Pregnant RAF officer awarded £16,000 for discrimination
Originally Posted by airpolice
So now we have reached the point where name calling is deemed to be a suitable response.
Instead of this being a forum where we can all state our opinion on the part of the case that has been made public, now we have to be subjected to being called Bigots by those who do not share our view. Oh the irony.
Years ago I was told that Opinions are like Ar$eh0les, everybody has one, but the safe thing to do is run away from anybody who seems interested in yours!
...
Instead of this being a forum where we can all state our opinion on the part of the case that has been made public, now we have to be subjected to being called Bigots by those who do not share our view. Oh the irony.
Years ago I was told that Opinions are like Ar$eh0les, everybody has one, but the safe thing to do is run away from anybody who seems interested in yours!
...
Originally Posted by airpolice
In the RAF that I served in, splits were shown the door as soon as they got pupped.
What I object to is retired individuals queuing up to have a go at an individual serving member of the armed forces for seeking redress through a system intended for that purpose.
Originally Posted by airpolice
In the RAF that I served in, xxxxxx were shown the door as soon as they xxx xxxxxx.
In the RAF that I served in, xxxxxx were shown the door as soon as they xxx xxxxxx.
As a 'retired individual', I was very pleased to read that a successful case was brought against the MoD on this occasion - the situation could easily have been resolved had the MoD actually decided to join the 21st century instead of attempting to hide behind some blinkered 1982-era stupidity.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: An Ivory Tower
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airpolice said
but I do feel quite strongly about the impact and consequences of the actions taken by the subject.
and
On knowingly making herself unfit (in terms of the rules) for duty at MPA she caused either another person to be sent there to fill the role or the staff at MPA to be a body short.
You seem to know far more than was in the article - "knowingly" for example, do you know the full circumstances or perhaps you are advocating compulsory celibacy for married accompanied personnel in the Falkland Islands to avoid any "accidents"? And in any case, is not the point of her case that she wanted to stay (and to fill her role for as long as possible) but she was sent home against her will?
I'm glad that some things have moved on from the RAF that I served in, but not all of this progress has been good for the troops or the service.
Lots have things have moved on in the RAF that I serve in and I regret many of them but I am definitely glad that the Neanderthal faction have been made to feel much more uncomfortable than the females in the Service who simply want to do their bit; I certainly don't begrudge them the chance to have a family as part of that career aspiration.
I may be wrong in this case
You are not kidding.
but I do feel quite strongly about the impact and consequences of the actions taken by the subject.
and
On knowingly making herself unfit (in terms of the rules) for duty at MPA she caused either another person to be sent there to fill the role or the staff at MPA to be a body short.
You seem to know far more than was in the article - "knowingly" for example, do you know the full circumstances or perhaps you are advocating compulsory celibacy for married accompanied personnel in the Falkland Islands to avoid any "accidents"? And in any case, is not the point of her case that she wanted to stay (and to fill her role for as long as possible) but she was sent home against her will?
I'm glad that some things have moved on from the RAF that I served in, but not all of this progress has been good for the troops or the service.
Lots have things have moved on in the RAF that I serve in and I regret many of them but I am definitely glad that the Neanderthal faction have been made to feel much more uncomfortable than the females in the Service who simply want to do their bit; I certainly don't begrudge them the chance to have a family as part of that career aspiration.
I may be wrong in this case
You are not kidding.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
adminblunty: Good points chap and very well made (post #50)
airpolice: Oh dear. Please do have a good look at the front page of your copy of the Daily Mail tomorrow, if only to remind yourself in which century the rest of us are now living.
I doubt the the rest of the page will be in any way accurate, and will simply reinforce your prejudices, but at least the date should be correct.
CS
airpolice: Oh dear. Please do have a good look at the front page of your copy of the Daily Mail tomorrow, if only to remind yourself in which century the rest of us are now living.
I doubt the the rest of the page will be in any way accurate, and will simply reinforce your prejudices, but at least the date should be correct.
CS
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: roughly near Everleigh DZ
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No issues with this one at all as long as the Officer concerned is comfortable cashing the cheque, tucking the folding into her maternity bra, visiting a triple amputee at Headley Court and buying him a beer while explaining her claim.
Moose.
Out.
Moose.
Out.
join the 21st century
remind yourself in which century the rest of us are now living
The monarchy (to mention just one old institution/idea/philosophy) isn't exactly a 21st century idea is it? But I don't see it being deposed because it's 2010. (Incidentally I think it has its good and bad points in equal measure.)
But blatant opportunism, the compensation culture, refusing to take responsibility for your actions, milking the system...these are behavioral traits that have never been a good thing...regardless of what century it is. A bad idea is still a bad idea whether it's 1910 or 2010.
I do accept that people have different opinions on issues, am I still a bigot if I think they are talking ar$e?
Finally, if the majority of people thought that this woman was justified in her actions...surely ZANU-Labour would have been re-elected with a clear majority last month?!
(Think about it)
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training Risk
A couple of your previous posts as below....
And may I ask what's wrong with being sexist and racist? Its more fun than being PC
To make absolutely certain you are accepted, try one, (or all) of the following:
1. Grow tits and blonde hair (if you are already a girl, get breast implants).
2. Wear a turban (or black yourself up like in Carry on up the Khyber).
3. Tell them you are an ethnic minority.
If all else fails and you can't use any of the PC auto-guaranteed options above, you will have to fall back on your ability and skill.
Good luck.
politically correct and so uptight that one's sphincter could be used to crack walnut
Nope - you are still a bigot when you have opinions as above
I apologise for going off thread - i will leave it at that. SPHLC - you were correct, they sure don't!
A couple of your previous posts as below....
And may I ask what's wrong with being sexist and racist? Its more fun than being PC
To make absolutely certain you are accepted, try one, (or all) of the following:
1. Grow tits and blonde hair (if you are already a girl, get breast implants).
2. Wear a turban (or black yourself up like in Carry on up the Khyber).
3. Tell them you are an ethnic minority.
If all else fails and you can't use any of the PC auto-guaranteed options above, you will have to fall back on your ability and skill.
Good luck.
politically correct and so uptight that one's sphincter could be used to crack walnut
I do accept that people have different opinions on issues, am I still a bigot if I think they are talking ar$e?
I apologise for going off thread - i will leave it at that. SPHLC - you were correct, they sure don't!
Last edited by Justanopinion; 10th Jun 2010 at 11:01. Reason: forgot to add something
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Canadian Break
How long before someone who did abide by the rules (written or spirit - whichever you want) sues the MOD for not having had babies! Oh bugger, now there's an idea!
How long before someone who did abide by the rules (written or spirit - whichever you want) sues the MOD for not having had babies! Oh bugger, now there's an idea!
now there's an idea
A very short time later, WRAF’s who were booted out because they had become pregnant, either by planning or by accident, were able to sue the MOD for many thousands of pounds.
So, for doing the right thing and playing by the rules we started off a family quite often struggling to make ends meat. Yet we knew of others, who broke the rules, being able to start off with enough money for a deposit on their own house and all the best things they could buy for the young one.
We have no regrets in the way we commenced our family life and I have two wonderful daughters to be proud of, both with very high moral values.
But I did and still do, feel just a little bit annoyed that by playing by the rules we lost out a bit.
But hey! as they say, “that’s life”.
Nope. Those 'opinions' don't make me a bigot, they merely demonstrate tongue-in-cheek advice for someone trying to join the RAF. If I was a bigot I would have said something like "women and blacks should not be allowed in the RAF", but I said no such thing.
Well done, you can use a search engine
You seem to have a stick up your proverbial about bigotry hiding around every corner, akin to reds-under-the-bed! You're not a black disabled lesbian are you?
You are the minority voice. Get used to it.
Well done, you can use a search engine
You seem to have a stick up your proverbial about bigotry hiding around every corner, akin to reds-under-the-bed! You're not a black disabled lesbian are you?
You are the minority voice. Get used to it.
