Airbus Getafe: doubts over merit and quotas in its leadership

Airbus Getafe and the promotion nobody knows if it was by merit

Carla Fernández heads Airbus Getafe. She is an aeronautical engineer and, according to those who have worked with her, one of the brightest people you can come across in a technical career. So far, the fact. The problem starts when you ask how she got there. The answer, in the sector, splits in two: own merit or gender quota. And that doubt, which is not new, taints any woman who is promoted in a company with equality policies.

What is known about the appointment and why it raises doubts

Airbus Spain operates with internal gender diversity programmes, including a volunteer network working to reduce the gap between men and women in leadership positions. The company publicises them as part of its strategy. In that context, every female promotion to a management position comes under automatic suspicion: did she get there on ability or on quota?

The discussion is not exclusive to this company. The Equality Act and successive European regulations oblige companies to correct imbalances on boards and in senior management. That means that, in practice, some promotions respond to representation criteria, not only technical evaluation. And when that happens, the side effect is devastating for competent women: they are presumed to have taken a shortcut.

Some argue that the Getafe director is a clear case of promotion on merit. Those who know her describe her as intelligent, friendly and respectful, and assure that she is not only qualified but runs rings around many of her colleagues. Against that weighs an argument that is hard to refute: in a company with quotas, it can never be demonstrated that a specific promotion was due exclusively to talent. The quota distorts the reading of every CV.

Airbus Getafe: the brain drain nobody wants to acknowledge

The other big issue that appears around this name is the management of the technical workforce. Airbus Getafe has become, according to several testimonies from the sector, an unattractive location for outsourced IT profiles. Turnover is high: those who have been there a while leave and those who join do not last. There is no official confirmation that this is related to the current management, but the fruta has taken hold.

The comparison with other European plants is inevitable. Those who have worked in France or Germany describe much better conditions for technicians. The difference is attributed not so much to Airbus as a group, but to local management and the weight of outsourcing. In Spain, the tech outsourcing model means salaries and stability fall below what is paid in other countries of the same company.

To this is added a structural problem that goes beyond this company: the lack of industry. The last Spanish production line, that of the C295, has been transferred to India. Without a factory, there is no design or certification. Most Spanish aeronautical engineers end up in administration, management or quality control, not in product development. That explains why many earn what they earn.

The calculation nobody disputes: how many engineers Spain has lost

One of the most cited contributions in the conversation is an estimate of Spanish technical emigration. There is no official figure, because no government has been interested in publishing it. But the partial calculations circulating suggest that between 300,000 and 500,000 engineers and technicians may have left Spain in the last 25 years. The phenomenon intensified after the 2008 crisis and has not been reversed.

The range is wide because specific statistics do not exist. It is built from fragmentary data from professional associations, emigration records and labour insertion surveys. Even so, the order of magnitude is hard to dispute: Spain trains engineers and exports them. Those who stay, in many cases, occupy positions that do not require their degree.

The question that hovers over the whole issue is whether the management of Airbus Getafe, with its workforce policies and its outsourcing model, helps to curb that drain or to accelerate it. There is no closed answer. What there is is a widespread perception in the sector: Spain is, among developed countries, one of the worst destinations to work in engineering. And that is not fixed by an appointment, however brilliant the person appointed.

---

The debate about Carla Fernández is not really about Carla Fernández. It is about a system that mixes quotas, outsourcing and lack of industry, and that leaves competent women with the burden of proving twice what a man is presumed. With these ingredients, any female promotion will continue to generate the same suspicion. And as long as merit is not separated from quota, the doubt will not go away.