Whinging bint.

[pipme]

Nobody yet mentioned the right of a woman to 'do her own thing'.

 

[Thermo]

hang on a minute. So shes in a job that pays well. so what, shes put the time and the training in to get it. makes no difference if its a 10k or 100k job, shes still got the same rights.

Shes pregnant again. so what. does it mean it was planned. is she not allowed more children. is she supposed to get rid of it? Is she supposed to disregard all her qualifications just because of that. They have invested money in training her and she has invested the same in getting where she is. It is in their intrest not to lose her and the investment theyve made.

I dont agree with the nanny bit, but each to their own. They live in a small house, but have two good incomes, again theyre choice. All seems a bit too judgemental and one sided this argument

 

[chainsaw_masochist]

They have invested money in training her and she has invested the same in getting where she is. It is in their intrest not to lose her and the investment theyve made.

Is this not the point though? Having made what must be a pretty substantial investment in getting her trained, are BA or any other airline likely to remain enthusiastic about the continual employment of women as pilots. Of course the Sex Discrimination Act technically prevents this, but in reality?....

 

[Thermo]

but its a short sighted view isnt it. Theyve spent the money training her, shes made the commitment, in a few years time she will be in a position to carry on and possibly go full time.

 

[david and julie]

I'm not so sure it is a short sighted view, we need to look at it from the airlines point of view as well. These PC inspired initiatives are all well and good but do they consider the practicle side of running a business? I am unsure if part time means reduced hours per shift or reduced days per month. If it was the former they would be restricted where they could send her. I have also read elsewhere that her husband is also currently on 75% part time too but has the required hours in to go 50% if he wishes.

I get the feeling these two can manage on one wage but neither want to leave a career to have a family. If they were both given 50% though they would then probably want the same time off together.

I can't help but wonder if the silly legislator's when drafting this sort of thing consider the companies concerned. They probably have a civil service mindset, where the public and money don't matter as long as it is PC correct. If all the pilot's went part time BA would fold through massive staff shortages.

It would be interesting to see who would take the blame if there was ever an accident due to this ignoring of the safety rules, even if they are new ones, just on the the alter of political correctness. As Adam said I wouldn't like to be on a plane where the pilot lacked the correct experience.

 

[kendor]

I can understand how difficult it can be to juggle work around childcare, especially for shift workers, childcare schemes tend to cater for 9-5 work patterns.
A parent can be put in an extremely dificult situation when an employer doesn't show care or their legal obligations to the welfare of their staff, it's a shame when it has to come to court to resolve what is probably an easily resolved issue, it wastes the courts time and as mentioned the only ones that seem to like this wrangling are the ones earning from it ie the lawyers etc.

 

[pipme]

Come on boys, tis a set up !! They must be one of BA's 'golden' couples .. so the set up is, the court case .. won --so far ok, BA may win the appeal, but as I mentioned before '.. 'The air safety regulator is now to consider placing new restrictions on inexperienced pilots after the sex-discrimination victory by Jessica Starmer, 26. British Airways'...

Ok !! Case has highlighted possible problem, win or lose, the regs will be altered via the other avenue if there is any possibility of safety problems .. Bingo .. BA sorted and other airlines too ... Golden couple, Golden handshake - bish bash bosh job done..

Well tis a little off the wall 'conspiracy theory' anyway.

 

[AdamW]

hang on a minute. So shes in a job that pays well. so what, shes put the time and the training in to get it. makes no difference if its a 10k or 100k job, shes still got the same rights.

Ah, but she is/was well aware of her contractual obligations to maintain her flight hours. Pilots licences are different to drivers' licences, you need to keep up the flight hours to keep your licence.

Now, there is no danger of her hours dropping below the CPL threshold (as the article says, pilots with the necessary experience can work at 50% levels). Pretty much any other job and I wouldn't have a problem with this. But, in a role where practice, skill and experience are most definitely required, she is making off with the urine.

Again, it is the "I want it all" attitude. She wants to pilot a jet in the morning, nurse the baby in the afternoon, and no doubt star in a tampon advert in the evening. Hell I'd love to fly a Typhoon in the morning, drive a Ferrari around Hollywood in the afternoon and play for the Wasps on a Saturday. Ain't gonna happen.

Women: KNOW YOUR LIMITS! (vintage Harry Enfield)

 

[pipme]

Pip's bold emphasis

....Part-timers too costly, pilot's tribunal told
JOHN INNES

AN AIRLINE pilot who wanted to care for her young daughter was refused permission to go part-time by her employer, British Airways, due to a lack of resources, a tribunal was told yesterday.

Jessica Starmer, 26, of Wareham, who has a one-year-old daughter with her husband Simon, also a BA pilot, is claiming indirect sex discrimination and loss of earnings.

David Warner, a senior BA manager, said the Airbus fleet Ms Starmer flew with was experiencing a shortage of captains, especially co-pilots, when she made her request.

Ms Starmer, a first officer, and two other female colleagues applied early last year to work half their scheduled hours because of child-care problems, but that option was not available, Mr Warner told the hearing. The three women were offered the opportunity to work 75 per cent part-time.
He explained that during 2004 Airbus pilots consistently raised concerns about their workload, and said the cost of training a new pilot would be £45,000 and the costs of employing two pilots instead of one would be £8,000 a year...

A subtle, but telling, change of emphasis there...
SAFETY was the prime consideration ...of course

...Mrs Starmer, an Oxford graduate who joined BA in May 2001, now has 1,400 flying hours with the company and needs just 100 more to qualify for promotion to captain.

That's not poor qualification for Co-Piloting .... is it ?

BTW 1400 hrs since May 2001 -- 1400 / (4 x 52) = Av 6.73 hrs per week.
If flying only half the employed time = 13.46 hrs per wk .. pretty tough then.
BALPA's take on the situation