Indian airline fires 9 overweight crew members

[derg]

Indian airline fires 9 overweight crew members
2 hours ago

NEW DELHI (AP) — Nine flight attendants who couldn't meet the weight standards of India's national airlines have been fired, an official said Tuesday.

The crew were significantly overweight and had been given time to lose weight but had not, said Air India spokesman Jitender Bhargava. He declined to give details on their weight.

A lawyer for the women blasted the firing. "The action is illegal and against the natural justice. I will soon file an application in the Supreme Court against the order," Arvind Sharma told the Press Trust of India news agency.

Air India has spent years fighting for the right to fire cabin staff it considers physically unfit. In 2006, it warned its nearly 1,600 cabin crew workers to shape up in two months or risk being assigned to ground duties_ jobs that often pay less than those in the cabin. When the airline reassigned employees it deemed overweight, some of them took it to court.

Last year an Indian court ruled in favor of the airline, paving the way for the firings earlier this week.

The airline said that fitness and efficiency were the reasons for its weight standards, which it said were based on "scientific" combinations of height, age and gender. It did not give further details about how such standards were determined.

While all the cabin crew fired this week were women, Bhargava said there was "no gender bias. The rules are the same for both men and women."

India has laws aimed to protect against discrimination based on factors including caste, gender and religion, but no specific ones about weight.

Air India has tried in the past few years to change a public perception of its cabin staff as tired, unfriendly and inefficient.

India's airline industry has grown dramatically in recent years as rising incomes and loosened regulations put air travel within the reach of millions of new customers — and increasing pressure on Air India to remain competitive.

 

[Velocipede]

Just try that in America!

 

[ILSstud]

I am not saying this is right or wrong, but Air India among other Indian carriers have a long standing weight restriction on their flight crews (namely flight attendants) because they feel that they represent the image of the airline. The crews knew this....nothing surprising here. They are pretty in their saris that is for sure...

 

[FM_Weasel]

Are we talking fat as in "too fat to move through the aisle easily" kinda fat? If so, I think that's a pretty fair decision to make.

 

[ILSstud]

I realize we cannot fire people in this country simply for being "overweight" but I have been on my fair share of flights in the US where I have seen a** cracks, pot bellies hanging over shirts, and a really sloppy appearance. If I were a CEO I would demand better appearance from front line staff of my airline.

 

[MQAAord]

Are we talking fat as in "too fat to move through the aisle easily" kinda fat? If so, I think that's a pretty fair decision to make.

I will agree to that. I think "weight" restrictions should be based on job duties. For example, I think a F/A (male or female) should be able to walk down the aisle forward-facing, and they should be able to fit through and be able to exit expeditiously through ALL exits on all aircraft in the airline's fleet. Also, they should be able to physically manipulate all objects involved in the course of their work, ie doors/exits, carts, oven racks, inserts, etc.

I do not think these standards are discriminatory or out of line, as they are directly related to specific job duties & functions.

*my opinion only

 

[WalterSobchak]

I will agree to that. I think "weight" restrictions should be based on job duties. For example, I think a F/A (male or female) should be able to walk down the aisle forward-facing, and they should be able to fit through and be able to exit expeditiously through ALL exits on all aircraft in the airline's fleet. Also, they should be able to physically manipulate all objects involved in the course of their work, ie doors/exits, carts, oven racks, inserts, etc.

I do not think these standards are discriminatory or out of line, as they are directly related to specific job duties & functions.

*my opinion only

Agreed. They need to be able to safely do the job in case of an emergency.Which demands some standard for physical fitness.

While non reving I helped a FA lift a bag that weighed no more than 20 lbs. She was older I wondered how she would throw a door in an emergency?

 

[Yank&BankmyRJ145]

I will agree to that. I think "weight" restrictions should be based on job duties. For example, I think a F/A (male or female) should be able to walk down the aisle forward-facing, and they should be able to fit through and be able to exit expeditiously through ALL exits on all aircraft in the airline's fleet. Also, they should be able to physically manipulate all objects involved in the course of their work, ie doors/exits, carts, oven racks, inserts, etc.

I do not think these standards are discriminatory or out of line, as they are directly related to specific job duties & functions.

*my opinion only

I would say most of our FA's are not overweight, but I have been called twice by small FA's that could not push the cart up the aisle bc of the Deck angle. I talking 6 maybe 8 nose up at the most, during a climb. They asked me to level the airplane for a minute or two. We have small carts compared to main line.

 

[400A]

I will agree to that. I think "weight" restrictions should be based on job duties. For example, I think a F/A (male or female) should be able to walk down the aisle forward-facing, and they should be able to fit through and be able to exit expeditiously through ALL exits on all aircraft in the airline's fleet. Also, they should be able to physically manipulate all objects involved in the course of their work, ie doors/exits, carts, oven racks, inserts, etc.

I do not think these standards are discriminatory or out of line, as they are directly related to specific job duties & functions.

*my opinion only

I would have a hard time fitting out any emergency exit, I would make it through, it wouldn't be "expeditously" though. I still say any man under 200 pounds is a woman though....


I like our "duality" of standards here (aviation) have a wrinkle in your uniform and you are unprofessional, be a water retaining sea cow/bull and it is a thyroid problem and no one can hold you accountable for your appearance.

Age, race, sex, religion, sexual orientation are the protected "things" you cannot be discrimanted for/against. I don't see fat in there and I'm not talking the "I'm a bit overweight" crowd, the out of breath from breathing crowd.

 

[derg]

I wonder if there's a requirement that a crewmember be able to carry up 40 lbs up a airstair without assistance.

I'm getting a little bitter about some crewmembers expecting that I'm going to carry up their 100 lbs carry-ons up the airstairs, laden with crap they looted from the hotel, up the airstairs.

I'm sure I've injested plenty of genetic material from telling an occasional FA "Hey, if I tell my wife 'You pack it, you drag it!' there's no way I'm going to schlep your bag up the stairs, dear!"

 

[dr650]

I completely agree with this. So many people try to talk around the problem of weight, its real and needs to be dealt with.

 

[VATechPilot]

Best person for the job!!

 

[tonyw]

They could impose a "maintain a professional appearance" standard to all employees at the airline and that would cover them if they wanted to can people who didn't maintain that appearance. Of course, it is subjective. Is it unprofessional if a pilot undoes his tie on the flight deck when nobody's around to see it and then puts it back on when the passengers leave? If he keeps the door shut when the passengers leave and nobody see him with his tie undone, is that a problem?

 

[twotwowoo]

I know I may have the unpopular opinion here, but personally, I don't think it's right to fire someone for something beyond their control. As for the "professional appearance" argument, what exactly is unprofessional about being overweight?

 

[hgroberts]

I know I may have the unpopular opinion here, but personally, I don't think it's right to fire someone for something beyond their control. As for the "professional appearance" argument, what exactly is unprofessional about being overweight?

Because weight is easy to control. Rarely is there a genetic condition that keeps someone from losing weight, it may make it harder, but never impossible.

One word, discipline.

 

[MQAAord]

I know I may have the unpopular opinion here, but personally, I don't think it's right to fire someone for something beyond their control. As for the "professional appearance" argument, what exactly is unprofessional about being overweight?

From my earlier post, it's not necessarily about "professional image", as I believe a professional image can be accomplished by someone of pretty much any weight.

I stated earlier my [opinion of] "weight" criteria. It was based on job function, specific to flight attendants in relation to their job duties. Fitting down the aisle forward facing, being physically able to perform job duties like opening exits and being able to fit through ALL exits (quickly!) I think is essential for the safety of not only the F/A, but all the pax that F/A is responsible for evacuating.

I don't base my criteria on numbers, I base it on performance of job functions, and I don't think that is out of line. The same "weight" restrictions I think are appropriate for F/As would not pertain to gate agents, as they do not have the same job functions.

Again, the above is just my own opinion... based on my experience.

 

[Qgar]

Agreed. They need to be able to safely do the job in case of an emergency.Which demands some standard for physical fitness.

While non reving I helped a FA lift a bag that weighed no more than 20 lbs. She was older I wondered how she would throw a door in an emergency?

Why Walter dear--are you having issues with older FAs again?
I can throw a door (and lift the air stairs) better and quicker than some of the young'uns who are young enough to be my kid.

While we're on the topic of "fat," did it occur to anybody that "too thin" may make a person too weak to perform some necessary duties like lifting and pulling? Hmmmm.

BTW Doug--I agree that no FA should expect you, or anyone else to schlep their overloaded luggage. It's nice when someone offers, though!

 

[MQAAord]

While we're on the topic of "fat," did it occur to anybody that "too thin" may make a person too weak to perform some necessary duties like lifting and pulling? Hmmmm.

Which is why my criteria [opinion] is based on performance of duties, not a number So being too waifly underweight could be as much of a problem as being overweight! The inability to open an exit is disqualifying in my book, regardless of reason for the inability! I'm certainly NOT saying that all very thin people are weaklings, but that's why I use performance of duties and not a weight number.

 

[dahhcon]

On the subject of weight, what is the average weight used for a passenger, or is it still 170 lbs?

 

[skydog]

This poses an interesting thought: Suppose airlines, as part of their pre-hire process, made candidates carry a 50 lb bag up a set of airstairs, push a fully laden service cart up an incline, and open, throw, and fit through, and emergency exit door. That might weed out a a number of candidates.