Overweight air hostesses can be grounded: HC

NEW DELHI: This is the final call for all overweight air hostesses with the Indian Airlines -- cut the flab or else be ready to be grounded.
 
Hopes of a legal reprieve for air hostesses, crossing the weight limit, crashed today with the Delhi High Court upholding the airlines' policy to ground such crew.
 
Five air hostesses, who were grounded for putting on excessive weight moved the court against the airlines alleging that the action was arbitrary and illegal.
 
Dismissing their petition, a bench headed by Justice A K Sikri held "there is no unreasonableness or arbitrariness" in the airlines' decision.
 
The rules prescribe different weight limits according to their height and age. For an 18-year-old air hostess with a height of 152 cm, the maximum weight permissible is 50 kg while air hostesses in the age group of 26 to 30 and a height of 152 cm, the weight limit is 56 kg.
 
"Grace and concessions are not matters of legal right. They are matter of policy and we do not find any illegality" in the decision, the court said.
 
The court had on May 5 reserved it's judgment on a bunch of petitions of Indian Airlines' air hostesses challenging their grounding for being overweight.
 
The air hostesses had also opposed the Airlines' circular of withdrawing permissible overweight limit of 3 kg over and above the upper limit as laid down for the cabin crew.
 
Challenging the grounding of air hostesses due to their excess weight, advocate Arvind Sharma appearing for the petitioners contended that the action was "arbitrary" and "illegal".
 
"There is no connection between weight and performance of duty when one is medically fit. Weight is not a criterion of fitness," Sharma argued.
 
The petitioners had challenged the judgment of single bench of the High Court which upheld the Airlines' policy of grounding overweight air hostesses.
 
Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramanium appearing for the Airlines' had contended that the action taken against them was justified.
 
"It was clearly mentioned in their contract that their job could be terminated in case they put on weight above the permissible limit and they have just been grounded on a condition that they would be allowed to fly after losing weight," Subramanium said.
    
The High Court in its 29-page judgment emphasised that the job of air hostess being "strenuous" in nature one needed to be physically fit.
   
"Air crew has to be athletic to deal with the emergency and for that he or she has to be in good shape. That is the reason that not only maximum limit but minimum weight limits are also prescribed," the Court said adding that neither anorexic nor abysmally fat is fit for the job.
    
"The nature of work of air hostesses is strenuous in nature and the weight check is relevant in relation to their physical fitness," the Bench said.
    
The Bench pointed out that in the highly competitive industry of civil aviation, the company has to focus on the personality of its employees.
    
"One cannot shy away from the reality that by the very nature of their jobs their overall physical personality is one of the primary consideration," the Court said adding, "it is universally accepted that overweight people have tendency to suffer from many diseases."
    
"Statistics reveal that overweight persons face constant challenges to their emotions which include remarks from strangers, discrimination at work, lower self-esteem and poor body image," the Court said.
    
The bench turned down the plea of air hostess who pleaded that the service conditions of the airline did not mention about them being grounded for putting on excessive weight.
    
"These air hostesses knew very well that their services could even be terminated if they fail to maintain weight within the prescribed limits," the Court said while pointing out their service contract which says that their job could be terminated in case of over-weight.
    
"Insistence on the part of the airlines that the cabin crew should keep their weights within the limit is nothing but enforcing the contractual obligation. It cannot be said that such a move on the part of the airlines is contrary to law," the Court said.