Now Iberia allows new parents to ‘pause’ their status …. will BA follow?

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• harry says:

  10 May10 May 08:14

  I think it’s great that we treat the fairer sex a bit special! I don’t envy them the burden of the 9 month term or (in most cases) the greater responsibility of caring for the new-born child in its first few months. And whilst there will always be plenty of exceptions where Dad takes more time off work than Mum, I’m sure that in most cases it’s Mum who takes the bulk of any parental leave.

  You can make logical cases for all sorts of work absence that’s ‘unavoidable’ and ‘not my fault/ my choice’. We could also argue pleasantly until nightfall about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

  By limiting the status concession to mums on maternity leave, there is a simple, understandable rule that is fair to mums plus easy to evidence and allow.

  • Julian says:

    10 May10 May 09:16

    And by doing this, punish the families where the father is the primary caregiver to the children, or where responsibility is shared equally, as is more common in today’s society.

    This rule is a relic of a previous sexist generation.

    • Brian says:

      10 May10 May 14:48

      It’s not sexist if women care more for the child than the man – it’s sensible. The mother is more important than the father in early childhood – that’s just logical.

• Nick says:

  10 May10 May 08:31

  Airlines don’t let pregnant women fly, for good reason. The same does not apply to soon-to-be fathers. I really don’t see the problem with the policy.

  • Boris says:

    10 May10 May 09:43

    Actually, Nick, they do allow pregnant women to fly.

    Iberia, for example, do not impose restrictions for the *vast* majority of pregnant women.

    Up to week 28 there are no restrictions.
    Week 28-36 (32 with complications) is take advice from your Doctor, and there is only a blanket restriction imposed by the airline after 36 weeks.

    I am sure you know that a typical pregnancy is 40 weeks.

    • David P says:

      10 May10 May 10:17

      BA is similar; a blanket ban after 36 weeks on pregnant women flying (32 weeks if carrying more than one child) but a doctor’s note is required after 28 weeks. Although my wife wasn’t asked for her doctor’s note when she flew at about 30 weeks.

• Chris says:

  10 May10 May 08:52

  On a somewhat related point, a few years ago I became quite ill and was not fit to fly. As a longtime BA Gold Card holder, I asked BA if I could pause my Gold membership until such time as I had been passed fit to fly again. They refused!

• Leo says:

  10 May10 May 08:57

  Yawn. Didn’t we do all of this a few weeks ago?

  • Billy Buzzjet says:

    10 May10 May 10:57

    Yes . Sounds familiar. zzzzzzzzz

• Daniel says:

  10 May10 May 09:32

  I find myself surprised by some of the comments this morning.

  Even if new mothers are the only beneficiaries of such a policy are any of the rest of us any worse off than before! ??
  Feels a like we are in danger of being a bit too begrudging

  • Julian says:

    10 May10 May 09:47

    It’s not anger at this policy being introduced, we just want a bit of equality. Policies like this is what keeps sexism going in society, it’s why women are still acting as primary caregivers. (Not specifically this, but it’s a small piece in a big jigsaw). I also think nobody can disagree with the unfairness of allowing only pregnant women and not those adopting.

  • Alexey says:

    10 May10 May 10:53

    Just image from ‘scream’ feminists would make if there would be something similar in other area “for men only” …

    • Alexey says:

      10 May10 May 10:53

      *imagine

• Richard says:

  10 May10 May 10:18

  I think the CX “status holiday” is much better. Your status is put on hold (eg for maternity leave, long term sickness) which means your status is taken away but you get it back once the leave is over. it’s open to anybody and you don’t have to prove anything. seems fair for everyone.

  As for the “are any of the rest of us any worse off than before! ??”, the same thing could be said when BAEC required 1500 points for gold status for those living in the UK and 800 points for those living in Mainland Europe. Were UK cardholders “any worse off” when that policy was in force? did they think it was ok?

• David says:

  10 May10 May 11:53

  This needs to either be:
  – open to ALL, for ANY reason,or
  – should NOT be offered.

  • Rob says:

    10 May10 May 11:56

    I think you’d have more luck campaigning for, for example, paternity leave to be extended for single people to domestic pets so that you could 9 months of paid leave if you bought a cat and it had kittens.

    • David says:

      10 May10 May 12:06

      Would this be a virtual clubcard pet?

      Actually, I think the logic is strongest for:
      Open to all, for any reason. Or not offered.
      And it should be a suspension while paused, as per my understanding of the cathay policy.

  • Boris says:

    10 May10 May 14:08

    That would introduce the question of proof, which is a very real concern.

    I suspect that one of the reasons Iberia went for the easy route they have was because legal docs are available.

    That’s no excuse for their cockup, mind.

• DV says:

  10 May10 May 12:00

  People “choose” to have children in the same sense that they choose whether to breathe or not. It is what we are made for, not a lifestyle choice. The burden of having children falls disproportionately on women, and in order not to disadvantage them in the workplace we have introduced protections for them when they are caring for babies and small children. You have to be remarkably small-minded and embittered to begrudge something as trivial as an extension of an airline gold card to a woman bringing up a small baby.

  • David says:

    10 May10 May 12:09

    In this day and age, no.
    People choose whether and when they have children.

    Justify why someone who is suffering an injury or illness should not be given the same benefit? Or someone who is caring for someone who has suffered an injury etc?

    Then justify it for someone who chooses to volunteer to care for others for a year. In this day and age, just as much as choice as whether or when to have children.

  • SM says:

    10 May10 May 12:29

    The burgen of shaving everyday in the morning falls disproportionately on men , people “choose” to have shaved face in the same sense that they choose whether to breathe or not. It takes at least 3 minutes of extra time , so I demand to extend boarding time for the plane by extra 3 minutes for men only …

  • Julian says:

    10 May10 May 12:30

    By introducing concessions for female parents only, that encourages the woman to be the primary caregiver over the man, making the problem worse. Why should a man be the primary caregiver if there are more advantages for the woman to quit her job?

    • Brendan says:

      10 May10 May 19:22

      It is far more beneficial for a woman to be a primary caregiver to a new born baby. That’s so blatantly obvious I can’t believe I actually have to state it.

      • Julian says:

        10 May10 May 19:32

        In what way can both parents not care for the baby equally? Please do tell me why women are more beneficial. There are some terrible mothers out there, there are some great ones, just like with fathers. The only thing I can think of is the production of milk, which is less of a problem now we have bottles and pumps etc.

        The only reason anyone says women are better is just because they want to try excuse themselves from the work of looking after a baby.

        • harry says:

          10 May10 May 19:50

          It helps to have a womb 🙂

          I know same sex couples eg Elton John & David Furnish) can make passably good parents with no woman or womb in sight – [or even any oil tubs lol]

  • Julian says:

    10 May10 May 12:34

    Also I can assure you I can live without having children, while I can’t live without breathing, not the same thing. I can choose if I have children.

    • Andrew says:

      10 May10 May 14:39

      And when you’re older and other people’s children are paying your pension? Or taking care of you in your old age? Even if you have a huge private pension the value of that and the stock market would tank without a new younger generation to keep consuming. And any private care would be incredibly expensive without enough young people to work in such industries.

      Like it or not someone has to have children to keep the world economy and society going.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.