Airline policy on men goes to human rights tribunal

An airline policy that prevents men from being seated next to unaccompanied children could pave the way for similar discriminatory policies to run rampant, says National's Wayne Mapp.

Dr Mapp yesterday laid a claim with the Human Rights Review Tribunal, saying that Qantas and Air New Zealand's seating policy breached the Human Rights Act. He said the policy discriminated against men and implied they were dangerous.

The seating policy drew criticism from the Green Party and the Human Rights Commission last year after several men were outraged at having to change seats because they were sitting next to unaccompanied children.

But Dr Mapp said the policy, if not corrected, could open the door for discrimination in all aspects of life.

In his written submission, he asked: If airlines could keep men from sitting next to unaccompanied children, what would stop bus and train companies or waiting rooms from doing the same?

"The airlines' decision to discriminate on the presumption of a higher crime rate leads us on very a dangerous path," the submission states. "Since Muslims are over-represented among terrorists in Western societies, all Muslims might be asked to take seats in the back of planes ... clearly such a policy would be illegal as well as immoral."

Dr Mapp acknowledged airlines were unlikely to adopt such extreme measures, but he said allowing the present policy left the door ajar.

Airlines needed to protect children travellers, he said, but it could be done without discrimination, such as sitting them near cabin crew.

A spokesman for Air NZ said the airline would not be commenting until it knew the details of the claim.

Tribunal secretary Nicholai Anderson said once the claim was served, the airlines would have 30 days to respond. If it is upheld, the policy would have to change. Dr Mapp hoped the process would be completed by the end of the year.