Human rights
Guest
Posts: n/a
Human rights
Heard today of an interesting labour issue -
in more ways than one.
A UK regional airline is being taken toan industrial tribunal by one of its female pilots. The lady in question got pregnant and was immediately grounded on full pay by the airline.
the airline contends this was necessary under health and safety responsibilities as their advice is that cosmic radiation may pose a threat to unborn child. CAA supports this. Lady pilot claims this a breach of her human rights as she should be the one who makes the call whether to fly or not.
Views please.
Guest
Posts: n/a
A number of companies have precisely the same policy. A company will successfully argue in court that they are only exercising their duty of care for their employee and the unborn child, as too little is known about the effects of CR on an unborn foetus.
You think they care? They just don't want to fight litigation later over the alleged cause of birth defects.
You think they care? They just don't want to fight litigation later over the alleged cause of birth defects.
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 479
Likes: 27
From: at the edge of the alps
I'd understand if she'd protest being grounded without pay, but protesting against such a basic protection of women seems rather stupid to me.
Some lasses seem to put their ego above their child's welfare....
Bad enough that US (and maybe other) cabin crew still have to work while pregnant. We should fight against that, not for being able to fly while pregnant.
In our Alpine country a pregnancy causes immediate suspension of the license on medical grounds. Problem solved.
Some lasses seem to put their ego above their child's welfare....
Bad enough that US (and maybe other) cabin crew still have to work while pregnant. We should fight against that, not for being able to fly while pregnant.
In our Alpine country a pregnancy causes immediate suspension of the license on medical grounds. Problem solved.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Forgive my short memory but isn't there a clause in the medical that states that a female pilot can't fly during the first and last 3 months of pregnancy.
She shouldv'e been aware of this restriction and accepted the medical certificate with full knowledge. Surely, if a medical is temporarily removed the airline have no choice in the matter?
She shouldv'e been aware of this restriction and accepted the medical certificate with full knowledge. Surely, if a medical is temporarily removed the airline have no choice in the matter?
Guest
Posts: n/a
FalconJock
I think you are right. I remember my wife had her medical suspended for the first three and last months of pregnancy. In fact she flew her first solo two days before discovering that she was about 5 weeks pregnant - debate in our house is whether this counts as a solo??
I think you are right. I remember my wife had her medical suspended for the first three and last months of pregnancy. In fact she flew her first solo two days before discovering that she was about 5 weeks pregnant - debate in our house is whether this counts as a solo??
Guest
Posts: n/a
From what i understand the medical is immediately revoked on confirmation of the pregnancy, however it can be reinstated at the CAAs discretion for a certain length of time.
I must say that seeing as the airline are still giving full pay i dont really see what she is so upset about. She would have known the airlines policy prior to getting pregnant, and it was ultimately her decision to get/stay pregnant.
Would she also have sued the airline if they let her keep flying and she lost the baby due to an incident/cancer from radiation??
Rocky
I must say that seeing as the airline are still giving full pay i dont really see what she is so upset about. She would have known the airlines policy prior to getting pregnant, and it was ultimately her decision to get/stay pregnant.
Would she also have sued the airline if they let her keep flying and she lost the baby due to an incident/cancer from radiation??
Rocky
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is a "Sexist" and [ANY] "Phobic" post.
When we [not "Royal"] sign a "contract" we are deemed to have 'read and understood AND ABIDE' by same.
Every beggar and their dog is leaping on the bandwagon.
1 "you can't do x"
1a B@llox, I can...Human rights
2 That is not "right"
2a 'course it is.....Human rights
The "Services" have had their fingers burt over this and other probs
so..."take care" you may be next
When we [not "Royal"] sign a "contract" we are deemed to have 'read and understood AND ABIDE' by same.
Every beggar and their dog is leaping on the bandwagon.
1 "you can't do x"
1a B@llox, I can...Human rights
2 That is not "right"
2a 'course it is.....Human rights
The "Services" have had their fingers burt over this and other probs
so..."take care" you may be next
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wonder if same lady pilot would have tried to sue the airline if she had carried on flying and miscarried or the child was born with problems due to CR. Sounds like a money grabing excercise to secure a wad of cash so she will not have to return to work after baby is born.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Minogue
You write that: "A UK regional airline is being taken to an industrial tribunal by one of its female pilots. The lady in question got pregnant and was immediately grounded on full pay by the airline."
I cannot understand quite what you mean by this. Are you sure you have the facts in the matter? If the lady is "grounded on full pay", then what possible ground does she rely on to take the airline in question to the Industrial Tribunal? It seems more likely to me that she has been grounded without pay.
And what exactly do you say the CAA supports? Is it the grounding on full pay or merely the potential (and alleged) effects of 'cosmic radiation'?
I am quite shocked and disappointed to read many of the posts in reply. How ready some of us are to jump onto this particular bandwagon of extreme prejudice. For my part I'd like to hear all the facts before leaping to condemnation of either her or her employer.
Come on Minogue, let's hear some more please. And, by the way, if the lady does wish to proceed on the basis of a breach of her human rights, as you suggest, then she would be wasting her time in an Industrial Tribunal.
[This message has been edited by tilii (edited 23 May 2001).]
You write that: "A UK regional airline is being taken to an industrial tribunal by one of its female pilots. The lady in question got pregnant and was immediately grounded on full pay by the airline."
I cannot understand quite what you mean by this. Are you sure you have the facts in the matter? If the lady is "grounded on full pay", then what possible ground does she rely on to take the airline in question to the Industrial Tribunal? It seems more likely to me that she has been grounded without pay.
And what exactly do you say the CAA supports? Is it the grounding on full pay or merely the potential (and alleged) effects of 'cosmic radiation'?
I am quite shocked and disappointed to read many of the posts in reply. How ready some of us are to jump onto this particular bandwagon of extreme prejudice. For my part I'd like to hear all the facts before leaping to condemnation of either her or her employer.
Come on Minogue, let's hear some more please. And, by the way, if the lady does wish to proceed on the basis of a breach of her human rights, as you suggest, then she would be wasting her time in an Industrial Tribunal.
[This message has been edited by tilii (edited 23 May 2001).]
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 1
From: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Yep, I've seen it argued both ways over the past couple of decades. I remember a Navy pilot who sued to be allowed to fly while she was pregnant, and I've seen an airline pilot who sued to stay home with sick leave payed by the union when she found out she was pregnant.
PMS is a similar gender biased issue. For years some women claimed it had no effect, now some claim their schedules and sick banks should be adjusted to compensate.
PMS is a similar gender biased issue. For years some women claimed it had no effect, now some claim their schedules and sick banks should be adjusted to compensate.
Guest
Posts: n/a
chiglet,
The qoute was Lenin not Marx. Marx said something to this effect- everyone is entitled to make mistakes but Commrade X has exceeded his quota. His comment was directed at a certain fellow traveler in the US.
BTW maternity pilot uniforms are available at the airline I work for. As I suspect they are at every airline in the US.
The qoute was Lenin not Marx. Marx said something to this effect- everyone is entitled to make mistakes but Commrade X has exceeded his quota. His comment was directed at a certain fellow traveler in the US.
BTW maternity pilot uniforms are available at the airline I work for. As I suspect they are at every airline in the US.
Guest
Posts: n/a
What in hell is the matter with this lady???
Would you men want your wife to fly when she is pregnant??? I don't and neither did she. As far as I am aware, there is almost nothing known about any adverse effects on the babe caused by flying, so do you want to be a pioneer??? We didn't!!
It's all too bloody late to discover that something bad happened to the babe which you could have prevented.
AND she is on full pay, so where's the problem??? We were on unpaid leave.
Would you men want your wife to fly when she is pregnant??? I don't and neither did she. As far as I am aware, there is almost nothing known about any adverse effects on the babe caused by flying, so do you want to be a pioneer??? We didn't!!
It's all too bloody late to discover that something bad happened to the babe which you could have prevented.
AND she is on full pay, so where's the problem??? We were on unpaid leave.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mustafagander
What in hell is wrong with YOU?
Personally, I would wish to support my wife in whatever HER decision was as to whether or not to fly. And that, dear chap, is the point here.
You speak in terms I thought were long past, yet I am over fifty, overweight, wear glasses and have the odd pint.
I don't believe that this lady is on fully paid leave, and even if she were then it is still a matter for her in my view.
Frankly, I think the general tone of this thread is thoroughly reprehensible and some of the posts here are certainly not what one would expect from highly trained professional pilots. Sad thing indeed.
What in hell is wrong with YOU?
Personally, I would wish to support my wife in whatever HER decision was as to whether or not to fly. And that, dear chap, is the point here.
You speak in terms I thought were long past, yet I am over fifty, overweight, wear glasses and have the odd pint.
I don't believe that this lady is on fully paid leave, and even if she were then it is still a matter for her in my view.
Frankly, I think the general tone of this thread is thoroughly reprehensible and some of the posts here are certainly not what one would expect from highly trained professional pilots. Sad thing indeed.
Guest
Posts: n/a
A comment from me as a woman.
Assuming Minogue's converyed the story accurately...
If I ever got pregnant and the company grounded me on full pay, I would be so thankful to the company! The reasons that immediately spring to mind are 1) pregancy is not an illness but is self-inflicted, so it is generous of the company to offer the full pay 2) if I had not thought of the risks of flying while pregnant, I would be thankful to the company for protecting myself and the unborn.
I would have thought that the increased risks of incapacitation is present at any time during pregnancy, due to miscarriage or premature birth to start with? Also the risks to the unborn of the cosmic radiation has not been ruled out as far as I know. One thing I read is that the effects of any radiation is greater for the newborn than to child/adult, so maybe the same applies to the unborn.
Anyway, who's this company? I would love to work for them!
Assuming Minogue's converyed the story accurately...
If I ever got pregnant and the company grounded me on full pay, I would be so thankful to the company! The reasons that immediately spring to mind are 1) pregancy is not an illness but is self-inflicted, so it is generous of the company to offer the full pay 2) if I had not thought of the risks of flying while pregnant, I would be thankful to the company for protecting myself and the unborn.
I would have thought that the increased risks of incapacitation is present at any time during pregnancy, due to miscarriage or premature birth to start with? Also the risks to the unborn of the cosmic radiation has not been ruled out as far as I know. One thing I read is that the effects of any radiation is greater for the newborn than to child/adult, so maybe the same applies to the unborn.
Anyway, who's this company? I would love to work for them!