civvies couldn't do a worse job as a career manager, at least they'd get the time in post to learn how to do a good job and would learn to know the pitfalls of employment law, unlike Sqn Ldr Bloggs or Sgt Scrott who are looking out for a Cmd/IDO(delete as appropriate) tour. Plus they'll be cheaper and you won't have to give the aircrew career manager flying pay. Trouble is do that and you won't need a military AMP, COS Pers, ACOS Manning, ACOS A1, ACOS this, ACOS that and ACOS the other.

Ohh and on ranks, we've probably more COS (insert description) than we have FJ squadrons!