For 23 years, the country's national carrier shortchanged its stewardesses. It had designed a contract that not only 'enslaved' the female cabin crew to their job, it also demoralised those who embraced motherhood more than twice, and within seven years in service.

Indeed, working as a stewardess for MAS was akin to doing the catwalk. Should the 'model' stewardess lose that physical appeal the carrier found she once had, there was no use for such an employee. And God forbid, if the stewardess, post maternity was unable to fit into her uniform, that was the end of her flying career, literally.

Sadly, for 23 years, the female cabin crew suffered in silence, a big number of them not wanting to compromise their high flying job with MAS while another group perhaps were too naive or indifferent to note the gender discrimination that was taking place in their midst.

That was until Beatrice Fernandez ( right ) came into the picture. In 1991, she sued MAS for sacking her because she refused to be penalised for respecting her reproductive rights. Her case however hit a dead end last month when Fernandez failed to obtain leave from the Federal Court to hear her case after the Appellate Court dismissed her appeal against a High Court ruling in 2003.

For her courage to expose the gender discriminatory practices employed by MAS, Fernandez is now left saddled with about RM130,000 in costs, following the dismissal of her suit.

However, the Tabung Bantuan Beatrice set up by the Malaysian Trade Union Congress is a shot in the arm for this mother of three, who served MAS for 11 years, only to end up getting the boot. The fund will also help raise funds to help female employees who are discriminated against by their employers.

Circulars have also been sent out by MTUC to its affiliates to support the rights of female workers and to ensure that companies do not practise policies which disparage Article 8 of the Federal Constitution which offers equality for all citizens.

Will the above efforts prick MAS' conscience? One wonders but if the airline chairman Munir Majid's statement in New Straits Times (March 25, 2005) is recalled, then sad to say MAS has yet to place premium on its greatest assest - its employees. Munir had said that MAS' goal has always been "keeping customers happy" and the national carrier would make the necessary improvements on its aircraft in the future to ensure passenger safety and comfort.

The erudite Munir, a former NST group editor, has clearly shown that what matters most to MAS is the moolah, not under what conditions its employees are made to work. Would the situation have been different if it was a female sitting in Munir's post and calling the shots? Who knows...

Ignorant ministers

The MAS issue of gender discrimination according to the Human Resources Minister Dr Fong Chan Onn is a non-issue. Just how the long-serving cabinet minister came to that conclusion is baffling. Fong last month was quoted by The Malay Mail as clarifying that the management of MAS had never practised gender biasness.

Fong went on to say that it was unfair to accuse MAS of gender discrimination policies because prior agreement had been reached in the terms and conditions of service between the airline's management and its workers union (Maseu) in their collective agreement (CA). He said MAS had explained that it was not the company's policy to discriminate against women as both parties, the management and union had reached a mutual agreement concerning the CA.

Now, we have in our midst our very own 'labour' minister who cannot or for reasons best known to him refuses to acknowledge the fact that MAS is notorious for its gender discrimination policies.

If Fong is genuinely ignorant about what constitutes gender discrimination, then it is ardently hoped that women's groups would consider it their topmost priority to educate an ill-informed politician and senior minister who has no inkling what gender discrimination truly is.

A quick retake for Fong's benefit - MAS has pegged the retirement age for its female cabin crew at 40 and at 45 for those who are promoted to supervisory level. While the retirement age for its male cabin crew is 50. Is this not gender discrimination in Fong's understanding?

The female cabin crew is also not permitted to get married in the first seven years of service and are prohibited from having more than two children. Then there is the issue of full maternity benefits which MAS has callously not adhered to.

In a recent press statement, Maseu said some of MAS 'gender bias policies against its female flight attendants have been revised. The retirement benefit for cabin crew members has been raised by RM200, from the previous RM800. The union also announced that should a cabin crew member choose to work after retirement they will be employed as ground staff. While the number of children a female flight attendant can now have is three.

The union was quoted by The Malay Mail recently as saying that the changes were being implemented gradually and the revision of the CA was still on-going. The review apparently will take cognisance of the Putrajaya Declaration and Programme of Action on the Advancement of Women in member countries of Non-Aligned Movement (NAM).

Maseu's statement requires more than just a pinch of salt. Does MAS and the union not know that the CA contravenes Article 11 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (Cedaw) which guarantees fundamentals rights of all human beings? Is Maseu ignorant of the fact that Section 37 (C) of the Employment Act 1955 assures a woman the right to full pay and benefits for up to five surviving children?

How then does Maseu have the audacity to pronounce that its revision of the terms and employment of conditions have led to positive changes to the position of its stewardessess? What are these positive changes? That MAS still rules over the reproductive rights of its female flight attendants, be it when she can start a family and the number of children she can have?

Has it not troubled MAS even the slightest to know that other airline companies are much more respectful of their cabin crew's basic human rights? Even new-kid-on-the-block Air Asia has shown more decency than the national carrier by imposing a retirement age of 55 for its cabin crew.

Sincerity in doubt

Recently when Prime Minister Abdulllah Ahmad Badawi at the opening of the NAM meeting announced his commitments towards protecting the welfare of Malaysian women, was he really sincere about it or is he as the seasoned politician taking the people for a ride through mere rhetoric?

Abdullah said there was an urgent need to identify laws that discriminate against women and if need be, amended, to put an end to gender discrimination and inequality.

The prime minister takes pride in the fact that the amendment to Article 8 (2) of the Federal Constitution reflects Malaysia's commitment to end gender discrimination. If Abdullah or for that matter the Women, Family and Community Development Minister Shahrizat Jalil are beaming proud for having put in place a "mother of all laws" as they fondly refer to Article 8 (2), let they be reminded that any Act which fails to serve its true purpose is akin to having none.

Can Abdullah or Shahrizat tell us why Article 8 (2) of the Federal Constitution has not been used to put an end to MAS' gender bias policy? Why the reluctance to get MAS to toe the line and adhere to Article 8 (2) of the Federal Constitution? Has an exception been made in MAS' case and that too in the case of "mother of all laws"?

Abudullah has promised to reflect transparency in his administration of the country. The rakyat want him to practise what he preaches and not merely ad lib. Must he be reminded of one of the principles of Islam Hadhari, which is to protect the rights of minority groups and women?

If MAS continues with its gender discrimination policies, it would only confirm the people's worst fear, that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And who best reflects this than Abdullah and his team of public servants.

JJ RAY started her career with a mainstream publication. A non-conformist, she soon saw the barriers that went up whenever, through her writing, she tried to make the world a home for one and all.