BA pilot wins discrimination case

Less · 22-04-2005, 18:26

BA pilot wins discrimination case

Do you have a daughter working hard for her exams? A young girl with ambition hoping to do well for herself in her chosen career?
Does she perhaps want to be an Airline pilot?

If the answer to the last question is yes, do you think it will be easier or harder for her to taken on by any of the bigger airlines now that Jessica Starmer has been successful with her action against British Airways.

I bet when she was originally asked what about children? she didn't reply "Oh well when it comes to that I'll take you to a tribunal".

She will probably of tried to assure them that either:-

a/ I have no plans to have children.
or
b/ If in the future I have any children I shall make arrangements for them to be taken care of while I perform my company duties.

I personally think it is important that our daughters get as much encouragement as our sons when it comes time to choose their career, whatever that choice may be.

However, If as this lady says, "I'm delighted with this result." Yes it is a good result for her but although airlines will still pretend to be equal opportunity they will probably be more inclined to take on male trainees whenever possible after all it will be less expensive in the long run.

Also, ever since passengers have been flying there have been Ladies taking to the air as Air Hostesses I would think that at least a few of these ladies have had children & like their more down to earth sisters have found a way to arrange their family life and their working life so what makes a lady pilot so different to them?

garinda · 22-04-2005, 18:36

The difference between female flight atendants and female pilots? Education.

This girl knew her rights, and used them to win her case.

I think a lot of women do face unfair discrimination when it comes to having children and being judged on equal terms with men with the same qualifcations. Most of this would be impossible to prove though.

One answer is to encourage more lesbians to be pilots thus alleviating the problem.

Margaret Pilkington · 22-04-2005, 19:46

I'm sure that BA will go to appeal......they cite safety as the reason for denying this woman's request to work part time. Pilots need to clock up so many flying hours to maintain competency and they clearly think that she won't be able to achieve this on part time hours.......and she is pregnant again so what chance has she got. I'm with BA on this one.
I'm all for equality, but this woman has done nothing for equality.

Oh, just by the by......at interview you are not allowed to ask a female applicant questions about their intention to have a family.....or about provision they have made regarding child care......it is seen as discriminatory.

West Ender · 22-04-2005, 21:11

I have been a Civil Servant since 1959, though with a 20 year gap in service from 1964 to 1984.

The reason for this long gap was my 3 children. When I was pregnant with my first child I knew that I would have no alternative to resignation when she was born. There was no part-time working, no flexi-time and only 6 weeks Maternity Leave. What's more, if I had to take Sick Leave for any pregnancy-related illness I was not paid.

I returned to the Service when my youngest child was 9. By then flexi-time was an institution and part-time work quite acceptable. In the years since then, "term-time" working has been introduced, Maternity Leave is at least 6 months, five-year breaks are possible and pregnancy-related illness is not even recorded as Sick Leave.

Whether or not one agrees with the above, this lady pilot has done nothing more than demand the right to be treated equally with a government employee, though I too think her occupation should be treated rather differently.

I would add that men in the CS can also work part-time, have flexi-time and will soon have paid Paternity Leave. Maybe pregnancy-related illness is somewhat unobtainable for the men but - one never knows.

Less · 22-04-2005, 21:29

Quote:

A spokeswoman from BA said: "Jessica Starmer currently works part time on a 75% contract. "British Airways has consistently said that the decision not to allow her to cut her working hours in half, to an average of just eight days a month, until she completes the required amount of flying hours was based on safety not sex discrimination.

So at the moment she is on a part time of 75% of full time that means that if 50% is an average of 8 days a month 75%= 12 days a month hardly what you could call a gruelling schedule even compared to what normal workers think of the 'cushy' situation civil servants have.

PurpleLass · 22-04-2005, 21:41

I'm with BA on this one. Women should be able to make the choices they want, I agree, but not when it goes against a company policy - in that case their only choice is to leave not take them to a tribunal because 'it's not fair'.

West Ender · 22-04-2005, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

So at the moment she is on a part time of 75% of full time that means that if 50% is an average of 8 days a month 75%= 12 days a month hardly what you could call a gruelling schedule even compared to what normal workers think of the 'cushy' situation civil servants have.

Ah, "cushy". Yes, top Civil Servants in Whitehall do have a cushy job. They are the ones in the bowler hats you always think about when Civil Service is mentioned. The rest of us - the Plebs who do the REAL work - are "normal" workers just like you. The working time conditions are good and I'll admit the Leave is decent but the pay, these days, is lousy and we DON'T sit around all day drinking tea, no matter what the sitcoms say.

On the whole, I'd rather be an Airline pilot.

Busman747 · 22-04-2005, 22:10

"Ms Starmer, a first officer with BA, told the tribunal in January that BA's "family-unfriendly working practices" reinforced male-dominated traditions. The pilot, who joined BA in May 2001, told the tribunal she and her husband, who is also a pilot, worked "extremely irregular" shift patterns, which made it difficult for them to care for their young daughter."

She is simply working the system.....and our courts help!

Whatever career you choose to follow, there will always be drawbacks. In the case of pilots, long and irregular hours are part and parcel of the job. This is counteracted by the glamorous side which is visiting foreign destinations and getting very well paid for doing so.

In addition, she chose to marry a pilot.......and must put up with the consequences!

Young mothers get maternity leave and then decide as to whether they continue with their careers or become a full time mum. 30 years ago, they didn't have the option of returning to work in the same job but British Airways has given her job back as per the law and as far as I am concerned, she has absolutely no right to dictate to her employer any change of contract that is different to the one she signed before pregnancy.

As it is, she only works 16 days per month, that to me is classed already as part-time, What good is a pilot that is only available for 8 days to a national company?

"Hello, B.A? This is Ms Starmer, Sorry can't work today, baby is teething. Better get someone else to do my flight to Hong Kong that takes off in 30 minutes"

Either be a full-time mum or a full time pilot!!!!

I like the bit about "male dominated traditions"......certain careers attract more than the average applications from the gay community, hair dressers being one because of their flair and discerning taste...and careers centred around aircraft, maybe because percentage wise, they are less likely to be into a serious relationship and therefore can adapt to the unusual hours without it disrupting or conflicting with a family life.

Less · 22-04-2005, 22:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

So at the moment she is on a part time of 75% of full time that means that if 50% is an average of 8 days a month 75%= 12 days a month hardly what you could call a gruelling schedule even compared to what normal workers think of the 'cushy' situation civil servants have.

If you noticed I put cushy inside a set of ' ' this was to signify a common conception of what civil service is like not what I necessarily think!

Less · 22-04-2005, 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busman747

"Hello, B.A? This is Ms Starmer, Sorry can't work today, baby is teething. Better get someone else to do my flight to Hong Kong that takes off in 30 minutes"

Why not give her your 'phone number busman? If she can't make it you can do a bit of moonlighting, after all I saw a documentary were a pilot said it's only like driving a bus!

=

WillowTheWhisp · 22-04-2005, 22:27

Women like her really annoy me. She wants to have her cake and eat it. Either she's a full-time pilot or she's a full-time Mum but why should she have the right to demand to work only 8 days a month?

I know I'll probably get a lot of stick for this but quite honestly you can't have equality between men and women because men and women are different. You can have equal treatment under equal circumstances by which I mean if a woman does exactly the same work as a man she should get exactly the same pay and working conditions.

It is not equality to go around demanding time off for children. If she wants to spend time with her children then she needs to rethink her career options. Until men start getting pregnant and giving birth there cannot be equality. Women should have been happy to be superior and left well alone.

cashman · 22-04-2005, 22:36

i'm all for equal terms,conditions,and pay for women,but everything must be equal.i also believe that one of the couple should be home with the baby unless its impossible due to financial constraints, don't believe one wage coming in in the circumstances prevents that.

West Ender · 22-04-2005, 22:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less

If you noticed I put cushy inside a set of ' ' this was to signify a common conception of what civil service is like not what I necessarily think!

That's OK, Less, I didn't take offence - honest! I knew what you meant. You'd be surprised, though, how many people DO think we have a "bobby's job".

Doug · 22-04-2005, 23:14

Although I respect this woman’s right to challenge a system that she as seen to be unjust, I draw you attention to the fact that her success in this case will cause considerable harm to small businesses throughout the UK.

British Airways can well afford to fight and or, compensate this woman for any discrimination that might have occurred. Almost all small businesses will not be so fortunate as to be able to meet future challenges and or, costs that this case may well create.

Many small family businesses and many low or not for profit organisations are already under considerable pressure trying to meet existing maternity regulations without this on top. Most social care organisations suffer considerable difficulties recruiting and retaining staff as it is, the success of this case will only serve to increase those difficulties. Just an opinion.

Less · 22-04-2005, 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

I know I'll probably get a lot of stick for this but quite honestly you can't have equality between men and women because men and women are different.

Women should have been happy to be superior and left well alone.

Yes, Willow, if I thought for just one moment that you could possibly mean what you said in the last sentence here then you would be in for some stick.
As it is I have found you to be of reasonable intelligence (for a women), so I realise that you would NEVER believe such a fairy tale.