Pandemic Pilot’s Discrimination Lawsuit Against Airline Thwarted After Refusing Covid Facemask: An SEO-friendly Tale

A British Airways pilot who was banned from flying for refusing to wear a Covid facemask during the pandemic has lost his lawsuit against the airline for discrimination. Peter Burch, an experienced senior first officer, argued that his refusal to wear a mask was a result of his belief in the “right to breathe freely,” claiming that it was equivalent to a religious belief deserving of legal protection.

However, an employment tribunal judge ruled against him, stating that his belief did not qualify as a philosophical belief under equality laws. The judge emphasized that a belief must impact various aspects of one’s life and not just a single action or concept. Additionally, it was noted that refusing to wear a mask could potentially infringe on the fundamental rights of others, such as the right to life.

The tribunal heard that Mr. Burch had been with British Airways since 1996 and had been furloughed during the pandemic, receiving reduced pay. When he was invited to return to work, he had to complete a training course that included a flight to Miami. However, he experienced a major stress reaction upon being informed of the airline’s mask policy and called in sick. On his next scheduled training duty, he reported to work without a mask, claiming exemption. When his request was denied, he was stood down and placed on unpaid leave.

In his letter to his manager, Mr. Burch argued that he should not be forced to wear a mask and that British Airways had a duty of care towards him. He stated that he did not want to face further humiliation or have his right to be treated with dignity and respect infringed upon. The pilot took BA to tribunal, alleging discrimination.

The judge ultimately ruled in favor of British Airways, determining that Mr. Burch’s refusal to wear a mask could potentially harm others and therefore did not qualify as a protected belief. She noted that Mr. Burch himself acknowledged that his actions could cause problems for vulnerable individuals. The judge concluded that his belief was in conflict with the fundamental human rights of others.

Reference

Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
DMCA compliant image

Leave a Comment