Originally Posted by fade to grey
BA clearly had a policy allowing pilots to work part time once they had reached a required experience level,which this lady had not -why should she be treated any different to the hundreds of male pilots with young children.
IIRC the experience level argument was only introduced late in the case when BA thought they might lose. The initial rejection was purely for financial reasons. Having flown both long and short haul within BA I would argue that the experience criteria they set was entirely arbitrary.
Originally Posted by Airbrake
This pilot wants to have her cake and eat it, who would blame BA if they never hired a female pilot again.
Or an alternative viewpoint would be that she wants to exercise the rights which European laws afford her and doesn't see why she should be denied those rights simply so that a manager can meet his budget (and bonus) targets.
I personally view this as a great victory for all BA pilots who want part time. We have seen other departments showered with part time, job share and other flexible working options but for the vast majority of pilots who seek that particular option stone-walling is the only response from management. Over 40% of BA cabin crew enjoy some type of flexible working, but only 2% of pilots. The disparity is purely due to the desire of BAs Flight Ops managers to husband every penny they can in order to enhance their own bonuses.
PS If BA never employed another female pilot then they'd probably be sued for sexual discrimination. They initiated the policy of targetting female applicants, they can hardly be surprised when they start having kids!
PPS I particularly enjoyed seeing our managers get caught telling fibs in the tribunal.
