Minogue
You write that: "A UK regional airline is being taken to an industrial tribunal by one of its female pilots. The lady in question got pregnant and was immediately grounded on full pay by the airline."
I cannot understand quite what you mean by this. Are you sure you have the facts in the matter? If the lady is "grounded on full pay", then what possible ground does she rely on to take the airline in question to the Industrial Tribunal? It seems more likely to me that she has been grounded without pay.
And what exactly do you say the CAA supports? Is it the grounding on full pay or merely the potential (and alleged) effects of 'cosmic radiation'?
I am quite shocked and disappointed to read many of the posts in reply. How ready some of us are to jump onto this particular bandwagon of extreme prejudice. For my part I'd like to hear all the facts before leaping to condemnation of either her or her employer.
Come on Minogue, let's hear some more please. And, by the way, if the lady does wish to proceed on the basis of a breach of her human rights, as you suggest, then she would be wasting her time in an Industrial Tribunal.
[This message has been edited by tilii (edited 23 May 2001).]