Jetstar Sinks to a new Low - Sacks Worker for beig a Goth
 

Page 2 in todays Daily Telegraph.

Story details a Jestar chick in girl who was sacked by Jetstar for looking too Gothic. But when you look at the photo of her, she looks to ba quite a gorgeous lass, attractive enough to be on a TV campaign for KFC.

"managers told her on sevaral occasions to change her appearence including instructions to wear more blush and lipstick, change the colour of her nail polish and lighten her eyes".

What's next, management telling females to get a breast enlargement/reduction. Or will mid level managers be able to fire female staff if they reject their sexual advances.

I thought that Goths were some of the markets that Jetstar were targeting.

I've seen some stunning birds wearing "goth" so I don't know why they would take issue with this girl.

JQ like all airlines have uniform standards that all uniformed staff have to abide by - these are provided to all staff

She obviously has chosen to ignore the company directive and abide by the standards of the company. Would this be such an issue if she was sacked for not following other company standards .. EP's for example

Whats the big deal .. she deserves to get the flick if shes not prepared to abide by the company standard

Jet Star might have uniform dress standards, but they certainly don't have any when it comes to weight!

Good on them, bet she didn't go to the interview looking gothic.

According to the full story, she DID attend the interview like that, and was hired. :rolleyes:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Jetstar sacks attendant over looks

07-04-2006

The Daily Telegraph


Brooke Ogden is good looking enough to star in TV commercials but according to Jetstar her looks are not good enough to check in passengers.

The 27-year-old was sacked as check-in attendant for the budget airline for looking too "gothic".

Now she is examining whether she has a case for unfair dismissal, despite the airline denying it had exploited new IR legislation by sacking her.

Ms Ogden said her managers had told her to change her appearance on several occasions, including instructions to wear more blush and lipstick, change the colour of her nail polish and lighten her eyes.

Despite having looked the same at the job interview from which she was hired, she said she immediately changed her appearance to comply.

But last Thursday Ms Ogden arrived at work to find she was not on the roster. At a meeting with her manager she was told she was being dismissed because of the way she looked.

"She said it was to do with appearance and work issues and when I queried her on the work issues she said, 'You are obviously upset, tensions are running high'," Ms Ogden told The Daily Telegraph.

"I said, 'I just want to know why I'm being fired' and she said, 'We can't comment on that right now', and I asked her once more and she couldn't tell me."

Jetstar claimed Ms Ogden was still on probation, even though she had been there for almost six months - well beyond the three-month probation period.

She said the same manager had told her at an earlier meeting: "You are quite gothic looking."

"I didn't know how to react to that," Ms Ogden said.

Her looks were clearly not a problem for KFC, which used her as the face of its Twister wraps in a television ad campaign.

Ms Ogden said she had been a hard worker and an enthusiastic advocate of Jetstar until the day she was sacked. She had even passed up another job offer on the day she was fired.

"I was a fan of the company up until last Thursday," she said.

A Jetstar spokesman said Ms Ogden was dismissed for "appropriate reasons" but could not say what they were.

I'm having a little time off, because I keep putting my foot in my mouth and act like a child.

Woomera (Eastern States)

Re. your location in your profile"Soldier" you are indeed where you belong. !!:yuk:

Jetstar would have more than 100 employees, wouldn't they?
So how does the new IR legislation have any bearing on this?

My Shout
 

jeez. Hamo's comment got me thinking. If the punter's down the back got a look at some of the stick-pullers up the front in a rat glider, what would happen. Some of the beer-gutted sclerosis-schnozzed short-arsed plain-old weird looking throttle monkeys ya get would make the sargeant major in anyones army weep. (not to mention the pimply one's):E

She would have a valid claim against the airline as it employes more than 100 people.:}

Weather you are employed by Qantas, Virgin or Jetstar they all treat employees the same.
That is like second class ....###..:} :confused:

Hamo OneStar and standards???:ugh:

I would be interested to know the full, non media-fied version of this story. If she did indeed turn up to the interview dressed as a 'goth' but was told during her training that she would be required to adhere to company grooming requirements, then I would imagine she has no case against JQ. If she were not made aware of grooming requirements at any time during the training or her probation, and was then told after that she had to change her appearance, well I would presume thats a different story altogether.

Either way, most (all?) people know that airlines have quite strict grooming standards for all front-line staff - forgive me for being presumptuous (yes naughty Sinala1 I know), however I thought that would be common knowledge?

Lets hope time brings out the full, unabridged facts of this story.

Jetstar's response. Who is telling the truth though, I will leave up to you...
http://www.jetstar.com.au/pdf/news/20060407.pdf
P

It obviously didn't work out for either side, she just should have moved on and forgot about it. If she has appeared in media commercials, she is obviously enjoying the publicity at her former employer's expense.

I'm sure she'll get a walk on in a soap opera before long too.

I strongly disagree with Jetstar's belief they are "an employer of choice"... Makes me wanna puke! :yuk:

And Magda fits beautifully into the Onestar image:yuk:


Yet another case of "do as I say, not as I do"

It seems it was just a case of darkish eyeliner and dark nailpolish. Not the full goth look, I;d like to see these clown managers told how to have their own hair cut, and maybe some of them could loose a little weight too. Middle aged fat, balding men telling young girls how they should dress.

Sexism is still alive and well.

I'd be very surprised if Jet* would publish the press release referred to by Starts with P if it was untrue as they'd be open to all sorts of litigation otherwise.

So, assuming the press release is accurate, then it doesn't seem like unfair dismissal, nor dismissal for appearing goth, as portrayed in the press.

http://www.jetstar.com.au/pdf/news/20060407.pdf

Claret,

you are probably right, however, could it be bully boy tactics by AJ? After all, unless the young lady employs Slater and Gordon, the legal might and wealth of QF will overcome her.

When you look at all the treads currently running, one gets the sense that all is not well in (with) the JQ camp. Is the bubble about to break? :hmm:

Interesting comment there - I would be interested to see how this can be construed as sexism?

Airlines (and lots of other companies for that matter) have grooming regulations set in place, which employees are made aware of at the outset. The company I work for has quite strict grooming regs for front line staff which you are made fully aware of when you start. I would guess JQ is the same?

Presuming that the Jet* press release is a correct portrayal of the facts (which I dont know nor am willing to bet on either way) then this employee apparently deserved what she got.

I concur with Sinala1. (even though I would be more then happy for her to be on front desk of any airline I work for :} )
If a company has dress standards and you don't conform to them then your braking the rules by which you where employed. If this was a first offence then I would be a bit upset but form what J* say it's not. The rules are there, if you don't want to follow them then get them changed or quit.

Hmmm

Seems some of you missed the following in the story:

Ms Ogden said she had been a hard worker and an enthusiastic advocate of Jetstar until the day she was sacked. She had even passed up another job offer on the day she was fired.

It would appear that she was already looking for another job before the dismissal, a job if the fourth estate is to be believed, she had secured.

Reminds me of Denmark and fish.

Jet* response seems to be pretty straight to the point, and for mine I bakc em.

Happy Easter or whatever deity holiday/break/long weekend you believe in.

i have many friends who do come under the gothic ideal (if there is such a thing), on this one im on the side of ms. ogden... and i agree that jet* is taking advantage of the IR laws. and there is nothing wrong with being gothic, and we should respect people's choices and the way they want to dress and act.

From what I can gather, again if the press release is to be believed, the 'gothic' dress preferences of this girl outside work had nothing to do with her being sacked - in fact its irrelevant. The grooming standards are there for a reason - like it or lump it.

I say again, How does the new IR legislation have any bearing on this ???????????????....................... :confused:
They have more than 100 employees!!!!...... :hmm:
If this chick was given an extended probation, then she obviously was marginal in her performance, and lucky to be given a second chance by the company, but she obviously failed to realise this was a wake-up call, and it would appear to me that they have been more than fair to this individual.

ozzy_melb

I will give you a little advice as you appear from your profile to be a 17 year old still at school. Working for an employer isn’t like being at school. It isn’t a democracy. Your employer will set out rules and standards you must follow on their time and in regard to aviation you must follow in your time as well. In this regard it is their train set and you will play with it the way they tell you not the way you want to. If you can’t or won’t do this you have three options:

1. Resign,
2. Be fired,
3. Or don’t take the job in the first place.

If you honestly think it is your right to dress and act as you please in the work place you are in for a shock. By the way have a good read of the J* press release. I think you will find that her Goth dress rated very low for the reason she was dismissed and would have happened irrespective of the new IR laws or not. If you believe all the bleeding heart stories you see on commercial TV you are just as gullible as most who watch these trash brain dead programs.

No Jetstar stooge here, neither am I a supporter of Howard's latest IR laws, but Titan speaks a very obvious truth, and though ozzy_melb hasn't discovered the reality of life yet, he/she no doubt will. Titan's post is a good place to start.

If you want to be paid, sonny, you will often be asked to agree to a set of conditions. Funnily enough, being allowed to express your individuality by your mode of dress doesn't usually appear in those conditions. In this case I am fully on Jetstar's side. Ms Ogen should have thought about improving her attitude rather than running to the media because she wasn't allowed to do exactly as she wanted. Perhaps being "the face of Twister" whatever that means, had distorted her sense of reality?

I know people who also choose to dress this way. But not at work. They knew full well when they took their jobs that it would require them to leave the Goth look at home during working hours.

Most (if not all) airlines have grooming standards, which, even if not TOLD to the employee, would be in the employment manual/handbook/whatever.

I know that if I were to turn up to work fresh from a night on the town, complete with my 'nightclub/going out/Goth' (circle applicable) makeup still on, even if in uniform, that I'd be asked by my manger to remove it and appear in something more fitting with the company image. Now if every other person working there had also appeared that way and was allowed to, it wouldn't be a problem would it? But looking at the press release, if true (which I daresay it would be - why leave yourself open to litigation) the makeup was the least of her worries here.

You want to work for an airline (or any company for that matter), you follow the rules, whether those rules are displaying your ASIC or what kind of shoes you must wear on the job.... simple.

I posted the following in the Cabin Crew forum when this topic was discussed. I made my comments well before the JQ media release.

Did anyone notice how this wasn't reported on in the Sydney Morning Herald or in the Australian or in any other well respected newspaper?? It was a biased story put by the Daily Telegraph. With all talk focused on the IR laws at the moment, i'm sure the editors would jump at any opportunity to print a story which would shock their obedient readers.

The reporting of the Daily Telegraph is of the same nature as that of Today Tonight and ACA.

I take what I read and watch with a grain of salt.

:ok:

Jetstar AN Employer of Choice.
Dont make me laugh. They would not know what that means.
As far as I am concerned what she dresses like away from work is her and not the companies buisness.
As long as she is properlry dressed and groomed when she comes on duty.

Jetstar AN (read Ansett) employer of choice:} how ironic....
If Jetstar treat their highly skilled labour with such disregard what chance do the easily trained have. What a joke Jetstar, be careful how low you stoop. The staff you crap on while you rise will be the same staff you rely on when the chips are down and one day they will be down.:ouch:

Which, if you read/believe the J* press release, she wasnt - and this was just one of the reasons she lost her job.

As has already been echoed on this thread, grooming regulations - amongst other rules - are part of airline workers jobs. Follow them or find a new job, its quite a simple concept :)

I would love to know who considers JQ to be an 'employer of choice'!? Apart from my wonderful(!) colleagues I hated every bit about working for those horrible people. :yuk:

As a former CSO for JQ in Syd, I agree with A320, The staffing levels at SYD whilst I was there were Skeleton to say the least (I'm fairly certain nothing has changed). Being one staff member down puts considerable strain on the rest of the team. Having someone turn up consistantly late gets on your nerves after a while.

That being said as a manager you simply cannot tell someone that they look goth, there are tactful ways of getting the message across. That's just not what you'd expect from experienced and professional management....