TWENTY-FIVE years after Deborah Wardley Lawrie launched a landmark sexual discrimination case to force Ansett to accept her as a pilot, she wonders how much has changed.
For the past 12 years Ms Lawrie has flown with KLM Cityhopper, based in The Hague, and when she returned to Melbourne for today’s commemoration of her historic case, she was stunned to discover that the Victorian Equal Opportunity Commission last year received 2216 complaints of discrimination against women.
They included 124 claims of discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy – the argument that airline head Reg Ansett used in 1979 to deny Ms Lawrie a job. “You would have thought after 25 years of equal opportunity legislation, women would no longer be discriminated against because of pregnancy,” VEOC chief executive Diane Sisely said yesterday.
Ansett claimed a woman was biologically unsuitable to be a pilot because she might go off to have babies, and because of safety issues associated with menstruation.
The then Equal Opportunity Board backed Ms Lawrie’s landmark case and, after a two-and-a-half year legal struggle, she became the country’s first female pilot for a major airline.
Ms Lawrie, who chairs a safety board comprising all the main European airlines, said she found it “staggering” that women in Australia were still fighting for maternity conditions. “At KLM Cityhopper, pregnancy is not an issue. Women have their baby and come back to work.”
Ms Lawrie said there was “an undertone of chauvinism” in Australia. “There seems to be greater equality in employment in Europe,” she said. “Australians seem to have difficulty recognising ability when the person is female.”
Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner Pru Goward said the anti-discrimination legislation of the past 25 years had brought improvements, and an increase in the number of family-friendly workplaces. Even so, last year she received 230 complaints related to pregnancy.
The financial pressure on women to work meant that “they can’t afford to be demoted, or to stop working, so they will fight these issues harder, and they’re more aware of the act.”
“Today we have women machinists, and women bus drivers,” Ms Goward said.
By: Silver Snapper - 29th June 2004 at 14:23
LMAO!
Chained to the cooker
That could describe an ever-growing army of bent-wristed men these days! :rolleyes:
By: Bmused55 - 29th June 2004 at 10:52
Stupid b*tches should be washing the dishes anyway ! 😀 😉
LMAO!
Chained to the cooker
By: Ren Frew - 29th June 2004 at 10:47
No, the over political correctness is allowing this sh!t to happen
Stupid b*tches should be washing the dishes anyway ! 😀 😉
By: Bmused55 - 29th June 2004 at 10:44
No, the over political correctness is allowing this sh!t to happen
By: Ren Frew - 29th June 2004 at 10:38
No no, you misunderstand.
I mean there are women (for example) that take potential employers to court purely because they didn’t get the job. Regardless of the fact that they may well have not been suited for the job. By lack of qualifications for example.
Some women even evade parking/speed/general fine tickets by accusing the issuing officers of discrimination.
Merely the tip of the iceberg that is called Political OVER-correctness
I see what you mean, no that’s not over political correctness, that’s just ripping the p*ss. 😀
By: Bmused55 - 29th June 2004 at 10:35
No no, you misunderstand.
I mean there are women (for example) that take potential employers to court purely because they didn’t get the job. Regardless of the fact that they may well have not been suited for the job. By lack of qualifications for example.
Some women even evade parking/speed/general fine tickets by accusing the issuing officers of discrimination.
Merely the tip of the iceberg that is called Political OVER-correctness
By: Ren Frew - 29th June 2004 at 10:29
I supose.
There are folk out there who take the system for a ride, you have to admit!
I’m not sure why you consider pregnancy to be “taking the system for a ride” but yes, there are chancers out there in all fields, professions and sexes.
By: Bmused55 - 29th June 2004 at 10:26
I supose.
There are folk out there who take the system for a ride, you have to admit!
By: Ren Frew - 29th June 2004 at 10:25
Its a hard world and those are the facts.
In a way.. the statement was fair. Could have been worded better though.
Yes but the unfairness in the statement is the assumption that every female wants to have babies. Not wishing to employ someone because of what might happen is discrimination in my view.
By: Silver Snapper - 29th June 2004 at 10:22
Political Correctness is crippling us!
Its reached the stage where one cannot voice an opinion in plain language or even humour. Is it accurate to say that
lady pilots flying upside-down will most definately have a crack-up? 😀
My 300th post, will it be my last? 😮
By: Bmused55 - 29th June 2004 at 10:10
A somewhat mysogynistic and chauvinistic statement, spoken like stereotypical male Aussies. :rolleyes:
Voice of female airline pilot:
“Excuse me passengers, this flight will delayed in a holding pattern while I bugger off and have a few babies, sorry about that, the boss was right all along”
😀
Actually, that statement from Ansett is not too far wrong.
A pilot must go through continual checks to keep up the proficiency. If your a pregnant female pilot at some point you must stop working as the “bump” will simply get in the way. This means you go on maternity leave. Meaning for at least 6 months you loose out of proficiency checks. Its going to cost the airline a lot of money to train you back up to standard after however many months you take to care for your new child. And we all know, todays airlines are run by bean counters… maybe they cannot justify this extra cash spent of female pilots.
Its a hard world and those are the facts.
In a way.. the statement was fair. Could have been worded better though.
I’m not saying thats a good reason not to employ female pilots.. but in todays cost concious aviation industry… it surely contirbutes to many a decision made.
By: Ren Frew - 29th June 2004 at 09:56
Ansett claimed a woman was biologically unsuitable to be a pilot because she might go off to have babies, and because of safety issues associated with menstruation.
A somewhat mysogynistic and chauvinistic statement, spoken like stereotypical male Aussies. :rolleyes:
Voice of female airline pilot:
“Excuse me passengers, this flight will delayed in a holding pattern while I bugger off and have a few babies, sorry about that, the boss was right all along”
😀
By: Bmused55 - 29th June 2004 at 09:15
The number may alos partly be down to a lot of women taking the system for a ride.
Over here in the UK, companies are scared to say no to women.
Even though they fairly lost the race for a position some women will shout “sexual discrimination” and get lots of money.
Its the same for Race too. A lot of immigrant get their own way here because as soon as they are refused anything they shout “Race Descrimination”. Regardless of whether or not they were entitled to what they were refused.
Political Correctness is crippling us!
Sign In
June 29, 2004 at 9:05 am