Jessica Starmer - BALPA's view (Update - Appeal decision)
How would a 250-hour newly-typed newbie flying on a 50% contract flying with a lady Captain, worn out by her sprogs and also on a 50% contract, go down with the travelling public?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps one should only get six month's seniority for six months work and make it across the board on a pro rata basis?
And, as Dave Fielding pointed out in an earlier post, illegal under UK employment law. We can't discriminate against people simply because they're only doing half the work, God forbid....
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How would a 250-hour newly-typed newbie flying on a 50% contract flying with a lady Captain, worn out by her sprogs and also on a 50% contract, go down with the travelling public?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yarpie Better take it up with the regulators and write to your MP to reduce the legal maximum hours from 900hrs/yr. (Unless you're with Ryanair and then I gather they do what they want anyway.)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JS would have little problem flying any aircraft. She is a great example of the quality of the old BA cadet program. Like the vast majority of her cadet colleagues she is a very talented pilot. 50%, 25 %, LH or SH I suspect would make very little difference to the high standards that she sets herself. (Having flown both I'm slightly confused why you think that a 757/767 is any more difficult to fly than an Airbus......do you think JS might have trouble with pitch/power and trim....jeez!!!)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong.
The vast majority her cadet colleagues are average pilots, some are better than others – I’ve trained them in a former airline.
B737 v Airbus – I’ve flown both too. You don’t fly an Airbus; you operate it. To pass an LPC is hardly a demonstration of flying skill, more technical knowledge. To pass a B737 LPC does require flying skill, as well as technical knowledge.
But my point as not about the above average BA pilots or cadets, or the merits of Airbus v Boeing. The fact is an inexperienced pilot has taken has taken her employer to court over her ‘right’ to work less than the airline’s management consider safe. The employee won; perhaps this does not set a legal benchmark but BA is unlikely to contest such working time requests from employees in the future.
Who is in charge? BA, seemingly cannot dictate working conditions to its employees, the employees dictate conditions to BA. BA needs to regain control over its employees and costs.
To see the future, look to Willie Walsh’s past (see separate thread). Enjoy this nonsense while you can.
JS would have little problem flying any aircraft. She is a great example of the quality of the old BA cadet program. Like the vast majority of her cadet colleagues she is a very talented pilot. 50%, 25 %, LH or SH I suspect would make very little difference to the high standards that she sets herself. (Having flown both I'm slightly confused why you think that a 757/767 is any more difficult to fly than an Airbus......do you think JS might have trouble with pitch/power and trim....jeez!!!)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wrong.
The vast majority her cadet colleagues are average pilots, some are better than others – I’ve trained them in a former airline.
B737 v Airbus – I’ve flown both too. You don’t fly an Airbus; you operate it. To pass an LPC is hardly a demonstration of flying skill, more technical knowledge. To pass a B737 LPC does require flying skill, as well as technical knowledge.
But my point as not about the above average BA pilots or cadets, or the merits of Airbus v Boeing. The fact is an inexperienced pilot has taken has taken her employer to court over her ‘right’ to work less than the airline’s management consider safe. The employee won; perhaps this does not set a legal benchmark but BA is unlikely to contest such working time requests from employees in the future.
Who is in charge? BA, seemingly cannot dictate working conditions to its employees, the employees dictate conditions to BA. BA needs to regain control over its employees and costs.
To see the future, look to Willie Walsh’s past (see separate thread). Enjoy this nonsense while you can.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The vast majority her cadet colleagues are average pilots, some are better than others – I’ve trained them in a former airline.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your right. Would have been more correct to say:
‘The vast majority her cadet colleagues that I have seen are average pilots, some are better than others – I’ve trained them in a former airline’.
As far I’m aware, all the cadets went to BACX after Sept 11. So if the ones that BACX got are representative of the rest, they are average; some are better than others - unless BA kept all the sky gods to themselves after Sept 11 and sent the duffers to BACX.
‘The vast majority her cadet colleagues that I have seen are average pilots, some are better than others – I’ve trained them in a former airline’.
As far I’m aware, all the cadets went to BACX after Sept 11. So if the ones that BACX got are representative of the rest, they are average; some are better than others - unless BA kept all the sky gods to themselves after Sept 11 and sent the duffers to BACX.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From my experience training BA cadet pilots (and cadet pilots from other airlines), they are mostly above average in ability and achievement terms.
There are exceptions, as always, but by and large the BA cadets are ahead of the pack
There are exceptions, as always, but by and large the BA cadets are ahead of the pack
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under bar stool
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When training BA cadets for IR's I would say the ability range was average to excellent. The difference between them and non selected students was that there tended to be no poor cadets but there were plenty of average ones.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 1,266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yarpy - worn out after 800 hrs/year?
Don't make me laugh! Even if one was worn out after 800 hrs (
), I dare say that that would generate a reasonable amount of overtime, which could afford to pay for extra childcare, which would mean that one wouldn't have to look after said sprogs as much, which would mean that one wasn't so worn out... 
Unless you're implying that 800hrs/yr wears out lady pilots and not men???
Don't make me laugh! Even if one was worn out after 800 hrs (
), I dare say that that would generate a reasonable amount of overtime, which could afford to pay for extra childcare, which would mean that one wouldn't have to look after said sprogs as much, which would mean that one wasn't so worn out... Unless you're implying that 800hrs/yr wears out lady pilots and not men???
DIRECTOR
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worn out after 800 hours pa? Well if on Short Haul; and you live in Dorset then I am not surprised. Does she have somewhere to stay near Airport before her flights or does she drive all these miles prior to her duty????
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forgive me if I'm being stupid here, and for going over old ground, but surely Mr Fielding has shot his own argument down in one sentence on the first page, second post.
In other words no men or women were being allowed to work 50%.
Now this lack of budget for 50% might be regretable. It might be argued that 50% should b made available, although I would see that as BA's choice. However it cannot possibly be sex discrimination. Sex discrimination is when men and women are treated differently. It is not when women are not given extra rights so they can bring up a child. In fact insisting that women should be allowed such extra rights not being offered to men is itself sex discrimination.
How can there possibly be an argument that this is sex discrimination when the representative of the person claiming such points out that men and women are being treated the same, all being denied the privilege at issue?
All the other arguments are asides to the definition of "discriminate".
...Jessica's ... application was denied on resource grounds when the department had made zero budget for Airbus P2s 50%
Now this lack of budget for 50% might be regretable. It might be argued that 50% should b made available, although I would see that as BA's choice. However it cannot possibly be sex discrimination. Sex discrimination is when men and women are treated differently. It is not when women are not given extra rights so they can bring up a child. In fact insisting that women should be allowed such extra rights not being offered to men is itself sex discrimination.
How can there possibly be an argument that this is sex discrimination when the representative of the person claiming such points out that men and women are being treated the same, all being denied the privilege at issue?
All the other arguments are asides to the definition of "discriminate".
discriminate v. (-ting) 1 (often foll. by between) make or see a distinction. 2 (usu. foll. by against or in favour of) treat unfavourably or favourably, esp. on the basis of race, gender, etc. discriminatory adj. [Latin discrimino: related to *discern]Pocket Oxford Dictionary
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Send Clowns, in which case it is not "Mr. Fielding" who has shot "his own" argument, but rather a failure on the part of the Tribunal that accepted the case and thereby made a faulty - and hence challengeable - finding.
Either that is the situation, or you have got the wrong end of the stick. I suspect it may be the latter. Maybe this has to do with how your grounded your argument ... and perhaps it is more to do with subtlety than with stupidity on your part.
Try this: I employ 100 females and 100 males. But I do not make provision for maternity leave for either males or females due to a lack of resources. Have I discriminated? If so, why? (In replying use only one side of the paper and be sure to clearly use examples that support your case if you want to obtain maximum marks. Any topic drift will be penalised).
Either that is the situation, or you have got the wrong end of the stick. I suspect it may be the latter. Maybe this has to do with how your grounded your argument ... and perhaps it is more to do with subtlety than with stupidity on your part.
Try this: I employ 100 females and 100 males. But I do not make provision for maternity leave for either males or females due to a lack of resources. Have I discriminated? If so, why? (In replying use only one side of the paper and be sure to clearly use examples that support your case if you want to obtain maximum marks. Any topic drift will be penalised).
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Near LHR
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a pilot's licence and did the CPL's before just before 9/11, but have absolutely no experience of commercial flying apart from the unglamorous oily bits, so all you high timers out there please feel free to deride or belittle this as you see fit.
When I was doing my apprenticeship a few years ago (ah, BOAC!), we used to have time allocated to go into flight ops to see the effect that any shortfalls in our work caused to the operation - a sort of object lesson if you like.
One of the guys in flight ops whom took us under his wing was an ex RAF Lancaster driver ( we're talking early 1970's), full of wisdom and experience.
He said several things to us over the course of our time with him, but I think this could be relevant to the debate about Ms Starmer's recency and experience and what constitutes a safe 50% when it comes to flying time. It has stuck with me throughout my working life, and also into my flying hobby.
He said that all aeroplane types have their own distinctive signature smell when you get on board. If you notice it when you sit in your seat you just aren't current.
I wonder if Ms Starmer notices any odd aromas when she gets on board, assuming she can remember where the cockpit is after so long away from it?
When I was doing my apprenticeship a few years ago (ah, BOAC!), we used to have time allocated to go into flight ops to see the effect that any shortfalls in our work caused to the operation - a sort of object lesson if you like.
One of the guys in flight ops whom took us under his wing was an ex RAF Lancaster driver ( we're talking early 1970's), full of wisdom and experience.
He said several things to us over the course of our time with him, but I think this could be relevant to the debate about Ms Starmer's recency and experience and what constitutes a safe 50% when it comes to flying time. It has stuck with me throughout my working life, and also into my flying hobby.
He said that all aeroplane types have their own distinctive signature smell when you get on board. If you notice it when you sit in your seat you just aren't current.
I wonder if Ms Starmer notices any odd aromas when she gets on board, assuming she can remember where the cockpit is after so long away from it?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Bamse01
Yes, but the "group" is the total population and the sample described is only part of that population.
Ergo, if you have very high selection/screening standards, you are representing an above mean performing sample of the population.
Thus in that particular sample, failure may well look like being at the 50% point of the total population.
Hope that this clarifies African Drunk's post - if you re-read it now, it should make sense to you.
Isn't average supposed to be just that, average of a certain group
Ergo, if you have very high selection/screening standards, you are representing an above mean performing sample of the population.
Thus in that particular sample, failure may well look like being at the 50% point of the total population.
Hope that this clarifies African Drunk's post - if you re-read it now, it should make sense to you.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GGV
Isn't it a sign of stupidity not to read the rules of the site that relate to personal attacks within posts, or are they too subtle?
The example you detail is not the case in point. Maternity leave is to allow for the pregnancy and the recovery from the birth, and for initial infant care. That is a fundamental difference in the make up of the male and female staff, and quite rightly there is a law that forces companies to allow maternity leave. Not to obey the law as it applies to females when the company obeys the law as it applies to males is discriminatory, as is forcing female staff to leave a job when having a family solely due to the fact that they are the ones giving birth.
There is no law requiring companies to allow staff with children to work part time, although they must consider requests, which had been done and she had been offered 75%. Either males or females can look after children. Therefore not allowing either 50% work to do so is not discriminatory, it is treating them identically.
Isn't it a sign of stupidity not to read the rules of the site that relate to personal attacks within posts, or are they too subtle?
The example you detail is not the case in point. Maternity leave is to allow for the pregnancy and the recovery from the birth, and for initial infant care. That is a fundamental difference in the make up of the male and female staff, and quite rightly there is a law that forces companies to allow maternity leave. Not to obey the law as it applies to females when the company obeys the law as it applies to males is discriminatory, as is forcing female staff to leave a job when having a family solely due to the fact that they are the ones giving birth.
There is no law requiring companies to allow staff with children to work part time, although they must consider requests, which had been done and she had been offered 75%. Either males or females can look after children. Therefore not allowing either 50% work to do so is not discriminatory, it is treating them identically.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 58
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SC,
That seems to be the heart of the issue as I understand it. It would seem that rules can be termed discriminatory if they disproportionally affect one sex. In this case it has been deemed by the tribunal that women are harder hit by restrictions in flexible working, and thus discriminated against.
As a lighthearted example, decreeing that all BA toilets must have stalls and no urinals could be deemed discriminatory, even though on the face of it this is enforcing equality. This is because males would be disproportionally affected by the removal of urinals. Sounds daft, but you get the idea.
Whether this definition of discrimination is right or wrong is a wider issue than just this case of course.
My own view is that it is another example of BA cutting costs too far (remember the chaotic summer last year at LHR due to check in staff shortages etc) and they have been forced down this route because the Airbus fleet is so short of staff. They aren't unique in this by any means of course.
In years to come flexibility for the workforce will be a very big point when trying to attract staff, as the pool of labour shrinks due to an aging population. Companies are going to need to start thinking about embracing it sooner rather than later if they don't want to be forced to by panic in the future.
That seems to be the heart of the issue as I understand it. It would seem that rules can be termed discriminatory if they disproportionally affect one sex. In this case it has been deemed by the tribunal that women are harder hit by restrictions in flexible working, and thus discriminated against.
As a lighthearted example, decreeing that all BA toilets must have stalls and no urinals could be deemed discriminatory, even though on the face of it this is enforcing equality. This is because males would be disproportionally affected by the removal of urinals. Sounds daft, but you get the idea.
Whether this definition of discrimination is right or wrong is a wider issue than just this case of course.
My own view is that it is another example of BA cutting costs too far (remember the chaotic summer last year at LHR due to check in staff shortages etc) and they have been forced down this route because the Airbus fleet is so short of staff. They aren't unique in this by any means of course.
In years to come flexibility for the workforce will be a very big point when trying to attract staff, as the pool of labour shrinks due to an aging population. Companies are going to need to start thinking about embracing it sooner rather than later if they don't want to be forced to by panic in the future.