Some outlets that covered recent appalling remarks of Akbar al-Baker, Qatar Airways chief executive and new International Air Transport Association chairman, noted the man had plenty of form on misogynist comments. Just last year he attacked US airlines for employing “grandmothers” as air stewards, then apologised. Al-Baker apologised again for his effort this week, insisting “Qatar Airways firmly believes in gender equality in the workplace.”
In fact, Qatar Airways is the most profoundly misogynist major airline and has long subjected female staff to appalling restrictions. It was less than three years ago that the airline ended its policy of sacking female staff who became pregnant, and banning them from getting married. That followed a damning International Labour Organisation report in response to complaints by the International Trade Union Confederation and the International Transport Workers’ Federation about the airline’s treatment of women.
At the time, al-Baker accused the International Labor Organisation of running a vendetta against Qatar Airways. “I don’t give a damn about the ILO — I am there to run a successful airline,” he said. Indeed, al-Baker’s preferred response to criticism of his airline’s misogynist policies is to accuse critics of a vendetta against his airline and Qatar, and of jealousy over Qatar’s successful soccer World Cup bid in 2010. The tiny Gulf theocracy bribed key FIFA officials to win the rights to the lucrative event.
While Qatar — where trade unions are illegal — systematically violates labour laws, with near-slavery conditions for migrant workers (who work in horrifically unsafe environment), its national carrier has a series of restrictions on female staff still in place, as detailed by the ILO report.
- Female staff must still obtain approval from the airline to marry
- Female staff cannot enter or leave company premises accompanied by any male who is not a relative
- Female staff are physically confined to Qatar Airways premises for 12 hours prior to a flight, with windows and fire escapes sealed to prevent them leaving, and they are banned from staying at unapproved accommodation.
- Staff are subject to strict surveillance including of social media activity, including when off-duty.
In addition to the ban on unions, there are no female labour inspectors in the country and no effective system within the airline for reporting sexual harassment or abuse. Other Gulf airlines such as Emirates and Etihad had similarly draconian policies in relation to pregnant staff.
According to the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index, Qatar is a top ten country for “labour market flexibility”. Australia is ranked 80th.
You’re being way too kind Bernard. Qatar is a crappy, little backwater country that still treats women like they’re living in the middle ages. A primitive, sharia law muslim country where men can do virtually whatever they want and women are treated like chattels. Women still go to jail for getting pregnant out of wedlock. Gay people likewise still end up in jail. It’ll be interesting to see how they handle women and gays during the world cup in 2022.
I recently flew with Qatar Airlines to and from Europe, and I didn’t see anything suggesting that misogyny is any more rife than in any other religiously dominated society.
Perhaps it’s because because it’s hidden to hide it from a socially aware customer base?
Australia had similar misogynistic policies decades ago when religion was more important in Australian society.
Fortunately, those days are gone. Mostly.
And on top of all that hate heaped on women…
https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/trump-calls-qatar-a-funder-of-terrorism-then-sells-them-12bn-in-fighter-jets,10407
The U.S. has sold Qatar $12 billion worth of fighter jets days after Trump accused it of being a “high-level” sponsor of terror.
Qatar isn’t a theocracy, it’s a monarchy where the ruling family uses an agreement with religious authorities to facilitate its rule. The difference between Qatar and Israel in that respect is that it’s a state that happens to have a particular religion, as distinct from a state that exists solely because of a particular religion. Not that there aren’t other differences, I refer solely to their respective reasons for existing.
This is simply another example of the blind ear & deaf eye the west has for the most appalling kulturs if there’s a quid, oil or gas in it.
Religion per se is incompatible with democracy and some of the brands are even more egregiously appalling than others.