Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BA Pilot's sex discrimination case. (Update: Now includes Tribunal's judgement)

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BA Pilot's sex discrimination case. (Update: Now includes Tribunal's judgement)

Old 24th Apr 2005, 16:07
  #401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Wherever my current employers wish to send me !!
Posts: 718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nothing to do with the fact that she is "Female", is it MP?
Little Blue is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 17:22
  #402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 1,074
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
If you haven't noticed yet, then YES!... this case is all about the fact that she is 'female'.
Training Risky is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 18:18
  #403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does it matter whether the rules were changed before or after. If they were changed after it was because BA had never had to deal with this situation before. They paid tens of thousands for her training and she has given nothing back - I can't believe that she will ever go back to working more than 50%. Why would she with a husband earning so much as well as herself.

You only have to scroll back through this post to see how many people think Jessica has done no end of damage to other female pilots. I am one of them and I am disgusted that she has won. Surely moving closer to Heathrow would have been the equivalent of going 50%. The only words that spring to mind are 'cake' and 'eat it'.

I don't know where this will leave us as a group but it definitely hasn't helped. I've worked hard to get where I am, I love my job and yes, one day I would like kids but only after I've put my time and energy into my career and some commitment back into the company that took a gamble on me.
Girl999 is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 19:04
  #404 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil

Oh come on now. Flying has always been a mans' game. It always will be. Young Jessica has simply been the Trojan Horse which proved the point. In this, of course, she was well aided by the lackeys at BALPA, servants of the concept of political correctness. An excellent result all round really. Goebbels would have been immensely proud of it. It's put feminine aviation back years. Female aspirants will always be looked upon with quite justifiable suspicion from now on.
What next? Will tribunals afford the same degree of luxury to a homosexual pilot who, with his husband, has adopted a child.
Will BALPA support such a claim in the future? It could surely hardly refuse to! Surely!
Must dash. Must review the new Flashman book just out. He would have known what to do, by the living jingo!
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 19:35
  #405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Midlands.
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, my two pennorth as follows....
I think it is a bloody disgrace, BALPA should be ashamed of themselves for backing such a giant leap backwards for female pilots. I will be cancelling my BALPA membership immediately. Any chief pilot considering hiring a female pilot now will clearly be having very serious second thoughts about the idea - a crying shame when so many employers are already in the dark ages when it comes to hiring women and there are so many emminently qualified women pilots struggling to find work. I hope that Jessica is proud of what she has done for her beloved industry by her selfish stupidity.
There, said it. Quite restrained for me, actually.
stella arrival is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 19:54
  #406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Having been a supervisor in another profession but not dissimilar in other respects to aviation, I have been down the "Jessica" road several times. When they first become pregnant their rate of sickness increases because of the fundamental changes their body is undertaking. They then go on to maternity leave. When they are due to return to work, they put in an appearance for a few days and then go off sick with stress caused by trying to work and tend the new born child.

This process can be repeated one or more times depending on the size of the famly they choose.

In the mean time you are short staffed as they cannot be replaced and their work has to be shared out amongst the remaining staff.

If you have two or more similar females working for you the job does not get done.
sammypilot is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 20:05
  #407 (permalink)  
Oops!
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sammypilot

I have to say that yours is probably the most offensive post that I have ever read on PPRuNe.
Whatever the specifics of this particular case, your comments are bang out of order and have no place in modern-day aviation let alone on a public forum like this. If you want to air your misogynistic views then I strongly suggest that you should consider doing so in private in the future.

Cheers,

G
greatorex is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 20:33
  #408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Greatorex, Sorry you don't agree but you are fortunate in that aviation is one of the few industries in which hours are limited by law. Try having a few words with doctors, etc who have to work lengthy hours to make up for absences.

Also try having a few words with the small businessman who finds trying to comply with employment laws forces him into bankruptcy. You might find my post offensive to yourself but it is simple statement of the facts out there.
sammypilot is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 20:45
  #409 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Also try having a few words with the small businessman who finds trying to comply with employment laws forces him into bankruptcy
Hear hear. There are too many people hiding behind ever demanding employment law (demanding on the employers part). Enough has been said on this particular subject to say any more.
Andy_R is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 21:30
  #410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hampshire physically; Perthshire and Pembrokeshire mentally.
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
your comments are bang out of order and have no place in modern aviation let alone on a public forum like this
Do we or do we not live in a liberal democracy? If yes, sammypilot's comments are not "bang out of order". He is entitled to his view and to post it.
Wingswinger is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 22:33
  #411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Having read the views - you are all frankly a load of old farts.


Bring on the younger generation as I can't wait for you lot to retire.


The world moves on...views rarely change with age however, so I can't expect many of you to be progressive with this modern newfangled stuff such as women working.
Lucifer is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2005, 23:21
  #412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
so I can't expect many of you to be progressive with this modern newfangled stuff such as women working.
I think that's the whole point, numbnuts. She hasn't actually done very much work. She's been trained by BA to be a pilot, and spent the greater part of her time with that company making/having/looking after babies. She's done 1,000 hrs in 4 years, when most of her contempories will have been pushing 3,000. You call that work do you? Sounds more like a hobby to me!

Having done all that, she's now taken her employer (and benefactor) to court. Amongst other things it can apparently be slightly disruptive, being an airline pilot. No ****! It's a topsy-turvy world we live in.
Slickster is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 01:22
  #413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah - greatorex

It is always the way - someone disagrees with the pc-brigade and they are the most shameful, wicked, women-hating, criminal, blah, blah, etc person to have surfaced in years and should not be allowed to contribue on this or any other forum ever, ever again. And that is the essence of the pc world - 'WE are correct, WE define the moral rules, WE say who may be heard and WE say who may not.'

WRONG!! If you are offended by sammy's comments it is you who needs to clear off. And, by the way, if that is the most offensive thing you have ever read on PPRUNE then you have not been looking at it very long! Sammy is entitled to his views and you to yours. This is a place for honest debate and if sammy has a point to make then let it be heard. If you can produce a cogent and rational argument to counter his views then let us hear it. Or shall we just ban him to save you the bother?

Last edited by Norman Stanley Fletcher; 25th Apr 2005 at 09:45.
Norman Stanley Fletcher is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 07:51
  #414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe she thought BA stood for "Baby Airlines" or "Benefit Airlines"!

How long is maternity leave anyhow? In normal desk jobs you would go off around 8 months into pregnancy, yes? But how is she going to "squeeze" into the cockpit in such a condition? Or does "Baby Airways" have special concessions for these situations?

It really is a matter of choice. What does she really want? To be a pilot or to be a mother? It really is that simple.

One thing that really puzzles me: How does she only have 1100 hours flight time after 4 years?

Cheers!
scotron11 is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 09:21
  #415 (permalink)  
GJB
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SAMMYPILOT - you are spot on. I have experienced exactly the scenario you describe on more than one occassion.

On the M/F equality issue - what bullsh*t it is. Man and woman are not equal. Has anyone watched womans rugby? Nuff said

Last edited by GJB; 25th Apr 2005 at 09:32.
GJB is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 09:32
  #416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Having been a pilot and and employer, I can attest to both the truth of cockpit competencies based on minimum standards; and the engagement of people who will adversely affect my bottom line.

There’s no compromise on either – in the case of the former where my butt is on the line; and in the case of the latter where my house is forfeit to the bank!
Argus is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 09:55
  #417 (permalink)  
feet dry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Argus,

In those two short sentences you have summed up the future consequence of this decision. Bravo
 
Old 25th Apr 2005, 10:32
  #418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down A Pathetic decision

This decision in favour of J was PATHETIC.

I join the ranks of like-minded people such as Stella Arrival, Sammypilot, and NSF in their views, and distance myself from people like greatorex who twist the argument with inappropriate comment about misogynistic views. It is nothing to do with that.

In all walks of life/business these days there is a cost/benefit to be forged out - what is the sense in having a pilot who has only flown 1,000 hrs in four years? I hurt for BA trying to make a profit with employees like J.

The PC clowns who are surfacing and imposing their 'will' want trod back into the earth, and allow the world to function properly and with purpose.

TG
Tartan Giant is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 10:49
  #419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: cambridge
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Like I posted previously, however, there is some good to come out of this for qualified pilots who are awaiting work - if this decision sets a precedent for people to work part-time hours on a widespread basis, it will surely create more part-time vacancies across the board - I.E, it takes two pilots on 50% hours to do the job of one pilot on 100%. Although it does only create part-time work, it may, one suggests, create more jobs.
bazzaman96 is offline  
Old 25th Apr 2005, 10:55
  #420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does anyone have a link to the actual decision of the Tribunal?
Argus is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.