Originally Posted by
Raffles
It would be seen as discriminatory because there is a simple alternative (ie not enforcing the 'continuous' clause) which would not have been discriminatory.
It would, for example, clearly be discriminatory if a law firm told its staff that they had to work for 10 years continuously (ie with no maternity break) before they could be considered for partnership. The principle is the same.
It's not just pregnant women that are discriminated against.
BA discriminates against those who do insufficient flying by setting the TP level for Gold at 1500. By setting it so infeasibly high, they are clearly discriminating against an even larger group of people than pregnant women.
Do you agree?