SEXUAL HARASSMENT, Captain Inaudible & First Officer X

[PaulDeGearup]

Interesting comments from a variety of sources reagrding twosides post. My first thought when I saw this was to call MP and discuss it with him;his view was that having raised the topic he would suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous response. My view was that twosides would be better named twofaced. . .. .Nevertheless, we all have to realise 2 quite important points here:firstly, MP was involved in the entire process and the incident was not alleged, it actually happened. Secondly twosides was not involved in the matter: his opinions are not founded necessarily on fact, but on hearsay and his bigotry towards towards MP.. .. .Moreover, his close relationship with the fleet management and his assessment of the ability, or not, of a trainer, is at odds with his assertion that the female involved has not caused him any cause for complaint; may I suggest,2 sides, that you do not have the skill or indeed ability or experience to make such judgements when your colleagues and peers have found some lack of judgement on her part. May I further suggest that the entire tone of your post suggests that at some time in your career MP has found your adequacy as a pilot somewhat lacking and that your diatribe is actually founded completely on your desire to "get your own back". . .. .Never let the facts get in the way of a good story- well done twosides you have kept your end up!. .. .As to contacted's remark that it was essentially a personality clash - you obviously have some higher insight in to the matter than the rest of us; would you care to elucidate? As for the rest of your remarks perhaps you can explain how MPs post was "uninformed"? I do know that he was there; were you? The ending of saga, BTW, contacted, could have been brought about at the very beginning of the matter, before it escalated into affecting MPs health. You will no doubt wish to give us all the benefit of your undoubted wisdom as to why it wasnt.

[EasyGlider]

Having now read the original post, for what it's worth I think MP's post was disgraceful.. .It is quite obvious who the airline is, and to degrade anyones character on a public forum is totally not unacceptable.. .You should be ashamed of yourself MP.. .. .Anyway, there is nothing wrong with "Girly Girls" pilots. Now we are all locked in the flight deck, somebody's got to make the tea…. .. .------------------------------------------. .If it Fly's, Floats or F...k's, rent it

[twistedenginestarter]

So we have another thread. First time everyone was supporting good old Pete. Now the bulb in his halo is flickering a bit. But still - nobody is spotting the crux of this argument.. .. .You can slag off Pete or FO X all day about whether they were any good or not. None of us can tell one way or the other. All we know is it's simply beneath what should be on this site.. .. .The charge was of sexual harrassment. Pete failed from the begining to the end to show the slightest scrap of evidence to support this.. .. .The prosecution rests. . .. .Now can we get back to rumours and news?

[Vee2]

Captain Inaudible, First Officer X & Sexual Harassment. .. . I apologise but this is lengthy in response to the original and other comments. . . . .This posting gives the other side of a recent posting to this forum. . .. . No, what this posting does is to give another individual's opinions on a recent posting. If you are the second party to the remarks it is the other side. However, your PS comments quite clearly state that you are not involved. Everything you say is either hearsay or based on your personal dislike of MP. . .. .Its quite amazing how many of you just blindly accept the word of one person without stopping to think there might be another side to this story, maybe even first officer X's story for instance? . .. . You do people an injustice when you make such all inclusive statements. You may wish to reconsider this point. How many people actually know FO "X" and have some knowledge of the circumstances? How many people actually know " MP" and have knowledge of the circumstances? . .. .When you consider that pilots today are supposed to be trained in Human Factors it really makes you wonder if 'Animal Factors' would be more appropriate.. .. . Are you alleging that whilst the Training Department of your airline is providing HF courses that the airline is paying "Lip service" to the implementation of Human Factors procedures? Or is your comment on the inadequacy of your airline's HF training? Is this not at odds with your comments later? Or are your comments directed at the Training Departments and inadequacies, as you perceive them, of other airlines? . .. .If ever one needed proof of why BALPA members make BALPA ineffective and why some pilots make bad 'man' managers, you only need to read some of the previous posts regarding this thread.. .. . Where does BALPA come in to this? To the best of my knowledge MP is not a BALPA member nor has he asked BALPA for assistance in resolving the problem. In addition, you obviously accept, unreservedly, that some pilots are bad "man" managers. What criteria do you use to judge a good or bad manager? Is it how “nice” they are (see later)? . .. .Recently our profession was put on a social par with police officers and again reading through some of the inane, gutter dribble on previous posts, I now understand why.. .. . So what do you have against police officers? Care to publish your registration number here? . .. .Consider this;. .. .First of all this particular captain is a magistrate and has recently completed a degree in criminal justice (partly during the period of time when he was off sick with stress, gosh, how did he manage to do all that hard work when suffering from so much stress!). .. . Righto, you obviously know MP well. Moreover, you know FO X well. From your remarks you work for the same airline. Your airline's Operations Manual specifically PROHIBITS, as part of your contract, any discussion of company business with the press radio, TV or media (and this includes the internet) without the prior approval of the company. So you are either in breach of the terms and conditions of contract and liable for summary dismissal, or you have the complete permission of your company to air this public. . .. .As this captain is well versed in the law, more so than the average pilot, and seemingly so very, very, concerned about this alleged incident, (alleged is a word some of you should become more familiar with) ask yourselves why he did not pursue this through the appropriate channels, E.G. the courts, with a solicitor? . .. . The matter should be dealt with at the lowest possible level; if you took the trouble to read the ACAS Guidelines on disputes you would know this. Taking the issue to Court should be a last resort. But then your airline does use a sledgehammer to crack a nut (not my words). Moreover your airline dislikes intensely any adverse publicity. . .. .Is this type of post to a public forum really the way a professional person of any calibre would handle what is a personal matter between himself and the first officer concerned?. .. . This is not a personal matter. Are you suggesting that any sexual harassment is simply a personal matter and should be resolved between the individuals? Should rape victims, who are "professional persons” just handle what is a personal matter between themselves? Is not your previous suggestion that the matter be ventilated in Court an admission that it should be taken into a public forum? Or is a Court not public in your opinion? . .. .Perhaps this is just a vindictive, spiteful action with no substance, by a man who hadn't got the balls to do anything about it while working. . .. . Perhaps it was or it wasn’t. Make up your mind, but now we come to the gist of it. What MP did was to refer the matter to his line manager. Bearing in mind his recent experience of the efficacy of the airline's disciplinary procedures, what exactly would you have him do ? What evidence do you have that there was no substance to this? If there is no substance how could he take the issue further? On the one hand you castigate him for not taking the matter to Court and on the other you claim there is no substance to it. What is correct? . .. .Perhaps this is the action of a sad individual who waits till the safety of retirement to makes snide public remarks aimed at destroying someone just starting out on her career. . .. . Check your Part A, Appendix B, Page 7, "Contact with the Media". MP acted in accordance with his contractual obligations. I refer you to my previous comment about your contractual obligations! . .. .Not one of you has mentioned the fact that this captain has chosen not only to castigate this first officer in public but also reveal private information in regard to her training record.. .. . I suggest that this FO's training requirements were- to use your expression - common knowledge within her own fleet; they were not, therefore, private. One would not normally let lose an FO who required more than the " normal" training time without making some comment to the individuals that FO would fly with. I suggest that your knowledge and experience of pilot training precludes you passing comment about this. I also suggest that at the time you were not a Captain, hence you have no knowledge of what was, or wasn’t said. . .. . The fact that some of you have even encouraged this discussion indicates much more about your own personal failings than ever could have been said about this first officer.. .. .On personal failings, more later. . .. .Having known this particular captain for many years, I can assure you, I and many others on our fleet, know the answers to the above!. .. . If that is the case, it begs the question why nothing was done sooner to remedy this; this suggests that the failings, personal or otherwise, were generally accepted. From what you have said, were the management then not at fault if they allowed the situation to not only continue, but to give the individual more and more authority? I suggest that your assertion is groundless; if the claims you make were common knowledge the managers would have taken steps to remedy it. If you pursue your argument you are obviously dissatisfied with the effectiveness of your managers. You contradict this later. . .. .Before making this post, I individually asked seven senior female cabin crew members this question.. .. ."Can you name one captain who repeatably stares at your breasts while you are in his company". Without hesitation they all individually named this particular captain and named him alone. Perhaps he was checking to see if they were wearing full harnesses!. .. . Well, we only have your word for this as you individually asked them. Who were they? Is it normal in your company for Senior First Officers or Captains to ask senior cabin crew this? Does this promote CRM? Are you deliberately stirring up discontent? Do your managers know that you do this? Do your cabin crew find this offensive? . . . .The above, and please all of you be very clear about this, is common knowledge on our fleet.. .. . Again, if it was common knowledge why was no action taken against the individual sooner? If "several female cabin crew" disliked being looked at, why did they not complain? If they did complain was any action taken? If not, does that raise questions about the effectiveness of your managers? Does your company not have a published protocol for a harassment free workplace? I suggest that your statements are fabricated and inclined to do nothing more than create friction between flight crew and cabin crew. Moreover, I suggest that your statements also highlight your discontent with the adequacy and effectiveness of your managers. . .. .I have flown with the first officer in question on many occasions and I find her standard of flying perfectible acceptable and up to company standard, including her ability to land the aircraft.. .. . Are you a training captain? If not, what say do you have in the company standard? Does your company have training meetings? Are you involved in them? Are your standards different to the standards of others - this remark is simply aimed at establishing what you consider the standard. It is not derogatory. . .. . As a professional pilot that's all I am interested in, I don't care who she has pictures of on her clipboard or if she complains about unpaid expenses, (Fully Justified) I mean come on,. .. . May I just point out that the individual in question complained about not being paid; she would have, and could have been paid. She had not given payroll the details of her bank account. I don't think you can claim she was justified in whining. Payroll was innocent. Additionally, you obviously approve of photos being posted on clipboards; does that extend to posters on the walls of crewrooms ? Where do you draw the line ? If you have a gay pilot or steward do you object to he or she displaying gay posters in crewrooms? What is your view of a member of the public, a child, being exposed to this? Where is the boundary of your tolerance ? Is your tolerance reflected in the company code of practice? . .. .Captain Inaudible remarks are defamatory to the training department, training captains and the company itself. I think we all know who the company is by now, thanks to the captain who felt it necessary to mention that the FO cried on stand after a bad landing. To that captain I would say, "You have that effect on many pilots, even before landing and I hope your flying career is never judged on the standard of one landing".. .. . Sorry, if your FO cries on stand after a bad landing methinks that the individual should not be on the flightdeck. We all throw in a wild landing every now and then, but we don’t cry! Is she emotionally unstable? Or is it just because she is a "girly girl" ? Do we have to make exceptions for "girly girls" or do we treat all pilots as professionals regardless of sex, colour or sexual persuasion? Is that the level you see female pilots at? Is that the level you see all women at - "girly girls" ? . .. .By the way, the first officer concerned does know about all these postings. On arriving back at the crew room a copy of Captain Inaudible disgusting snide post was on the wall. I have sent this down to First Officer X with the compliments of Captain Slime ball, which pinned it on the wall. Sorry to spoil your fun lads but the good news for you is that the B.B.C. have recently announced that 'Andy Pandy' is coming back to our television screens!. .. . Are the B.B.C taking up this story? . .. .I have complete confidence in our training department and in all our trainers, especially now that Captain Inaudible has left.. .. . This would suggest that you had no confidence in the trainers or training department before he left. Or is it that you consider that the standards which he set will now be eroded sufficiently to allow you to exercise your inadequacies on a crew and the paying public? . .. . As we all know, anyone who isn't up to standard is removed from flying, it's happened in this company before but its not happened to this first officer and it won't happen, on this fleet. . .. . You have influence then. You can decide who will and will not be removed from flying-“but if it will not happen to this FO” - you have already pre-judged her ability as satisfactory under every contingency. So regardless of what this person does she is secure in the knowledge that she will get away with it. Isnt there a case going on against a gay police officer whom the newspapers allege thought he was beyond criticism because he was gay? Does this mean ultimately that this woman can be a hazard to aviation, and the paying public, but will not be criticised or be subject to any sanctions? If that is so perhaps on the OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION OF SAFET Y WE SHOULD NAME THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE AIRINE! . .. .First Officer X is a young, girlie girl, in common with many people of her age; her interpersonal skills are not the same as someone old enough to be her father. I understand she speaks out when it would be wiser to remain silent. I understand she complains when it would be wiser to endure. These are not sub human failings unique to her. As in any airline, we have some very intelligent people and we have some people who make you want to re-examine the history of human evolution. As professional airline pilots involved in multi crew operations we need to be able to adopt our tolerances and prejudices to accept a wide variety of personalities. . .. . For someone who “knows” so much you rely on “understanding” ,ergo a lack of personal knowledge and something that has come to you via another, for your opinions. Should she not have been able to follow your advice and adopt her prejudices and be tolerant to another personality? . .. .In my experience the captain concerned was unable to remain unbiased when dealing with people he took an obvious dislike to.. .. . That is opinion, not fact. . .. . He also singled out certain people, whom he alone, decided were not up to standard.. .. . Opinion not backed up by fact. . . . .His standards and his methods of applying them were noticeably not in line with other training captains and as such he was never taken that seriously within the training department.. .. . Correct me if I'm wrong but he was the Senior Training Captain! Did he and the Training Manger not SET the standard! How many other Training captains are/were there ? Did he have absolute power? I think not! . .. . He was one of those unfortunate characters who laboured in the belief that 'his' rule book was a bible and we all know the connection with fools and inflexibility, don't we?. .. . Let me guess here - you did your command ride, as I did, with MP. You failed. I passed. Get real, he only pushed people as far he thought they could cope to explore the boundaries of their abilities. If you couldn't deal with simple failures you were not up to a command. If you couldn't deal with multiple failures you were equally not up to a command. MP gave me absolute stick on my command ride in the sim, but I didn’t come out bleating about it. He was harsh, but fair. . .. .Within our training department he was unique in this behaviour. Instead of providing guidance and encouragement for those on the edge, his intimidator, unhelpful attitude would reduce their moral and ability even further. In fact I would use the term, 'a bullyboy' to describe his behaviour towards some people but he was clever enough to only treat certain individuals in this way.. .. . Absolute rubbish. If that were the case would the management not have done something about it? It cost lots of money to have people fail sim checks and upgrades to command. I can, however, think of another Training captain in your airline who decided to “move” the localiser by .25nm while the candidate was on approach; note there were no failure indications on the flight deck ! But they crashed! Doesn’t happen in real life ! . .. .Within the company he was known as 'Captain Inaudible'. His persistent mumbling and inaudible speech was the talk of the fleet. You would think that one of the most important qualities for a training captain would be the ability to be able to speak in such a manner that other people could actually hear what was being said.. .. . Captain Inaudible - that means you couldn't hear him. Someone else could. Had your hearing checked recently? . .. .In my flying career, Captain Inaudible is the only pilot I have ever had cause to complain about. I told the fleet manager that I thought he was unsuitable to be a training captain and I was told "not much we can do about it, we inherited him from the XXX fleet!". .. .With regard to Captain Inaudible comments about our ex-fleet manager;. .Again the defamatory remark about whether or not our fleet manager was effective is not a matter for comment here. I can however tell you all, that our ex-fleet manager was possibly one of the nicest, helpful people you could wish to meet. I have to say that being a genuinely nice person is not the description that springs to mind when describing Captain Inaudible.. .. . But you have just told us that- I was told "not much we can do about it, we inherited him from the XXX fleet!" by your fleet manager ! So is he effective or not? Your arguments run counter to each other! Either MP is right in that your FM was ineffective or your remark is not absolutely correct. . .. .I am afraid 'Captain Inaudible' has had an overdue retirement present he brought upon himself.. .. .I do however wish him a happy retirement and hope he channels his vindictiveness into the most suitable of new careers he has found for himself. However, I cannot help thinking that the way he has conducted himself in this forum demonstrates his unsuitability, even for being a magistrate.. .. .P.S. When I discussed these postings with F.O. X her comments were, "Rise above it". I suggest those of you who can, do so!. .. . If she felt that any of the comments were not absolutely valid would she have refrained form comment? . .. .Judge a man not on how he treats his friends but how he treats his enemies . .. . Touché . .. . If you have anything about you, you will make your real identity known. Otherwise shut up. Your Part A refers. Your arguments do not hold water. They contradict. You complain about managers on the one hand but praise them on the other. In short you your comments lack structure, objectivity and validity. Moreover, you feel that you are not obliged to abide by the terms of your contract, or are you actually a manager who has approval to voice an opinion in public? . . . . <small>[ 29 March 2002, 21:17: Message edited by: Vee2 ]</small>

[basil fawlty]

Well, having read both viewpoints threads now,I really don't know what to think....apart from the fact that it doesn't affect me or 99.99% of the members on this site, so I don't really care a great deal. I AM NOT AT ALL SEXIST, but, what I do know is that EVERY female pilot I have met through the course of my career has milked the fact that she is a GIRL no end......

[twosides]

Sorry you missed the point V2. Its a shame Part A dosn't warn of the dangers of ignorance exceeding ignorance!. .. .PS Just think, if I was as clever as you, I wouldnt be an airline pilot!

[L337]

I cannot help but wonder, if this thread will not have us on the front page of the Sun. Without too much imagination it will end up in court, and, I do not know the answer to this, does pprune as publisher of the thread become partly responsible?. .. .Apart from the two protagonists, who knows the truth? God only knows what happened, but the place to air the dirty washing is not here.. .. .Close the thread I say.

[ZQA297/30]

I would say that I have flown with one absolutely professional female F/O, one above average, and one hopeless one. . .Almost like male F/Os when you boil it down.. .Why all the emphasis on personalities in this thread?

[DX Wombat]

I am not a pilot and have no idea of the identity of the people and company involved in this mud-slinging session, nor am I particularly interested. What I do know is that the one person who has shown maturity in this matter is the FO. She has not resorted to joining in the fray but actually told Twosides (according to him) to "Rise above it" This sort of scrapping in public makes me wonder about the maturity of some of the people flying the aircraft I have to travel in. It is not a good advertisement for your industry. Before anyone tells me to mind my own business as I'm not a pilot, I have to fly long distances as a passenger on a regular basis and remember that these are open forums and therefore available to all those members of the public who have internet access not just those who have an interest in flying.

[pontius's pa]

"There'll be trouble", I said, "if you let them wimmin on the flight deck". That's what I said, yes I did.. .. .It is clear from many posts on both threads that misogyny is still alive and well on the flight deck.. .. .The original post from MP was self pitying and pitiful. The Two Sides post that started this isn't much better.. .. .Enough already. Move on.

[siwalker66]

Pity the poll feature hasn't been activated yet so that there could be a vote on whether or not the 2 threads involved should be deleted or not. . .. .I find it hard to believe that as a magistrate he felt his original post was a good idea. I am sure the press are watching with interest.. .. .The facts, even as presented by MP himself, seem to me not to warrant the often rather bigoted, misogynistic responses which feature on the threads concerned. This dispute is in my opinion the result of a clash of personalities which has been dealt with inappropriately by MP himself and his immediate managers. It is sad that someone of his experience should have had their career ended in this way.. .. .I feel that MP has let his fellow pilots down by making his allegations public in the way he has chosen. I am sure many members of other professions who hold pilots in the highest regard are making some adjustments to their opinions after reading the relevant threads.

[Wiley]

Danny, do the profession a HUGE favour and remove both threads to Administration before, as someone has already said before me, we find this on the front page of the bloody Sun.. .. .Only in the last few day, we’ve seen the way a tabloid ‘journalist’ (sic) can make a meal out of a slightly less than well-considered PA, imagine what they’re going to make of this.. .. .Talk about ‘shock, horror’. This is ‘dirty washing’ of the worst kind. Gitridovem. Please.

[LowNSlow]

It's an issue that can't be resolved here. We've seen enough dirty washing. . .. .As previously stated it's all starting to underwhelm.. .. .Time for the bin I think

[Capt PPRuNe]

Whilst this thread and the original one obviously made some people feel uncomfortable that in itself is not reason enough to remove a thread. If the incidents happened then pretending they didn't does not make them go away. The original thread was allowed because the poster provided full details and did not post anonymously. This post was allowed because it provided a different perspective on the same issue.

There are some serious CRM and management issues to be debated because of the way this whole affair was handled by all parties. Most people are able to discuss the relevant issues and it is an ignorant minority that fail to see the main points and concentrate on trivia or irrelevancies. As this is an open forum most readers with a normal IQ or better are able to ignore the idiots who are unable to contribute meanigfully to the debate. If there are journalists reading this and deciding to make a story outof it for their tabloids then they will cater for the ignorant ones.

Just because a story is uncomfortable doesn't warrant removing it. If the events happened and one party has decided to make public the details from his point of view then so be it. Whilst I do not expect the other parties to state their side in a public forum they have the opportunity to do so, either officially or as some on here suspect, anonymously. Whatever the issue, it is in the public domain and contains issues that are worthy of debate as they potentially affect CRM and possibly flight safety issues.

If the thread degenerates into meaningless argument that no one can win or concede on then I will close it. Equally, if the ignorant brigade try to inject their infantile attempts at humour or digress into areas of irrelevance such as trying to name the individuals then it will be closed too. At the end of the day there was a problem, it was handled and this is the debate. How it was handled what is relevant is open for discussion and although some feel uncomfortable with that, putting ones head in the sand doesn't make it go away.

[roland poole]

Like many of my colleagues who have posted on this forum, I am aware of the nature and progression of the accusations against MP.

The point MP raised on this forum was essentially simple:- He was falsely accused of sexual harrassment, and the strain of these accusations had an adverse affect on his health. These events ultimately led to the untimely culmination of his career as a pilot.

MP had a valid point to raise, and, in any such case, it is inevitable that any concerned party may make the odd statement which reflects how one feels rather than demonstrating the facts. The post from Twosides is, however, rather short on fact and is, in my humble opinion, very slanted (to be diplomatic).

The issue here is sexual discrimination and the false use of an unfortunate workplace phenomenon. The individual's background was given by MP as information relating to the possible cause for the individual's actions.

I would imagine that part of MPs intentions when posting on pprune was to reduce the chance of such sad events occurring again due to our awareness of past mistakes. I can only hope that MPs future life is not clouded by events that have been raised here, and that the individual is treated in exactly the same manner as her colleagues by all concerned.

The arguements on this thread should be restricted to the original issue raised by MP and replies to it. Any discussion on the suitability of topics for pprune should be raised with the moderators on a different forum.

Remember the cause of the discussion here - an ubsubstantiated allegation of sexual harrassment that was withdrawn.

[Chickenhawk66]

Due to some software issue beyond my ken my former posts under Chickenhawk have all had the author changed. I lay claim to the post above, and would like to follow on from it:

Pity the poll feature hasn't been activated yet so that there could be a vote on whether or not the 2 threads involved should be deleted or not. . .. .I find it hard to believe that as a magistrate he felt his original post was a good idea. I am sure the press are watching with interest.. .. .The facts, even as presented by MP himself, seem to me not to warrant the often rather bigoted, misogynistic responses which feature on the threads concerned. This dispute is in my opinion the result of a clash of personalities which has been dealt with inappropriately by MP himself and his immediate managers. It is sad that someone of his experience should have had their career ended in this way.. .. .I feel that MP has let his fellow pilots down by making his allegations public in the way he has chosen. I am sure many members of other professions who hold pilots in the highest regard are making some adjustments to their opinions after reading the relevant threads.

I appreciate and respect Captain Pprune's response, and I hasten to make clear that I value Pprune as a conduit for free expression. I agree fully that it would seem that serious events may have occurred. I totally agree that there are management issues that need to be discussed.
However, I feel that these management issues should be discussed in an objective way, perhaps in relation to a past case or case in which all the facts are known. Reading the threads concerned, I feel that it is unlikely all the relevant facts are known here, and I feel very strongly that this forum is the wrong place to attempt to make them known, due to the extremely emotive issues surrounding allegations of sexual harassment.
But that's just my opinion. Would this not be a good opportunity to use the new poll option?

[ILS27R]

From the evidence presented here I totally agree with MP and his postings. This man has been through hell and back as it appears from his postings. For what reason exactly? Because a woman or "girlie girl" if you like wrongly accused him of sexual harassment. You cannot blame the gentleman in question for airing his thoughts and frustrations on this most delicate of subjects. I think it is indicative of the society in which we live in that certain individuals believe they are invincible to any kind of criticism and disciplinary action. unfortunately it would also seem that the authorities also hold such a belief.



Good luck for the future MP,


ILS27R

[IMMELMAN]

Injustices, if there is such a word, occur all the time. Surely, if the framework within which somebody operates fails to deal with a problem adequately and, maybe, takes the soft option and leaves somebody feeling aggrieved, they are fully justified in wanting to air their grievance in some way. That is the value of such a forum as this, isn't it? This will lead, probably, to no resolution of the problem but, at least, the 'injured party' can at least get it off his/her chest ( sorry ) and that , in itself, has to be therapeutic to an extent. It may well be that the complainant is not in the 'right' - ok, the option is for the other side to either respond or ignore - that's up to them - but, provided such a post is decent, honest, legal and true, others do need to know that there is a potential problem in this area - the various views should, I hope, make us all think - especially those who should deal with such alleged situations. If it does nothing more than make the aggrieved party feel a bit better - then so be it - surely this is better than a very bitter person, rightly, or wrongly, never having the possibility of expressing their feelings. Nothing we say is likely to affect what has happened but maybe, just maybe, it may make those whose job it is to arbitrate and deal with this kind of problem to put a little more effort into it - if that leads to a fairer world - then, 'Rock on Tommy'

[Flight Safety]

This may be a small contribution to this whole issue, but I'd like to point out something that is troubling me about the accusations being made on both sides.

Consider the following statement made by MP in his original post...

She was well below the standard expected of someone of her experience and I contacted the Training Manager in order to arrange for some extra training. She was of the opinion that Training Captains should not train on line flights but only on line checks.

During late August/early Septeber 2000 she remarked to at least five line captains that she flew with, one of whom gave me statement, advising them that" confidence has gone as a result of me staring at her breasts instead of training her". I contacted the Fleet Manager and the rest is history and appears below.

The lady in question later freely admitted in a meeting on the 19th January 2001 when the Fleet Manager, a Personnel Person and myself were present, that she had made up the entire story and that it was malicious, false and entirely without any foundation. NO action was taken against her.

MP later said in the same post...

The level of harassment is assessed in law as perceived by the victim. All I wanted was an apology and a guarantee not to fly together. This was not an option. When I sugested a apology to the lady at the 19th Jan meeting she demanded an apology from me and stated that "I would do the same thing again if I threatened and considered it justified." Nice lady!!

It's interesting that both of these events appear to have oocurred in the same 19th January 2001 meeting!!!

As far as I can tell, "towsides" never disputes in his/her posts that these 2 events in the 19th January meeting (and their respective comments) actually occurred.

The truth of what actually happened to MP (and First Officer X) is strongly hinted at by what allegedly occurred at this particular meeting. Look at this 2 events very closely, what do you see? Think it through very carefully.

[sirwa69]

FS

I don't know if this is the point your alluding to but here goes,

It would seem that this particular FO is a proponent of the maxim that "the best form of defence is attack".
To me it looks as if when critisised for her skill level and told she needed more training, she made the sexual harassment claim in order to deflect attention from the critisism of her flying skills.
Having read all of both topics I would contend that she has been quite sucessfull.