THE International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF), a grouping of trade unions representing 4.5m transport employees around the world, was never going to be Qatar’s biggest fan. Unions are banned in the ultra-rich Gulf state, where expatriates account for 94% of the total work force. Little wonder, then, that one disgruntled cabin-crew member at Qatar Airways chose to share her employment contract with the ITF. The federation duly pounced on the document’s more contentious clauses, and alleged “flagrant abuses” of workers’ rights. It cited one passage that requires employees to “obtain prior permission” from Qatar Airways if they wish to get married. Another clause says the employee can be fired if she becomes pregnant (which, by the way, she is contractually obliged to disclose “from the date of her knowledge of its occurrence”). Now, the trials of a flight attendant's life are well known. Most cabin crew understand that the perks associated with their lifestyle–of which there are many–will be counter-balanced by certain impositions. Maintaining relationships while living and working abroad is not easy, for example. But the conditions laid down by Qatar Airways go beyond more familiar rules.

A perusal of online forums used by cabin crew suggests that Qatar has a reputation for severity among industry professionals. Allegations of harsh treatment and overbearing scrutiny are commonplace. Many complaints centre on the accommodation provided to cabin crew, where rigid curfews and restrictions on visitors create a less-than-homely atmosphere. Swipe-in door keys and CCTV on the premises have fuelled speculation–warranted or otherwise–that management are interested in more than just their employees’ safety. Akbar Al Baker, the airline’s chief executive, was asked about his workplace environment in January, after 35 pilots resigned en masse. “I don’t need the services of spies,” he told Al Watan, an Arabic newspaper. “We are not running an intelligence agency. We are an airline company. The reason why I know everything happening in the company is that I’m deeply involved in the smooth running of the company. I’m simply everywhere, talking to everyone, listening to them.”

Qatar Airways has opted not to respond publicly to this latest furore and does not appear to be challenging the authenticity of the contract obtained by the ITF. However, a representative of the airline said the allegations had been taken out of context. She noted that the residence permits which expatriates require under Qatari law must be updated with changes to marital status, so the airline is legally bound to collect this information. On the matter of maternity, she pointed out that Qatar’s Civil Aviation Authority has medical restrictions on flying while pregnant. Some benefits and allowances may also be extended to newlywed employees or expectant mothers. Besides, she added, other airlines in the Middle East impose similar conditions (though Gulliver would contend that Emirates has a more lenient policy). Crucially, she said no female employee of Qatar Airways has ever been fired solely for becoming pregnant. That is an encouraging statement, but why, then, is such a clause included if it will never be used?

Gulliver can't help sympathising with the disgruntled worker in this instance. Cabin crew elsewhere in the world are free to get married, and will typically be transferred to ground duties while pregnant. Applicants for Qatar Airways' vacancies may be surprised to learn that Mr Baker will ultimately have a greater say over their family planning than any future spouse.