Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Qantas’ search for female pilots has led to more workplace harassment - Quartz

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qantas’ search for female pilots has led to more workplace harassment - Quartz

Old 9th Nov 2019, 22:56
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Orange future View Post
You will find that there are a far greater proportion of women applicants for cadet positions than for direct entry positions from people already in the industry
If true that’s telling in itself with regards to motivation.
havick is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2019, 23:05
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I suspect Qantas HR thinks this is another good opportunity to divide and rule... Not that it’s an excuse not to be more gender inclusive.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2019, 23:12
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: moon
Posts: 3,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Orange Future:
Real change always results in the loss of power.
No it doesn’t​​​​​​! It causes a redistribution of power. Furthermore, it can cause major imbalances and injustice if checks and balances are not present.
Sunfish is offline  
Old 9th Nov 2019, 23:13
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sunfish View Post
Given the existence of the gender pay gap. Could I be forgiven for thinking that a largely female pilot group would be a cheaper and more compliant workforce?

The perfect match: Vitriol and logical fallacies.

Can't we all just get along?

The market, one way or another will sort it out.
Precisely!

Wouldn't it be the case that if the "gender pay gap" existed then cost minimising employers would employ women over men?
Think of the savings for KPI incentivised managers.
Rated De is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 00:19
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Shouldn’t the best applicant just be chosen regardless of gender?

Anything else is just discrimination really.

You don’t make the cut- try harder next time.
virgindriver is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 00:42
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Its called the price of doing business. Women exist, they make up half of the the population and if men lose some weekends off in order to accommodate women then its a small price to pay for a progressive society.
So positive discrimination and inequality is now a cost of doing business?

Sorry but aviation is already hard for everyone you cannot start pulling those sort of stunts just to try and fulfill some gender quota. If some woman don't want to turn up 24/7/365 like everybody else then is it really the job for them? Not saying they aren't capable but do they really want to do the job which includes missing birthdays christmas easters school holidays etc etc

Ultimately you can't have it all in aviation. If you want weekends and public holidays off go work for a bank or become a school teacher.



non_state_actor is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 01:08
  #147 (permalink)  
34R
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 51
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by exfocx View Post

Whether men like it or not, their positions today are in one way or another a result of discrimination against women.
You're absolutely correct. Shall we start with the very first example of when discrimination occurred, perhaps when the X chromosome was overlooked in favour of the Y?

Oh bugga, come to think of it, that's due to the male as well!! Even on an evolutionary scale there is oppressive patriarchy!
34R is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 01:15
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by non_state_actor
If some woman don't want to turn up 24/7/365 like everybody else then is it really the job for them? Not saying they aren't capable but do they really want to do the job which includes missing birthdays christmas easters school holidays etc etc
The 1950’s just called, they want that quote back.

Funny how the female majority cabin crew workforce manage to work the exact same rosters and work holidays, Christmas etc without suffering any of these problems which a lot of people here think would supposedly prevent female pilots from being able to do the job.
dr dre is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 01:51
  #149 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 1950’s just called, they want that quote back.

Funny how the female majority cabin crew workforce manage to work the exact same rosters and work holidays, Christmas etc without suffering any of these problems which a lot of people here think would supposedly prevent female pilots from being able to do the job.
It is in response to Orange Future calling for positive discrimination in rostering. Are you happy to start giving up your weekends and christmases so there can be more female pilots?
non_state_actor is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 02:06
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 34R View Post
You're absolutely correct. Shall we start with the very first example of when discrimination occurred, perhaps when the X chromosome was overlooked in favour of the Y?

Oh bugga, come to think of it, that's due to the male as well!! Even on an evolutionary scale there is oppressive patriarchy!
Oh gee, that's really witty. lolololol the intellectually challenged always come out with some childish comment.
exfocx is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 03:37
  #151 (permalink)  
34R
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 51
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by exfocx View Post
Oh gee, that's really witty. lolololol the intellectually challenged always come out with some childish comment.
Gee thanks... and there you have it.... typical response from a SJW...
34R is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 03:55
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Because they are still left with what I have just pointed out, while men have their cake and eat it! It isn't difficult to see, if you just open your eyes.
Take part time then, if that is an issue for you. I don't have any problem even if this was positively discriminated against. However if you want to work full time in airlines ( and collect full time money) you have to work full time which means 24/7 rosters and taking the good with the bad.

It is hypocritical to want equality in hiring then to discriminate in rostering once you get in.
non_state_actor is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 04:58
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,818
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by non_state_actor View Post
It is in response to Orange Future calling for positive discrimination in rostering. Are you happy to start giving up your weekends and christmases so there can be more female pilots?
Again I’ll refer to my previous point, how do the majority female cabin crew who work the same rosters and weekends and Christmas etc, deal with that and overcome those issues?
dr dre is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 05:07
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The same way that the male cabin crew do.....ie, there is no discrimination.
73qanda is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 05:58
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dookie on Drums View Post
Watching Libby Lyons get taken apart with a little factual questioning by Senator David Leyonhjelm was like the posts here: All full of spirit and venom, sadly lacking any factual basis.

Libby won her position on merit now didn't she...
Trained as a primary school teacher, yet ending up on all sorts of boards..

No such thing as patriarchal nepotism of course when it suits you, eh Libby?

Last edited by Rated De; 10th Nov 2019 at 06:38.
Rated De is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 05:59
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Ponderosa
Age: 50
Posts: 837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
re: dr dre

Perhaps not in QF mainline but the turnover of Cabin Crew is much higher compared to Pilots. VA have a pretty high turnover.
hoss is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 09:52
  #157 (permalink)  
34R
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 51
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
exfocx

For what it's worth, my position relates back to the opening quotation in this thread about reports of female QF pilots reporting the highest rates of sexual harassment and bullying.

Depending on which study you read and who compiled it, rates of sexual harassment in the workplace range from more than 50% to under 1% (in STEM fields).
How the hell does this variation occur and why is it so vastly different? What is driving sexual harassment in the workplace?
Does it stem from the definition of sexual harassment itself? What are the rules?

Is it no unwanted contact?
Is it no asking anyone out?
Is it no jokes?
Is it glancing at somebody for too long?
Is it swearing?
Is it dismissive behaviour?
Is it being an asshole?

Apart from the HR generic definition, what exactly is it? It's certainly not a scientific term. There seems to be a lot of room for interpretation with regards to boundaries, and it would appear the edges of those boundaries (if they exist) begin to get twisted and shaped in a particular direction, usually to suit a purpose.
I would have thought treating your colleagues with courtesy and respect would avoid all the harassment pitfalls, but apparently descent people are still transgressing?

As is relevant to us today, men and women have been working in complex fields together for only a short amount of time (I'm talking decades). Not very long and on the face of it we aren't doing a very good job of it. There are a lot of bugs to be worked out.
So a blanket comment that two thirds of female qantas pilots are sexually harassed and therefore a perceived implication that we have an oppressive patriarchy is a complete nonsense.

As for equality of opportunity, 100% yes.
34R is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 11:44
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
Funny how the female majority cabin crew workforce manage to work the exact same rosters and work holidays, Christmas etc without suffering any of these problems which a lot of people here think would supposedly prevent female pilots from being able to do the job.
You may have made that comment tongue-in-cheek Dre, but it is actually a very valid question and there actually is an answer.

Under the legislation (and I don’t have it in front of me right now but I have read it before, so I may not have it accurate but I will give you the vibe), an employer must provide reasonable flexible working conditions to carers, so long as it does not unreasonably inconvenience the employer.

With a large female flight attendant workforce, Qantas is able to refuse carer conditions to flight attendants, because Qantas can reasonably demonstrate that they would otherwise be unable to crew flights 24/7/365 because a significant proportion of their workforce would actually qualify as carers. Hence NO flight attendants qualify for carers rosters. That is actually the case - there may be minority exceptions but certainly childcare does not qualify a flight attendant special treatment. They generally seem to understand that and many of them leave at some point. There are some career flight attendants but not a large proportion these days. They also have part-time provisions which pilots don’t generally have (despite the best efforts in recent EBA’s). Part-time is unattractive to employers of pilots because the overheads are very high.

However, with a mere 5% female pilot workforce, Qantas cannot make the same argument for pilots. Therefore, they find themselves legally obliged to give the female pilots a roster that suits their childcare requirements. This is typically something like working 3 days per week with all weekends off (B737 - I don’t have current knowledge of how it’s going in the long haul fleets). On the B737 in Qantas, many females with young children work to such a roster. Despite the overall average of females being currently around 5%, the demographic is such that the bulk of the females are currently junior, so the actual percentage in some bases and ranks is a lot higher than 5%, and so yes, the males, (many of whom also have kids) do actually end up having to work most of the weekends. I am not speaking here for what is proposed, I am describing what is actually happening now.

Now, someone above questioned my knowledge of the legislation when I mentioned that these carers rosters were only available to females. That was a bloody good question, and while I again can’t give a concrete answer, I can give you my understanding. The legislation, of course, does not discriminate for gender when defining who qualifies as a “carer”. But Qantas gets to discriminate on gender because a large number of their male pilots actually qualify as carers. Therefore they use the “flight attendant” argument for their male pilots! They can’t give them all carers rosters because they would run out of pilots. Yet, they hand them out to female pilots with kids almost no question asked. Now that might be legally questionable, but I think Qantas spend almost as much on lawyers as they do on PR, so good luck to anyone challenging it. I actually asked AIPA to challenge it many moons ago and I never actually heard the response because the background laughter kind of made the point for me. So as it currently stands, a female pilot can get a carers roster simply if she has kids. A male pilot cannot.

Having said all that, I will leave it to others to speculate what impact a progressive increase in female numbers will have. However, I will put out a suggestion that if it gets to a certain threshold, it is quite possible that suddenly the “flight attendant argument” will become valid for female pilots: “Sorry, there are now too many of you. We will have to start treating you equally with the male pilots. Carer’s rosters are no longer available, you are now required to be available 24/7/365 just like your male colleagues.”

So, to my good female pilot colleagues: be careful what you wish for.















Last edited by Derfred; 10th Nov 2019 at 11:56.
Derfred is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 11:47
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: New jersey
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exfocx,
I’m curious about your age. Many of the posters on this thread are describing a situation and events that they have personally experienced. I’m sure that there is a woeful lack of statistics or studies to prove what many of us, from over 40 years of flying, have actually witnessed. Nobody is against equal pay and opportunity, most are leery of these quota programs because we have seen where they lead.
The chart posted that showed United Airlines has the highest percentage of female pilots of all airlines. Do you know why? Back in the 1970’s the EEOC commission targeted United airlines for discrimination in a number of job positions including pilots. They were forced to correct the numbers and from the 1980’s till 1995 they hired a huge amount of female and minority pilots to correct the percentages and comply with the lawsuit. None of my non female, non minority, friends in the USAF even considered applying to United,
We watched as marginally qualified pilots were called by United 2 years before their military commitment was up and asked to interview for a position that they never applied for. United was actively recruiting folks who never expressed interest in employment at United. Also there were quite a few of sub 1000 hrs general Aviation pilots hired during this period..this is our experience, we were there. Also, please don’t assume this is a case of sour grapes, I was hired by United in 1995 but took another job elsewhere. We’re not Cavemen, just passing on knowledge of real world events as they happened versus what other wish happened.

Last edited by Chiefttp; 10th Nov 2019 at 12:31.
Chiefttp is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2019, 12:05
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I’ve found that this thread is far more readable if you exclude posts made by exfsomething. He’s not even actually talking about pilots, which is the topic of the thread. If I was a mod, I would delete them all. In the meantime, the ignore button works.
Derfred is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.