Case of alleged inequality between male and female cabin crew of Indian Airlines and Air-India

Air-India's hostesses pose prettily before a plane: Little to smile aboutAfter the right to property, the right to equality and equal protection takes a considerable share of judicial time and effort in Indian courts. Much as people may think that equality is essentially an incontrovertible concept, the legal reality seems quite the contrary. That much, at least, is clear as the Supreme Court faces up to a case of alleged inequality between male and female cabin crew of Indian Airlines and Air-India.The cases of Air-India vs. Nargesh Mirza and Kamal Chopra vs. Indian Airlines Corporation, along with similar petitions filed by a host of other employees, are surprising because the Indian Constitution goes further than, for example, the American one in specifically prohibiting sex as a relevant criterion for different treatment. If at all it is valid - under Article 15(3) - it is for the preferential treatment for women.The case is also remarkable because such a crucial matter has come up to the Supreme Court only after more than three decades after the Constitution was adopted. What is even more amazing is the airlines' case that rules left unchallenged for so long have in effect become immune to a challenge now. The appeals and petitions are being heard as a group though independent lawyers will argue the cases.Complaint: In essence, the grievance of the air-hostesses is that they are retired at the age of 35 as against their male counterparts who are retained in service till the usual' retiring age of 58. Moreover, male employees can get married whenever they want but women have to submit to a four-year moratorium, breach of which causes summary termination of their services. The four-year period is the result of a recent amendment to the rules of service - earlier, marriage was simply not permitted.If decisions in America and Europe are anything to go by, the state-owned airlines have quite a hopeless case. In England, where no specific constitutional protection is granted, the courts on their own to begin with, and now with help from Parliament through the Sex Discrimination Act, have provided women great assistance in fighting institutionalised male chauvinism.The airlines have made a vigorous defence in their replies filed in the court of Justices Murtaza Fazl Ali, Varadarajan and Amarendra Nath Sen and can certainly be expected to brief their lawyers to argue till they are blue in the face. For the airlines, an adverse decision may well mean substantial administrative reorganisation and a considerable burden on their already parlous finances.Struck Down: Of late, however, such considerations have not weighed very heavily with the court - the recent decision on the Life Insurance Corporation bonus provides an excellent example. And as one of the air-hostesses has tersely stated: "Even as iron fetters are being removed from hardened criminals, the law cannot allow economic fetters on women."It is not as though Indian jurisprudence is blind to the case being made out by the petitioners. Sexual discrimination has been struck down time and again, most recently in C.B. Muthamma vs. Union of India where the Supreme Court last year intervened to prevent discrimination in the Indian Foreign Service. Similarly, a claim that women could not be district judges was rejected in Radha Charon vs. Slate of Orissa.The airlines have relied almost wholly on a decision of the Madras High Court in Teressa Parakka vs. Indian Airlines Corporation, where the above cases were distinguished on the grounds that they did not involve special considerations, such as safety. In other words, the airlines claim that since the main purpose of the cabin crew is to provide safety for passengers, and "'pregnant" as well as "ageing" women cannot be relied upon to do so, they have to be excluded.Difficult Case: Though the case is yet to be decided, what does seem rather unsavoury and primitive is the statement that women are employed primarily for "business considerations" and otherwise from a flight operations point of view, they remain "handicaps". Equally questionable are the grounds that married women are "undependable" and "their attitude towards the job and effectiveness" becomes undesirable. The airlines have even resorted to "historical and cultural factors" to defend their position.Air-India has a particularly difficult nut to crack in explaining the different contracts they offer to European girls employed outside India. Besides, they have the impossible task of explaining why their apprehensions about the capabilities of pregnancy-prone employees do not apply to female pilots. A nauseous employee would by any other name be just as nauseous.Indian women have been known to successfully raise families and very efficiently command police contingents, a task no less demanding or arduous than flight emergencies. It seems unlikely that the Supreme Court will be impressed by pseudo-cultural arguments. It has had to guide many Indians towards the modern constitutional morality. It may well take this opportunity to teach the Maharaja some modernity.Published By: AtMigration Published On: Feb 25, 2014 08:15 IST--- ENDS ---

Download App

Get 37% off on an annual Print +Digital subscription of India Today Magazine

Case of alleged inequality between male and female cabin crew of Indian Airlines and Air-India

After the right to property, the right to equality and equal protection takes a considerable share of judicial time and effort in Indian courts. Much as people may think that equality is essentially an incontrovertible concept, the legal reality seems quite the contrary.

PUBLICATIONS

TELEVISION

EVENTS

RADIO

GAMING

USEFUL LINKS

PRINTING

WELFARE

DISTRIBUTION

SYNDICATIONS

WEBSITES

EDUCATION