Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1841214
A4 Pacific wrote:<snip>

On the flip side. During Maggie Thatcher’s time, and Ayling’s stewardship, BA tried to acknowledge it’s worldwide reach and customer base with their ‘ethnic tailfins’. But very many people felt that detracted from one of it’s USPs. It’s consummate ‘Britishness’. Sometimes you just can’t win!

Of course it was Maggie Thatcher who famously saw a model of a BA airliner with one of those ethnic fins and covered it up with a hankerchief! It wasn't long after that that they started going for the standard red/blue flash up the fin on all aircraft when they had a repaint, so I think they realised their mistake.
#1841222
rikur_ wrote:.. in national security roles it is common place that all conversations in the workplace must be in English, because of the security risks of collusion between colleagues in another language...


I have worked in high national security governmental establishments in US UK and Canada, in which in the cafeterias there were on certain days of the week areas set up so that professionally employed linguists could meet up and converse entirely in their other languages to keep up their skills. Unsurprisingly in the Cold War era the largest group was of Russian linguists :wink:

Obviously, in the Canadian one both English and French flowed freely (sometimes changing mid-sentence!); my office was majority francophone, so that was the usual working language. In Ottawa I helped organise and host a multinational conference of obscure military specialists, for which the working language was announced in advance to be English. Most delegates giving talks followed the Canadian example in starting with formal greetings and thanks in French before switching to English (the US ones didn't try!); for her talk, the NZ Major started in Maori :thumright:

Oh, and in one UK one, there was a regular corner of the cafeteria for the weekly meet up of the in-house Welsh society. And I worked in a UK office where two of the seconded military were British Officers from Gurkha units, who used to chat in Ghurkali, again to keep up their skills in anticipation of their return to their parent units :thumright:

But I've never been deployed to a submarine (although colleagues were, to their surprise and that of their hosts, in 1982) :?
User avatar
By leiafee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841229
skydriller wrote:Read the quote I am responding to clearly talking about Locals (ie welsh natives) having a different price to those from outside (ie English visitors/immigrants).


This one?

I was led to believe that in restaurants on the Llŷn you'd get a discount for ordering in Welsh


Even assuming rickur was “led” corrctly, it seems clear that’s a skill based decision not an origins based one.

And as for

sort of a locals discount scheme


If that’s illegal then, Cardiff Castle, Swansea Council-run leisure centre and Transport for Wales all need dobbing in because every one of them have an assortment of “locals discount scheme of sort sort for access to services.

Not sure quite why 50p off an icecream if you show the courtesy of a “diolch” when ordering it hurts anyone so deeply they feel the need to compare it to a brutal legacy of colonialism and slavery against people of colour.
User avatar
By leiafee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841230
Bill McCarthy wrote:@leiafee - We couldn’t help but eavesdrop when in such close proximity with about 20 men in a space 12ft X 10ft - absolutely nothing to do with morals.


Well since you couldn’t understand them you clearly WERE capable of not listening.

More that they were guilty of bad manners. Indeed, before that they were warned about communicating between compartments over the back aft Tanoy due to the fact that EVERYONE needs to know what is going on.


Interesting how the story suddenly changes from manners to security when challenged.

I don’t in fact believe you. I think that you were the rude one just being nosey and suspicious.
User avatar
By leiafee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841231
a rule, policy or procedure which, although applied to all equally, particularly (dis)advantages a specific racial group .... when the rule, policy or procedure is applied to them and an ‘objective justification’ cannot be shown for the treatment.


Which “special racial group” do you imagine is targeted by a marketing ploy designed to encourage locals as well as tourists to use the local businesses?

I mean, I’m not sure there’s a protected category labelled “eveyone except people of Llŷn and tourists wholve learned enough Welsh to order dinner”
By Fellsteruk
#1841235
Welsh places in english are hard enough, the atis at hawarden today said “ Gliding is active at Lleweni Parc”

I turned to my instructor “the gliding site where is active?”

I was still like “show me on the map?”
#1841238
@leiafee - look, it wasn’t me who threw them out of the mess - it was a majority decision. I couldn’t care less if they spoke bliddy Swahili !
When they were talking in their tongue it was VERY important to know what they were saying - they could have been making unauthorised decisions on the plant thus putting everyone’s lives in danger. Now, if you are miffed at that - too bad.
User avatar
By rikur_
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841242
leiafee wrote:Which “special racial group” do you imagine is targeted by a marketing ploy designed to encourage locals as well as tourists to use the local businesses?

It's not 'which group I imagine' - just highlighting that there is plenty of case law that discrimination based on language can be cause you to fall foul of discrimination legislation.

You asserted that discriminating based on language is not illegal, I was simply highlighting that the law is not that clear cut. You can still fall foul of unintentional and indirect discrimination.

I never said there was anything illegal about local discounts scheme - I've been involved in implementing several in tourist areas.

Your ability to misunderstand points and take offence from them is quite remarkable. Your tone on here and assertions that everyone is racist sexist misogynist by twisting and misinterpreting what is written is actually rather offensive.
#1841250
kanga wrote:Some English place names as spoken on the air can also be tricky. ISTR having to ask an East Midlands ATCO to say again Tatenhill.


Both Tatenhill ('Taytenhill' not 'Tattenhill') and Sleap ('Slayp' not 'Sleep') suffer from this problem.

Sleap was my first solo land away back in 2001.
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841276
@leiafee Im sorry my minor (possibly poorly explained) point seems lost on you. You seem to be offended by this whole thread so I will bow out.

Regards, SD..
#1841304
Bill McCarthy wrote:@leiafee - look, it wasn’t me who threw them out of the mess - it was a majority decision. I couldn’t care less if they spoke bliddy Swahili !
When they were talking in their tongue it was VERY important to know what they were saying - they could have been making unauthorised decisions on the plant thus putting everyone’s lives in danger. Now, if you are miffed at that - too bad.


Well I can’t really comment on that. However I certainly can comment on this:

In my time on Anglesey it was widely known, and I experienced it myself. That one could walk into a pub in which all were chatting happily in English. However as soon as one opened one’s mouth to place an order at the bar, revealing one’s English accent. All other conversations in that bar were subsequently conducted in a language I could not understand.

Me, I thought the locals were just being ‘friendly’. I simply presumed I was the rude one, and obviously considered myself little more than “nosey and suspicious.”

I merely consider it the burden of being the despicable and detested English.

AKA: “What have the Romans ever done for us?”
#1841307
rikur

Your ability to misunderstand points and take offence from them is quite remarkable. Your tone on here and assertions that everyone is racist sexist misogynist by twisting and misinterpreting what is written is actually rather offensive.


The point you appear to be missing is that only certain groups have the privilege of asserting in any meaningful way, they are ‘offended’. The ‘offence’ of causing offence, is limited, not universal. In other words, in the current climate, not everyone can be accused of it! :roll:

Or to put it another way, ‘some’ can say whatever they wish, completely immune from the worry of causing ‘offence’ to groups not ‘worthy’ of such a defence.

Other than that you make a good point.
User avatar
By leiafee
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1841484
Bill McCarthy wrote:When they were talking in their tongue it was VERY important to know what they were saying - they could have been making unauthorised decisions on the plant thus putting everyone’s lives in danger.


In the mess? Was it routine to always listening to everyone off hours conversations in case of that?