Virgin Blue bias against older women

[easternboy]

From www.smh.com.au

Virgin Blue off song in bias against older women

By Mark Todd

October 10, 2005 - 2:28PM

Eight flight attendants have won an age discrimination case against airline Virgin Blue.

The women, aged between 36 and 56, claimed Virgin Blue discriminated against them in job interviews that required applicants to dance and sing.

Outside court one of the women, Nicole Hopper, said she was overjoyed by the win and it showed "people over the age of 35 are not finished".

After applying for jobs with Virgin Blue in 2001, the women attended "assessment centres", where they were asked to sing, dance and perform. None of them made it past the first round.

The flight attendants - all former Ansett workers - alleged in the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal in Brisbane that they were refused jobs because of their age.

During an earlier hearing, one of the attendants, Theresa Stewart, 52, said she was refused a job at the airline in late 2001 despite her 27 years' experience, because she didn't have the "Virgin flair".

"The assessment was designed to view a large number of people in a very short space of time to see how they look. They were after a certain look that appeals to Richard Branson.

"If you had two beautiful blonde girls, 25 and gorgeous, then they went to them like homing pigeons."

Virgin Blue said it had not hired cabin crew over the age of 36 in a two-year recruitment drive because mostly young women had applied.

However, the court sided with the women.

Tribunal member Douglas Savage, SC, upheld all the complaints and awarded costs against Virgin Blue.

"I find that the case of direct discrimination on the basis of age made by each of the complainants is made out," Mr Savage said. "I order that the respondents pay the complainants' costs of these proceedings."

Virgin Blue's assessors (or job interviewers) were "comparitively young" and identified "with persons of the same age and experience as the assessors, or what the assesors regarded as ... a fun person," Mr Savage said. He said there had been a "significant correction" in Virgin Blue's hiring practices after September 2002.

Compensation is due to be decided within four weeks.

It is understood the flight attendants - Nicole Hopper, Maureen Mulherin, Carol Dowling, Keely Bill, Alma Frank, Theresa Stewart, Lynley Boyes and Virgina Jeffries - have signed a deal with a commercial television station.

[OZcabincrew]

they just had on the news that out of something like 800 DJ Flight Attendants, 799 are under the age of 36? interesting......

[Eddy]

Without any intention to sound insulting, why would anyone apply to work for an airline that makes you "dance and sing" at the interview????

[SkySista]

Ok, I'm not saying the court isn't entitled to its decision, but - and it's a big one - how the hell can they say it was their age?

Who gives a stuff if the recruiters were 'young'?? Perhaps these women were too set in their ways or showed an attitude that wasn't what the airline was 'looking for'. Everyone knows airlines have a certain 'type' they want. You don't see me suing Emirates because they decided I wasn't their type. Yes, it pissed me off, Yes i was ticked off, but hey - they're the one offering the job. Unless I'm a mind reader how can I say they decided against me for whatever reason?

You could say the wrong thing or accidentally piss off a recruiter - then they don't pick you. That's not discrimination - that's going for a job interview. Sometimes you win sometimes you lose. I see one of the women went on to get a job with QF. Totally different company, totally different 'style' and way of doing things. Fairly likely she just didn't 'fit in' - for whatever reason - with Virgin. A company has the right to pick between applicants for the person who has the best 'job fit'.

Example:

Applicant A and Applicant B are both previous crew, both lovely, outgoing, etc etc. Applicant A may be a bit older than Applicant B. Applicant B shows during assessment that they are more flexible and adaptable than Applicant A.

Company feels that Applicant A doesn't 'fit' with that company, is too set in their ways and probably won't be happy after a while with the company. They feel they will get a better 'investment' (for lack of a better word) from hiring Applicant B because in their opinion Applicant B is better suited to the job. Applicant B just happens to be younger - so what. Yes, majority of DJ crew are young. Perhaps they felt that these ladies would be unhappy because they wouldn't fit in so well with the other crew (a generalisation on their part if they did but hey they have to make a quick decision on assessment days)

Let's face it, you don't hear of this many lawsuits happening in other industries, does anyone else think that because of the competition for CC jobs that rejected applicants get over-sensitive?? Sometimes you just aren't the person who is MOST right for the job and someone else gets it ahead of you. Too bad, there's plenty of other opportunities out there. Wastes the time of courts who have plenty of cases of severe discrimination (not trying to downplay these womens' case but some perspective for say, someone who is disabled being discriminated against....)

[757manipulator]

Skysis...I suspect in some cases you are probably right, but doesnt it make you think??..a whole year without anyone over 35 passing the muster?? the burden of circumstantial evidence is enough to bring a civil discrimination suit..based on the size of VB and its recruitment.

:)

[GalleyHag]

Good on them I say, if Virgin were half smart they would of at least put a few people in over the age of 35 just to stop this type of action being taken against them.

Now lets get to the compensation, I think for a start 21 year old toy boys should be at the top of the list!

[OZcabincrew]

Skysis,

Absolutely agree in some respects, but there is such an obvious trend with DJ that they only tend to recruit crew of the young variety, it is advertised, promoted and it's in their marketing, then on top of that majority of their crew are under 36, with majority of 'older' applicants being unsuccessfull, that's just a law suit waiting to happen. Put yourself in their shoes. On the other hand though, i do think that an employer has the right to employ who they want based on what their company is about, but EEO has to come into it somewhere.

On top of DJ having to pay all court costs for all parties involved, it will be interesting to see what the compensation will be or how much it will be i should say.

Oz

[alibaby]

Crikey...here I am about to return to Cabin Crew after a 13 year break ....I've got a Virgin interview next week....and yeah...I'm over 35...41 actually and probably more confident and capable than I ever was.......
Not sure about my singing though.... Anyway, I'm looking forward to my assessment

[easternboy]

You will be fine, the Virgin marketing wheel will be in full overdrive right now you will be the next pin-up girl/boy with billboards of you plastered all over Australia with a slogan "see we do employ old people look she/he is 41". No offence about your age but that is something I fully expect Virgin to do thats their standard and bad taste.

Branson always reminds me of a dirty old man going through a midlife crisis every time I see him with a group of 18 year old blonde flight attendants fresh from their Magazine shoot hanging off his arm. Maybe its time for his son to take over as the figure head of the Virgin group as he is more the age that projects youth not some old man with bad teeth that are just way to white.

[OZcabincrew]

alibaby, this is focused on Virgin Blue in Australia, i wonder if it is the same practice for Virgin Atlantic?

[alibaby]

Hi - yeah sorry should have said...I'm off for an interview with Virgin Atlantin here in the UK.... anyway age is all in the mind.....at least I think it is...ha ha ha
No seriously, I expect there'll be loads of young, nubile wannabes...fine....bring on the competition! ....Will let you know how I get on....fingers crossed everyone ...

[flygirlnz]

Well I totally support the women who sued and the outcome of the courts.

CC is not just about looking virginal, it is about hard work and getting the job done. Experience should always win out in the end and if age comes with that wisdom then more power to your elbow.

Well done and hopefully we may see more airlines being sued because of 'ism's.

I heard that some Asian and middle east airlines will not hire women pilots. How infuriating it must be to train and pay all that money just to pipped at the post because of gender.

Thank goodness I live and work in a country that is beyond all that nonsense and lives up to equality.

Go New Zealand and its national carrier.

Flygirlnz

[blue_stew]

Bravo to the court.

I'm VB CC and it is a rare day indeed that I don't work with some young inexperienced crew member.

Being a flight attendant is not about looking pretty. Its about bringing life experience and work experince to the job and being able to effectively balance strong customer service skills with assertive safety standards.

If VB want to have a 'pretty' airline then they should have models on board to do the bar service and trained CC to be the safety profs on board. ALA "Hooter Air' in the states.

Discrimination is wrong, whether it be on age, gender, race whatever and anyone who thinks otherewise has surely never been a victim of it.

I hope this will wake VB up and make it realise that it is now a BIG COMPANY and has to act like it. Get people into the recruiting department and training department (ohh the stories we could tell about the training dept.....) who have a bit more experience than graduating high school and a parttime job on the weekend.

Bring on the adults I say!!!

[flugenluft]

they just had on the news that out of something like 800 DJ Flight Attendants, 799 are under the age of 36

So where have the other 800 cabin crew gone?

[Anflygirl]

What other 800 flight attendants are you talking about. The day we lodged and required stats from VB they only had 800 flight attendants. That shows you how long ago this was started. But do you want to know the best part. We won. We have no gripe with any dept of Virgin Blue bar the recruitment section. Good luck to each and every one of you. For me now, its back to full time international flying with a brilliant airline that has never shown discrimination of any kind. Good luck to everyone over 35 who applies to VB. You probably have a really good shot. Cheers Richard!!!! :ok:

[capt.cynical]

I wonder if a 56 year old,straight bloke would get a look in.
With either the airline or the "Discrimination"board.
I would say the chances are somewhere between FAT and BUCKLEY'S:(

[keeperboy]

I do really think it is awful what happened to these women.

Saying that, I don't think it is unique to Virgin. It's just they got caught. I also think that the anti-discrimination laws in Oz are a fair bit stricter than the rest of the world.

I am Cabin Crew for BA and also work part time in recruitment/selection. I have to say that BA is so 'PC' in it's recruitment it is unreal. But that isn't the case with all airlines here in the UK.

When we hold recruitment days for Cabin Crew we (the seconded crew) work alongside a professional recruitment agency. So if you are being interviewed for a cabin crew position with BA it is likely the interviewers are a mix of BA seconded crew and professional recruiters. We work to a 'specification'. ie. In the group interview you get a 'tick in the box' for certain behaviour types. In the 2-on-1 interview (the interviewers cannot be the same as the group interviewers), the interview is 'scenario' based. Every answer you give is written down in detail and each answer is 'rated'. If your 'score' passes and you got all the 'behavioural quality' boxes ticked from the group interview, you are in.

What you wear, what brand of shoes you have on don't really come into it. Your facial expressions, interaction, way you carry yourself do.

I remember on my initial cabin crew course with BA, there was a 51 year old woman in my course who had never flown before. She was an ex-policewoman, was brilliant in the course and was fantastic in her job until she had to retire at 55. (So never assume when you see an old gal on a BA flight that she has been there forever! Lol)

I did some interviewing a couple of weeks ago and was chatting with the agency recruiter I worked alongside. Co-incidentally, they also work alongside the recruiters at Qantas UK in a similar 'joint' situation as we have at BA. She was telling me she hates doing QF recruitment days because they aren't objective in their recruitment. She was saying that they would interview an older person, with flying experience, displaying all the qualities they are looking for.....Only to be vetoed by the QF recruiters with phrases like 'No No No...we want young, vibrant individuals. Did you see the shoes she was wearing!'.

That is just one example. Can you imagine what it must be like in the recruitment departments at the likes of Malaysian, Singapore or Cathay????

[OZcabincrew]

capt.cynical.

You are generalising when you said i wonder if a 56yo straight bloke would get in? There are plenty of older straight men which are F/A's (obviously not with DJ), but i worked not that long ago with a 48yo, straight ex-farmer, that stereotype should just be a myth by now.

Oz

[blue_stew]

Believe me - DJ is full of yucky straight boys. ;)

[Chief Chook]

I do really think it is awful what happened to these women.That must be what the VB recruiters thought as well, keeperboy. lol.
I hope VB now employs them - their going to wonder wtf has hit them when they are away from home for so many nights a month.
Its a different scene to the leisurely life they had at ansett.

[gigs]

out of interest a pilot showed me a copy of a gen.dec. from a u.s senior crew going into hong kong number one senior birthday ,1921 and good on her!!!!!!! i wonder if sir dic would employ her? cheers gigs

[PAXboy]

Mr Savage said.Virgin Blue's assessors (or job interviewers) were "comparitively young" and identified "with persons of the same age and experience as the assessors, I saw this happening in the London financial district in the late 1980s. I was in my early 30s then and peer group department managers who were in their late 20s never hired anyone closer to them in age than two years and NEVER older than themself. On one occasion I hired a technician who was 20 years older than me. He later told me that, when first meeting me and seeing my age relative to his, he assumed that he would not get the job.

Once I was over 40, work in telecommunications (IT) became scarce until I found that any application for contract work was ignored. Had I become less skilled? Had I forgotten everything from the past 20 years? So I left that game. Why did I not sue? Tell me how easy it is for one person to sue ten different companies?

There was an interesting experiment documented recently in the UK. A group of MBA students in London were asked to short list possible candidates from a list of recruits. The post was for a PA to a CEO. This was an exercise and all of the CVs were made up - save for one genuine one who had ALL the qualifications and experience required from the job description. She was not shortlisted and she was in her early 50s. Later, the students were faced by this fact and by the woman herself. Many of them admitted that they thought she would be 'past it' as she was old enough to be their mother.

easternboy [speaking about Richard Branson]:Maybe its time for his son to take over as the figure head of the Virgin group as he is more the age that projects youth not some old man with bad teeth that are just way to white. Well, there is more evidence of age bias! You have made a judgement about a man based on publicity photographs and decided that he is biased in favour of young people and so his younger son must take over. Is that because his son would favour older people? I shall restrain myself from making further personal comment.

If you recall the judgment in this case was that ... assessors were "comparitively young" and identified "with persons of the same age and experience as the assessors" That is the root of the problem that I have seen for over 15 years.

So, easternboy, the problem is NOT some edict sent from on high but the fact that companies give responsibility for hiring to people who are very much younger than folks in similar positions 20 or 30 years ago. These 20 somethings are predisposed to hireing people that they can identify with in their age group. Accordingly, they are exhibiting gender bias for which they have been correctly punished. It is only by brave people taking on companies in this way, that we can teach companies that hiring lots of young people for less money - to hire more young people for less money - is not always in the best interests of the company and its customers.

My sympathies to those who were discriminated against. I have had no opportunity to sue those who have done so and have experiened enromous financial loss as a result. [see above] Thanks for standing up where you could.

[wine o babe]

I believe the 8 ex-ansetters probably weren't all suited for the role at VB. The point is that they have made Virgin realise that yes there are decent over 35 yr olds out there regardless if they are ex AN and that they need to change their recruitment culture. As an ex-An I am fully aware that AN had a lot of crew who were awful, but we also had a lot that were the best in the business!!!! Sadly most of the good ones don't stand a chance while some of the real lazy ones are currently flying. Doesn't make sense. I have a lot of friends who are businessmen who initially thought VB were brilliant, "the chicks are gorgeous" was the theory. Most have gone back to QF. Why??? One comment was" I reckon the old bag with the grumpy face" has more chance of getting me out of this A/C in an emergency than the 20 yr old clone. I guess thats why we have choice. Service or safety.Soon we will have 4 airlines to choose from, only the fittest will survive and maybe VB's more vulnerable than most will admit.

[OZcabincrew]

"Most have gone back to QF. Why??? One comment was" I reckon the old bag with the grumpy face".

This is another stereotype of something. Qantas is not all grumpy and old......again another generalisation based on something that's come from years ago from someone's experience that has been told to someone else and so on and so on and it's just stuck. People need to actually open their eyes next time they fly QF and have a look at the crew and you'll soon find that there are a lot of young happy, crew aswell flying for QF.

I don't know about DJ, but the crew that evacuated the QF70 in Japan last August were certainly not old, infact all were quite young. so the relevance as to who would be able to get you out of an aircraft based on age is completely irrelevent, we all do the same training therfore 'should' all react in the same way.

[australian boy]

well said OZcabincrew.

We have all done the same training, I was a long haul Flight Attendant with the Qantas Group and and since moved over to Virgin as have a few others. Most of the Cabin Crew training department is made up of ex Ansett senior Cabin Crew, and our training in Melbourne is conducted at the Qantas Training centre.
Having done EP'S the Qantas way and the Virgin way I found Virgin to be the hardest. U will also find that we have a very mixed range of crew these days in both age eg: several crew members in their 40's and 50's and in nationality eg: asian which is great. I find a lot of DJ crew enjoy flying with older and more experienced crew members.
:O

[OZcabincrew]

australian boy,

Why did or would you leave Qantas long haul/Australian Airlines to fly for Virgin Blue? were you on fixed term contract or strikebreaker etc?

Qantas has a changing image and now there are a lot of young enthusiastic crew coming online, some a little too young and 'stupid' (first job out of school) if you ask me, but the stereotype of Qantas being old, rude and grumpy is simply that, a stereotype. I worked with a 20yo F/A who was great, hard worker and i also worked with a lady who had been with the company since the 60's and she was one of the most enthusiastic, hard working crew on that trip, so it all varies depending on the individual. People just need to open their eyes a bit more and get their own opinion rather that of someone else.

Why do you think DJ training is harder? don't forget that at DJ, you only had to train on two or so types of aircraft. At Qantas short haul, the F/A's are trained/examined on 7 different types of aircraft, that's a big difference.

Anyway, interested to hear your response.

Oz

[captcat]

From day one, when we get into aviation we are taught that Safety must come first. Would you say that choosing an unexperienced, young CC over a mature, experienced one is "safe"?
Would you say a mother who gives a 2 years old all the candies he wants is a good mother?
I believe that it's immoral for an airline to trick its customers into believing that a nice, young unexperienced CC is what they want. Because if they asked the right question, "would you rather have a mature and experienced person to look after your backside, or a cute, unexperienced one" we all know what the answer would be. But of course that would cost them more, so they sell you junk food with a nice wrapper. Someone from a company with that kind of policy about CC told me recently that their policy was to keep CC an average of 2 years (2 years! You don't even know what an aircraft is after 2 years. You are beginnig to have a clue!), so as to avoid seniority (and the pay rises that go with it) and all the problems given by maternity and sick leaves, and at the same time all the fallouts of the awareness that comes with experience after a while, when you've had the time of seeing all the pros and cons, and realise that maybe the novelty of spending 20 days out of 30 in a s*itty hotel at the end of 35L very quickly wears out, and start demanding more human working conditions and treatment.
So the solution is to overlook the real value of a proper training, that takes time to build, and experience, which is given also by working side to side with more experienced collegues who pass on their knowledge, and make you see only the "funny" side of flight, forget safety!

[ozskipper]

Ozcabincrew says:

Qantas has a changing image and now there are a lot of young enthusiastic crew coming online, some a little too young and 'stupid' (first job out of school) if you ask me,

I'm not sure stupidity is reserved solely for the young and just out of school. I've worked with many "experienced" colleagues who have all the common sense of a headless chicken. :D

I think its slightly inevitable that with the increase in casuals that you attract younger workers. Seemingly, the instability is easier to absorb when you don't have the committments that you seem to accumulate when you get a few years on you!

but the stereotype of Qantas being old, rude and grumpy is simply that, a stereotype. I worked with a 20yo F/A who was great, hard worker and i also worked with a lady who had been with the company since the 60's and she was one of the most enthusiastic, hard working crew on that trip, so it all varies depending on the individual. People just need to open their eyes a bit more and get their own opinion rather that of someone else.

I don't necessarily disagree that there is a general perception that Qantas has an older workforce. I also think that there is probably some reasonable grounds to suggest that we may be a bit grumpy and a bit rude. These perceptions don't just appear - it's usually from experience. I do think that the perceptions of Qantas are changing, but it'll be a cold day in hell before we're seen as a fun airline!

Why do you think DJ training is harder? don't forget that at DJ, you only had to train on two or so types of aircraft. At Qantas short haul, the F/A's are trained/examined on 7 different types of aircraft, that's a big difference.

Hmm, this isn't the first time I've heard that the DJ EP training is more intense than ours. Maybe there's something in that.....

[cartexchange]

Its impossible to state which age group makes a better f/a
We all know that there are good and bad in both groups, however I must state that "experience" does count.
If you are fit and healthy and have a great attitude towards your fellow flight attendants and pax then age should be no barrier.

[SkySista]

So the solution is to overlook the real value of a proper training, that takes time to build, and experience, which is given also by working side to side with more experienced collegues who pass on their knowledge, and make you see only the "funny" side of flight, forget safety!


Capt, gotta disagree with you there mate. I'm not saying anyone who is experienced, either young or old, won't do a good job. But it's nonsense to say that just because someone is older and 'experienced' (thus some draw conclusion 'wiser') that they will ALWAYS do a better job than someone who is perhaps younger and newer to the job. SOmetimes fresh perspective is an advantage.

How many of you have worked with an old Captain who was very experienced but alsoa right old b@stard precisely because s/he "have so much experience and I always do it this way so I must know better"

You have to evaluate each individual on their merits, experience isn't the ONLY criteria to go by; sure it helps but if that experience isn't relevant or the training actually goes contrary to what the new job/company requires, then choosing someone less experienced may be the option, as they haven't been so "imprinted" with previous procedure etc...

Unfortunately the airline recruiting process is inherently "unfair" as the assessors have to make judgements/decisions about people in a very short time.

Too bad for these ladies that on the occasion they applied they were unsuccessful. I am curious to know how many times they tried again, or whether they were rejected just the first time. If so, sounds like someone may have been a bit sensitive, in my opinion... who knows the next time round they may have been just what DJ was looking for at the time.

Just look at Craic, she got the knockback from EK how many times? 5 or more? Yet on her most recent attempt she obviously was what they wanted, so she got in. SImple. A bit of perseverance goes a long way. Perhaps DJ wanted to see if these ladies wanted the job badly enough to keep trying...

[Qwannas]

australian boy,

I cant understand why someone would leave QF long haul for VB? It is an odd thing to do. What's your situaion? It's a fair question. Permanent? Fixed contract? Strike breaker?

We all know that ground school is intense and difficult, but what made the ground school for VB more difficult than that of QF long haul?

(Not attacking, just sincerely interested)

Thanks in advance.

:)

[australian boy]

:O Hey guys, I was with Australian Airlines from day 1 and flew with them for 18mths. I only left as at the time there was no staff travel and I did not enjoy living in Cairns and had a relationship in Melbourne. It was a fantastic job and i really miss it. It has taken a while to get used to VB but I am happy doing short haul flying now.

cheers Australian BOY:O

[RaverFlaver]

I honestly don't think there is justifacation that older crew are more experienced in terms of saving pax arses in an emergency. In terms of service and inflight experiences I would think they would obviously have more exposure, however if you are talking about "emergencies" like an evacuation or ditching and such, then most of them have probably never been in one, so how can they be classified as more experienced compared to a younger crew member with less years of flying?

If EP's is anything to go by, then I think it would prove my thoughts correct. Having done re-current training with QF crew in the simulator, especially CSM's and more senior crew, leaves a lot to be desired for! I'm not confident they would be any better than me in such situations. Having said that, this is not my thoughts of all senior QF crew (there are great crew out there too) or that AO is perfect as we have some of the same, I'm sure you all do a wonderful job and are fully competent, though from my first hand experieces with doing an evac with some of them, I really don't see them (more senior crew) as being any better than the rest of us.

Sorry back to the topic......having just done a trip with one of the ladies involved in the case. I have to say she is a great flight attendant. Wonderful upbeat personality and always with a smile on her face. Hard working and would love to fly with her every trip. I would have thought she would have had no problem getting into DJ.

Either way, well done on exposing an unfair process within such a big company.

Cheers,

RaverFlaver :)

[captcat]

SkySista
it's nonsense to say that just because someone is older and 'experienced' (thus some draw conclusion 'wiser') that they will ALWAYS do a better job than someone who is perhaps younger and newer to the job.
It's not what I have said. My point is that we need all age groups, and that they all take advantage from the mix, and fill eachother's gaps, that in the case of unexperienced people (noticed I never said "young" alone, always "young unexperienced") is the lack of experience.
I didn't point to how the mature profit from the young because that was not the topic: the topic is an unbalanced crew, all in the unexperienced side, and how they can benefit from working with more experienced people .

What happens in QF (of which I know nothing) is not to be made a general case. In my personale experience, Even after years of flying, I'm always happy to learn from those who are more experienced than I am.

[SkySista]

hey Capt, my bad, I misread you.

Yes i agree they need to look at how crew can balance out. I guess I was trying to say a similar thing that there is always something new to be learned no matter your age or time in the job. And that quite often someone who has been in the job 'longer' can learn from someone new because that person looks at the job with a fresh set of eyes...

It's good to see you have an open mind toward learning from your colleagues - more of that is needed is what I say! :D

[flyblue]

In AF we have "Tutors". Tutors are experienced CC, who are trained (a 1 day course) for "passing on" knowledge and tricks to new recruits mostly, but even people coming back from maternity leave (some maternity leaves can last years, when it's more children in a row) or a long illness.
Tutors don't earn more money than other CC. It's all about the pleasure of being helpful to collegues, and help them avoid the mistakes we made out of lack of experience, and not to waste time tying to find out things we need to know. And not only on the job's technical side. Since AF is a very big company, I realised that it is very useful to explain a little the way it works, which office is where and what they do, where to go if you need a visa/lost your announcement book/need the uniform store/hours of the cafe and restaurant/how to reach the Training Center/telephone number of the on-call CC Manager etc etc.
Lately AF also recruited lots of people coming from other companies, so we had 30, 35 or 45 years old juniors, and they had to be tutored too :D Of course it didn't start with "T H I S-IS-A-F I R E- E X T I N G U I S H E R " in their case. But they all found having a tutor very useful, since they had to completely change the way they worked, which sometimes can be very tricky since you assume lots of things are done a certain way just because it's the way they were done in your previous mob.

[smile]

I was chatting to another crew member whilst checking my internal emails the other day at work. She was reading the email sent to all staff regarding the outcome of the case. She looked at me and said "Funny, I was hired at the exact same time as these girls went through their interviews." She's just celebrated her 41st birthday.

[ozflyboy]

Well said, Smile!

DJ has many of these ladies ex-AN colleages both flying and in the training department - a great majority of a similar age. Maybe THEY had to try to get into the company more than once like many of us do in the airline industry.

Maybe I should have trotted off to court when QF kept me on hold for a "permanent" position for 15 months only to offer a contract.......

I have heard several crew state, as Australian Boy has mentioned, that DJ training was as/if not more intense than other airlines.

Virgin Blue has, for quite some time, had an extremely wide range of age/experience/race/and both genders within their Cabin Crew - let's all move on from the notion that this is not the case!

Cheers LADIES.....

[OZcabincrew]

well there was obviously something in it for the judge to award these ladies the case. They wouldn't just go and say DJ were in the wrong for nothing? There's no sense to that.

"Maybe I should have trotted off to court when QF kept me on hold for a "permanent" position for 15 months only to offer a contract......."

Re the above comment, were you internal QF staff at the time you applied to be a QF F/A? or did you apply as an external applicant? When did you apply and when did your shortlist expire? Just interested to hear as QF never guarantee that you're on a shortlist for a permanent position, especially for 15 months. Unless you were under some other arrangement? Look forward to your reply.

Oz

[blue_stew]

DJ is my second airline and I have to say the charm school was quite simple and that EPs are a piece of cake.

I've been with DJ a few years now so maybe they've tightened up the intitial train, but I think there are a few VB crew who would be challenged if we had the assortment of A/C to learn that overseas crew have to learn.

[Anflygirl]

"I was chatting to another crew member whilst checking my internal emails the other day at work. She was reading the email sent to all staff regarding the outcome of the case. She looked at me and said "Funny, I was hired at the exact same time as these girls went through their interviews." She's just celebrated her 41st birthday."

Smile, I am one of those women. Your friend should check her start date. You will find that she is either a) the only one who was 36 years of age at the time of employment (VB's very own stats supplied at the anti discrimination court) or b) she received her position AFTER we lodged in Aug/Sep 2002.

Anything else is complete rubbish. I know because I was there. And you know what else, we won so it really doesnt matter what you and your friend think. Cheers Uncle Dickie!!!!!!!

[sinala1]

I made the following post in the similar thread that was running in the D & G forums, however that thread has gone quiet...

The below quote is from this (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=2141913#post2141913) post on the D & G thread

I happened to be on duty one Sat morning here in BNE when B727 ANA blew an engine just after rotation and was still on fire when it landed

If thats the one sometime around 1990 or so (forgive me if the dates are not entirely correct - it was the #2 engine that blew, a/c came back in and pax were evacuated on the runway?) one of the F/A's onboard that aircraft holds (and has done for quite some time - over 4 years) a position with VB, and is now quite senior in the CC training department.

Agreed 100% with SkySis - I too went for both EK and QF but was knocked back (more than once too I hasten to point out). I can conjure up any number of discrimination theories (age, height, weight, sexuality, teeth not being 100% perfect etc) but I did not turn around and sue them - I simply accepted the fact that I was not right on the day(s).

At the end of the day everyone is entitled to their opinion on this matter - I am not here to belittle anyone elses nor have mine belittled - but my opinion is not only that justice has been denied to VB; but also the precedence this sets implies that the process of recruiting the people you feel are most appropriate for your company is no longer an option for any company that does not wish to be sued on entirely unfounded grounds. There is no proof that these ladies were denied employment on the basis of their age and just because they were experienced crew from another airline does not mean that they are automatically entitled to any CC job they apply to!

I am not in any way at all condoning any form of discrimiation against any person or group of people, however I do believe that in this case justice has not been served. I look forward to the appeals process and hopefully a more realistic judgement. If not, watch out EK and QF - using this precedent, a lawsuit will be coming your way! :hmm:

(edited to fix my bad html scripting)

[SydGirl]

... the process of recruiting the people you feel are most appropriate for your company is no longer an option for any company that does not wish to be sued on entirely unfounded grounds. There is no proof that these ladies were denied employment on the basis of their age and just because they were experienced crew from another airline does not mean that they are automatically entitled to any CC job they apply to!

sinala1 your posts are generally well thought out and intelligent however this time you have completely contradicted yourself.

Recruitment is about selecting the best person for the job, regardless of age, racial orientation, sexual preference etc. It is all very well for any company to want to hire people that are "appropriate" however it is called discrimination when they deliberately exclude a person or persons because of age (or any other issues outlined in the Anti Discrimination Act). It is apparent that a court of law agreed that Anflygirl and her colleagues were amongst the best for the job, but discriminated against based on age.

DJ would have had to supply evidence of candidates recruited for the role of cabin crew along with their dates of birth. Had there been an even spread of people recruited amongst various age groups then there would have been no case.

These women have a legal right to be treated fairly, regardless of their age. They have proven that they would be equally competent cabin crew as their younger peers.

As for the woman you mentioned re the AN 727 evac, you said she is in the training department - she's not cabin crew.. which is what this case is all about.

SG
:}

PS. Congratulations Anflygirl on a positive result for you :)

Edited to fix a spelling mistake!

[sinala1]

SydGirl thanks for your compliment re my usual posts and for your replies to my previous post. With all due respect, I am going to disagree with you...

What has not been proven (or made public if it were proven) is that the recruiters actively discriminated against 'older' applicants and imparticular the AN 8. The findings from the tribunal were that the recruiters "unconciously" discriminated against the 'older' applicants because they themselves were younger and therefore related better to people closer to their ages. The understanding I get from that finding is that VB should probably have had a broader range of ages working in their CC recruitment department, however as far as I am aware its not discrimination or illegal for a recruitment department to not have a wide age range of recruiters working within it. There is still no proof that the recruiters purposely discriminated against the AN 8, which is what amazed me about the tribunals judgement. It has not been proven that these ladies were denied employment purely on the basis of their age.

Again I refer to my refusals by QF and EK - would it be fair of me to be awarded compensation on the basis that I did not get the job just because the recruiters were not 24yo white aussie gay males and I therefore did not get the job? No, because I have no proof that I was specifically denied employment on that basis - just as the tribunal admitted the AN 8 did not have proof of deliberate denial of employment purely on the basis of age.

I have no personal grudge against these ladies - I wish them all well in their future endeavours - however I look forward to the ruling being overturned and VB being cleared.

Oh and as far as the Crew member from the 727 evac is concerned, she was crew - a Cabin Supervisor who I learnt a lot from on our trips (stuff that I now use regularly as a CS myself, or at least will do when I return to that role upon my return downunda) but last I knew she had made the voluntary decision to move into training.

Cheers :ok:

[SydGirl]

sinala1,

Firstly, I appreciate your calm and rational reply. With all due respect to you too, I will also disagree (heehee)..

There are actually two forms of discrimination. Direct and indirect. I am fairly sure that DJ did not put out a memo to the recruitment team to state that they should not employ any persons over the age of 35. That is an example of direct discrimination.

What DJ did do, according to your post, was create a team of recruitment professionals that were unprofessionally biased - in other words discriminatory. It is natural for people to like others based on the same age, interests, experience etc. A recruitment specialist puts all those personal 'gut feelings' aside and hires the best person for the job, not necessarily the 'nicest' person or the person that they best personally relate with. You are right in saying that it is not illegal for a recruitment department to not have a wide range of recruiters working within it - the same as any other job.

However! If a person or persons can prove that over a course of time (let's say 12 months) when a certain amount of recruitment for a position took place, that not one person hired was over the age of 35 (or whatever age it might be) yet there were capable applicants within that age bracket then that is discriminatory.

As for your personal situation with QF and EK that is a different issue altogether. EK is not bound by the Anti Discrimination Act so therefore you have no right of recourse. If you took QF to court, then they too would be required to produce evidence that they had recruited people of your age (the issue of colour and sexual orientation are different court cases!). If they could not produce evidence then they would lose.

It's quite simple.

In regards to your training colleague, I have no doubt about her vast amount of knowledge and skill. However she was not recruited during this period contested by the AN 8. Companies regularly change their recruitment policies and strategies over time, and as long as they aren't discriminatory that is fine. It's when the line between 'right fit' and discrimination becomes blurry that the trouble starts.

Best Wishes
SG
:}

[smile]

Anything else is complete rubbish. I know because I was there. And you know what else, we won so it really doesnt matter what you and your friend think. Cheers Uncle Dickie!!!!!!!


Wow!! This sounds a little like something you hear in the school playground!! (na-na-na-na-na)

Sorry that my little post caught such a raw nerve. I personally don't have any facts on this other crew member, all I 'know' is that she has been in cabin crew longer than me and I started in July 2002. She told me that she is 41 and I have no reason not to believe her.

[Anflygirl]

Sorry Smile. You are probably right. Just getting a little over the negative comments. Thanks to everyone who had positive ones though. This has been a long hard road for everyone concerned. A lot has been said that will never come to light. 5 out of the 8 of us had been re employed or are about to be with airlines. The other 3 have moved on and are happy with their choices. I just hope that when any of you reach 35yo+ you can still keep doing what you love even though that once pretty face has a few character lines. I still love my job and I doubt there is anyone in either of the airlines that I have worked for that would say otherwise (oh bar that one CM, but thats a personality thing). There are plenty of ex AN CC and techies at Virgin Blue that could and would vouch for any one of us. Anyway, I think this horse has been flogged enough. It is well and truly dead. May you all have really long (as long as you would like anyway) flying careers. I have enjoyed every one of my 24 years and am still counting. Cheers.:ok:

[SkySista]

smile,

She told me that she is 41 and I have no reason not to believe her.

If anything, she's probably older - we all know how women lie about their age and say they're younger!!! :E :}

[cart_elevator]

sinala, smile ....

You are floggin a dead horse here.

Simple fact is, a court (read: a judicial board of society's thoughts) found that Virgin Blue did indeed discriminate against these ladies. Your persoal views are obviously protectant of Virgin Blue ... thats cool, but if a court case was heard, well you have to go with it!

I know people who work for VB, a good mate of mine is in his 30's, and he often comments about how 'old' he feels when he is at work. Is that a healthy way to feel when you are in your 30's? Virgin obviously has a 'young is great' culture for him to feel that way.

Virgin needs to see that yes 'young-dumb-and-pretty' may appeal to a certain niche, but they also need to understand that their customers are varied in age, race, size, nationality .... therefore their crew should be too. how else are their crew to relate to the customers? And yes I have flown Virgin, once, and never again! Why? the particular crew on that flight were so unprofessional, I would not trust my life with them in an emergency. My opinion only, and based on that particular crew, but once was enough for me!

And no - I am not an 'old-qantas-hag' trying to justify my existence (I aint 30 myself yet!), but when a mate of mine who is three years older than me feels intimidated because he is past 30 in his workplace, well I think there is a problem !! And based on that, the ladies had a great case! Good on 'em

:ok:

[OZcabincrew]

i have only flown DJ once and as soon as they got a passenger up to do the safety demo, that put me right off. It's great to have a laugh at work while being professional, but the safety demo etc i think are times where you need to be a little bit more serious and jokes don't come into it. Just my opinion anyway.

Oz

[skyboy1919]

These cases are really kind of sad. Someone within the Virgin corp has decided Virgin blue is a fresh young airline, or that older women may struggle with the high workload. Corprate; marketing, personal; or someone has come up with this rubbish, and its crazy.
I think its
BULLS***T
Never judge a book; I worked for an airline that had many " older " women, and they were fabulous. A balance is the best way, and a lot can be said for older crew either male or female. I have seen many "older' crew out-work the young summer temps many times. Each person should be judged as an individual. Boo hoo Branson; I though you would have learnt by now. Its his loss ladies. Do what women do best, tell eachother, I say destroy; call Oprah. Do you have her down under? Or the Aussie version.

[smile]

cart_elevator...

you are entitled to your opinion as are others. There is only one person on this site (that has identified themselves) as having ANY facts relating to this case. (note I wrote the word ANY). All anyone else has is second hand information passed on by the media, a 'friend who was there' or a 'mate of mine'.

Most of the arguments (for both sides) have some sort of rational thinking behind them, however... when you start throwing in little comments such as 'young-dumb-and-pretty' to add weighting to your argument you tend to lose any credability to your argument.

just my "opinion"

[Bidan]

Sorry this may have been said before but dont have time to read the 50plus post on this thread.

Virgin Blue has been in operation for 5yrs now and has had I presume thousands of Cabin Crew applicants, I find it hard to believe that not one applicant over the age of 36 has been suitable in this time.
Age discrimination for sure..Not only for the AN8 but for every older applicant who took the time to apply... Shame on you VB..

[flugenluft]

There are plenty of ex AN CC and techies at Virgin Blue that could and would vouch for any one of us
Yes, and no doubt there are some that remember you from AN and wouldn't.
5 out of the 8 of us had been re employed or are about to be with airlines
Well it is quite reasonable for one to draw the conclusion they didn't have much choice but to employ you. You now have a reputation as a litigant, even a successful one.

As I read in press, Virgin Blue said they were considering appealling. I wonder if Ray will have you back on if you lose, should they choose to appeal ofcourse. I am neither for or against either party, but having followed this case in the press (whatever value that can be given) and read the rather contradictory judgement (http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/qld/QADT/2005/28.html) I still think there is a longer road to walk yet.

As they say, it ain't over until the FAT lady sings :D Hope the fat lady doesn't sue me!

[Pole Vaulter]

Dont like the umpires decision do we Flugenluft. More likely 5 out of the 8 were chosen on their abilities which is more the the Aero Club that has 737's has done since its inception.
Easy to make your derogatory remarks about some that would not vouch for them. certainly in a company as large as AN was not everyone is is going to be ready to say nice things about everyone else in the company but I can tell you that of that group you would not find a better and more experienced group of f/as if you tried. If VB wish to appeal that is their right under the law and if thay want to air even more dirty linen let them go. Love the way their spokespersons have a memory lapse every time they are asked to give the numbers of over 35 F/As they have. I guess to act dumb (which they do well) is better than tell the real story. Good on you ladies. this is not just about VB and its blatent discrimination but about all older workers being shafted by companies that think that they are above the law of the land.