I'm totally foxed by Unite's comment about pregnant cabin crew. I thought that the EU regs dictated that female cabin crew stopped flying as soon as they learned they were pregnant. BA regs state that in these circumstances the individual will be assigned to ground duties at their home base. Now I appreciate that there are cabin crew who used to have home bases nearer their current abode, so it might seem a little harsh under such circumstances, however, I don't really have any sympathy for those who out of choice have elected to live a fair hike from either LHR or LGW.
If you look at the rest of the BA workforce, no other female employees are allowed to take on what is in effect lighter duties as soon as they become pregnant. Unite's argument seems to be that female cabin crew who are pregnant should be allowed to turn down work if it doesn't fit with their travelling arrangements, yet get paid not only their basic, but also a proportion of their flying allowances, effectively for at least 5 months prior to giving birth. Whilst procreation is a wonderful thing and lord knows I've had fun doing my bit, I find it incredible that any body of people could believe that employers should be expected to operate in this manner.