Qantas pilot sues the airline for sexual harassment
Join Date: May 2021
Location: Australia
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m not an airline guy and not really in the know but isn’t it possible that this pilot had a command position on a smaller type then transitioned to FO on something larger? Plenty of scope for that in 23 years surely.
I’m not an airline guy and not really in the know but isn’t it possible that this pilot had a command position on a smaller type then transitioned to FO on something larger? Plenty of scope for that in 23 years surely.
Any talk of quotas in long haul operations is fatally flawed.
I know many women who simply will not apply to fly long haul coz of their preferences not to leave their kids for up to 2 weeks at a time. For several that I know very well, family and close friends, it is inconceivable that they would leave their babies and toddlers for a fortnight on a regular basis. These women, usually very competent pilots, find a place in the regional world mostly. This means that they choose not to apply for long haul and quotas are irrelevant. What if, say, 20 pilots are to be recruited next month for a course and there are not 10 female applicants assessed suitable?
I know many women who simply will not apply to fly long haul coz of their preferences not to leave their kids for up to 2 weeks at a time. For several that I know very well, family and close friends, it is inconceivable that they would leave their babies and toddlers for a fortnight on a regular basis. These women, usually very competent pilots, find a place in the regional world mostly. This means that they choose not to apply for long haul and quotas are irrelevant. What if, say, 20 pilots are to be recruited next month for a course and there are not 10 female applicants assessed suitable?
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Retired-ville
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems previous complaints to HR and Pilot managers did not get the result she wanted. That she was written down or marked poorly, might perhaps actually be, oh shock and horror, because her check and training and assessment history has shown she is not particularly good at her job.
Adequate one assumes, but not good enough for command. Although in this new PC age, it wouldn’t surprise me if HR had been injecting strong suggestions that she be given an easy ride to command. I put nothing past the 2 tailed dog (HR & Accounting) that currently seems to have too much influence in meddling with pilot recruitment, training and upgrades.
Consequently, she has chosen to effectively use the gender discrimination aspect, rather than facing up to her own limitations and in the process sully the reputation of the QF training and checking system, and complain about having to make the coffee.
I have flown with many women over decades. Both good and bad. I would not dispute that in years gone by, women seemed to have to work harder to get a foothold in the predominantly male pilot industry. A common comment by women pilots who hear of this current nonsense, is that it can tar the rest of them with the same brush. They would rather people got their respective big girl or boy pants on, and got on with the job. If they are not up to the task, then leave. Don’t blame others as your excuse for poor performance and being an antagonistic individual who looks for the slightest opportunity to take offence.
On one of my first conversion flight debriefs, I was asked to make the coffee, did I take offence that the Capt was a Brit, and I was picked on to be the char wallah because I was a colonial? No, it was just a damn coffee ffs!
The article has the pilot as a widebody FO back in the 90s.
Imagine you are told you only have the job because you have a penis. Despite you having aced all the exams, at your first attempt…but every person you fly with (females, just to change it up) says you’re just there because of your gender.
No matter what you learn,or how well you know the books, there’s a minority of morons who say you’re just there because of your gender.
Some people won’t have any empathy or understanding, but they’re the ones who also didn’t get the career they dreamed of … and never will.
No matter what you learn,or how well you know the books, there’s a minority of morons who say you’re just there because of your gender.
Some people won’t have any empathy or understanding, but they’re the ones who also didn’t get the career they dreamed of … and never will.
Seen it all before. Below average first officer, in this case female, finds many reasons for not attaining command status except looking inward, taking ownership and responsibility. Easy way out; everyone else’s fault. Pick a reason, oh it must be because I’m female and those nasty training captains are misogynistic and prejudiced. Throw sexual harassment into the mix and voila all hell breaks lose. No offence but highly unlikely I would have thought and in this case the accused have been exonerated. I have mentored a female pilot in exactly this position and my advice was to prepare well for training events, not get into childish spats with captains, read the OM A, FCOM, QRH etc, don’t look for conspiracy around every corner, relax and enjoy your flying. Fell on deaf ears naturally. Grievance and victimhood being the preferred option and ending in tears. It doesn’t have to be a disgruntled lady of course, other genders and excuses are available. Major caveat that genuine bullying and harassment is unacceptable but unlikely in the modern era and certainly and correctly not tolerated.
Venturing a public opinion about a person with a particular barrow to push and a litigious nature may not be a sound strategy.
In general I am unsurprised to learn of discrimination or harassment in the past. It was common everywhere, just like smoking and drink driving. It still happens obviously, but I hope much less, and I hope that the perpetrators get corrected.
On quotas: I would hate to be considered a token hire by anyone. I don’t like flying with people who have to constantly prove how good they are to counter some real or imagined bias.
Finally: Qantas HR took a long time with that case, and the pilots involved were treated poorly. One obvious result of that is that it may be expensive to critique the performance of a small subset of a subset of the pilot group lest the gender card gets played and you end up forever tainted after being probed, hard, for unsound ideology.
In general I am unsurprised to learn of discrimination or harassment in the past. It was common everywhere, just like smoking and drink driving. It still happens obviously, but I hope much less, and I hope that the perpetrators get corrected.
On quotas: I would hate to be considered a token hire by anyone. I don’t like flying with people who have to constantly prove how good they are to counter some real or imagined bias.
Finally: Qantas HR took a long time with that case, and the pilots involved were treated poorly. One obvious result of that is that it may be expensive to critique the performance of a small subset of a subset of the pilot group lest the gender card gets played and you end up forever tainted after being probed, hard, for unsound ideology.
In a perfect world, if less of a certain group seek employment, or indeed are less SUITABLE for a particular type of employment, no-one should be suprised or upset of they are under-represented.
Where it get's tricky is WHY are they underrepresented? If part of it is not because of the capabilities or aspirations of the group involved, but in the TREATMENT of that group by others, some steps towards reparation is not only justified, it is beneficial.
I read a study which showed that something like 40% of the growth in western ecconomies in the last half century was due to the increased participation of groups previously marginalised. The number of people who COULD have been major contributors to society but were instead pushing a broom because they were black, or baking cookies because they wewe female, meant we ALL missed out on the benefits of capable people fulfilling their potential.
In recent history, Women weren't PERMITTED to be airline pilots. So, of course, airline flying was exclusivley male. Simply removing that prohibition doesn't instantly fix the problem, as now women had to enter an exclusivley male domain, and that in itself is a huge disincentive.
I was until recently a night-freight pilot and there were women working the ramp along side the men. But there are REASONS fewer woman choose to be bag slingers, due to the fact women on average are less physically strong. What biological reasons are you claiming keep women from being pilots?
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Vienna
Age: 50
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was until recently a night-freight pilot and there were women working the ramp along side the men. But there are REASONS fewer woman choose to be bag slingers, due to the fact women on average are less physically strong. What biological reasons are you claiming keep women from being pilots?
Sadly this topic is already bringing out the usual virtue signaling-big-mouths who hope for the worst to give them a soapbox to stand on and gather attention.
(I used plural terms above but really it's just the one guy.)
Hiring people due to sex instead of more realistic and practical form of qualification - interesting concept........ they could change the airline name to Quotas.
Apologies for butting in, but there is considerable evidence that handling machinery (or more generally: dealing with objects or systems) is on average less appealing to women compared to men, and that this is not just a result of socialization. This is not a matter of suitability (there is at least as much evidence that gender differences in pertinent skills are negligible to non-existent), but simply of interest.
If it were the case that "it all evens out" and societal roles get evenly split, that would br fine- but the fact that "female" roles almost always end up being lower paid and subservient to "Male roles" (think Doctor-nurse, Pilot-FA, Lawer-legal secretary) mean this isn't so.
Surley part of "wanting to" would nclude seeing others like you DOING the roles? And thus seeking to increase participation is a step in the right direction?
As a female who has been a professional pilot for 35 years this whole quota thing really does undermine the rest of us who have just got on with it. and if someone has made an inappropriate remark just given back as good as we get and laughed it off. It's usually just dumb banter, not malicious.
However calling someone a "token" is very malicious and only encouraged by the very small minority of female pilots who have an axe to grind.
The reason there are less female than male pilots is simple. Not as many women as men are interested enough in flying. That's it! The only barriers are money and the required competencies. If someone isn't interested enough or lacks the required skills they will not achieve the required competencies.
Did she really ORDER this or is it just bad journalism?
However calling someone a "token" is very malicious and only encouraged by the very small minority of female pilots who have an axe to grind.
The reason there are less female than male pilots is simple. Not as many women as men are interested enough in flying. That's it! The only barriers are money and the required competencies. If someone isn't interested enough or lacks the required skills they will not achieve the required competencies.
[the pilot] demands she receives a pecuniary penalty, a monetary fine collected by the civil court, for the alleged harassment and discrimination she underwent while working at the airline. She has also ordered that Qantas establish a quota system to increase the percentage of female pilots it employs.
Sadly this topic is already bringing out the usual virtue signaling-big-mouths who hope for the worst to give them a soapbox to stand on and gather attention.
(I used plural terms above but really it's just the one guy.)
(I used plural terms above but really it's just the one guy.)
As a female who has been a professional pilot for 35 years this whole quota thing really does undermine the rest of us who have just got on with it. and if someone has made an inappropriate remark just given back as good as we get and laughed it off. It's usually just dumb banter, not malicious.
However calling someone a "token" is very malicious and only encouraged by the very small minority of female pilots who have an axe to grind.
The reason there are less female than male pilots is simple. Not as many women as men are interested enough in flying. That's it! The only barriers are money and the required competencies. If someone isn't interested enough or lacks the required skills they will not achieve the required competencies.
Did she really ORDER this or is it just bad journalism?
However calling someone a "token" is very malicious and only encouraged by the very small minority of female pilots who have an axe to grind.
The reason there are less female than male pilots is simple. Not as many women as men are interested enough in flying. That's it! The only barriers are money and the required competencies. If someone isn't interested enough or lacks the required skills they will not achieve the required competencies.
Did she really ORDER this or is it just bad journalism?