Cabin crew face trial after speaking up about icing on the wing
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cabin crew face trial after speaking up about icing on the wing
"Three US Airways flight attendants are facing a law suit filed by their pilot collegue demanding 2 million US$ in compensation for defamation, after they spoke up before departure on Jan 24th 2003, when they noticed ice accumulation on the wings of their airplane, which was to perform flight America West HP-851 from Calgary,AB (Canada) to Phoenix,AZ (USA). It took the common effort of all three flight attendants and three attempts, before the flight crew unwillingly agreed to de-ice the airplane. The airplane reached Phoenix on time and without incident.
The flight attendants reported the case to the FAA, which dropped proceedings against the pilots in 2006 stating, that they couldn't substantiate the allegations even though that doesn't mean, that they wouldn't believe the flight attendants. The first officer, put in charge by the captain to decide about de-icing, hired an attorney to represent him before the FAA, which cost him around 21000 US$. The first officer filed a law suit requesting 2 million US$ from the flight attendants in 2006.
US Airways let the flight attendants know, that they are on their own for that law suit, and wouldn't carry the bills for legal representation, even though they were on duty and following required crew cooperation procedures to ensure safety of flight.
Unknown to the flight attendants, Calgary Airport had filed an irregularity report as well, as ground staff had observed contamination of the wings and approached the flight crew asking, whether de-icing would be needed and received a blunt no.
The first officer admitted in a court deposition into the trial against the flight attendants, that there was frost on the wings of the aircraft indeed, but denied, that they were approached by the flight attendants until after having pushed back.
I wonder what implications this is going to have on future situations like this ?
The flight attendants reported the case to the FAA, which dropped proceedings against the pilots in 2006 stating, that they couldn't substantiate the allegations even though that doesn't mean, that they wouldn't believe the flight attendants. The first officer, put in charge by the captain to decide about de-icing, hired an attorney to represent him before the FAA, which cost him around 21000 US$. The first officer filed a law suit requesting 2 million US$ from the flight attendants in 2006.
US Airways let the flight attendants know, that they are on their own for that law suit, and wouldn't carry the bills for legal representation, even though they were on duty and following required crew cooperation procedures to ensure safety of flight.
Unknown to the flight attendants, Calgary Airport had filed an irregularity report as well, as ground staff had observed contamination of the wings and approached the flight crew asking, whether de-icing would be needed and received a blunt no.
The first officer admitted in a court deposition into the trial against the flight attendants, that there was frost on the wings of the aircraft indeed, but denied, that they were approached by the flight attendants until after having pushed back.
I wonder what implications this is going to have on future situations like this ?
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the icing/frost wasn't reported until after pushback. So what? I dare say that would be because up until that point the CC were busy with their primary duty of boarding pax and securing the cabin.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why have the pilot management not taken this idiot aside and told him to wind his neck in for being a total and utter tool.
So much for CRM, I hope the FA's give him an absolute kicking.
Good old USAirways, doing the right thing by their crews by letting this happen and then not backing them up.
I wouldn't want to drink that F/O's coffee by mistake......
So much for CRM, I hope the FA's give him an absolute kicking.
Good old USAirways, doing the right thing by their crews by letting this happen and then not backing them up.
I wouldn't want to drink that F/O's coffee by mistake......
Threats of law suits are just that "threats"
The flight sounds like both sides were correct and we have no other way of judging.
he said -she said-they said. One sided cherry picked words hyped by the press.
I'll wait and see what the court decides if it even goes that far before it's dropped.
The flight sounds like both sides were correct and we have no other way of judging.
he said -she said-they said. One sided cherry picked words hyped by the press.
I'll wait and see what the court decides if it even goes that far before it's dropped.
'The first officer, put in charge by the captain to decide about de-icing, hired an attorney to represent him before the FAA, which cost him around 21000 US$'
Shall I be a pilot or an attorney - tough call, that one!
Shall I be a pilot or an attorney - tough call, that one!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kettering
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All a bit odd really
If Calgary filed an irregularity report then doesn't this add weight to the FAs' claims?
How did the FAA/company deal with the Calgary report?
Why didn't the FAs use the company safety reporting system?
Why was the FO dropped in the poo? Why didn't the Captain have to defend himself before the FAA?
How did the company deal with the Captain?
How does reporting a failure to act constitute 'defamation'. LOSA has revealed that pilots miss 50% of the errors they make. Is a LOSA observer open to a defamation charge by noting an omission by the crew?
All a bit of a mess.
How did the FAA/company deal with the Calgary report?
Why didn't the FAs use the company safety reporting system?
Why was the FO dropped in the poo? Why didn't the Captain have to defend himself before the FAA?
How did the company deal with the Captain?
How does reporting a failure to act constitute 'defamation'. LOSA has revealed that pilots miss 50% of the errors they make. Is a LOSA observer open to a defamation charge by noting an omission by the crew?
All a bit of a mess.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"the First Officer put IN CHARGE by the Capt to decide about de-icing" ? ? ?
WTF was the Capt thinking I wonder, or he was in the rest room ?
As the aircraft rolls gracefully over on it's back @100ft perhaps he would have cause to ponder the abdication of responsibility. There is delegation and then. . . . . something else.
Fair enough if what actually happened was that he delegated the identification of whether contamination was present to the guy doing the walkround, which may be what they meant to say, quite another if he let him make the "decision" on whether they should do something about it.
WTF was the Capt thinking I wonder, or he was in the rest room ?
As the aircraft rolls gracefully over on it's back @100ft perhaps he would have cause to ponder the abdication of responsibility. There is delegation and then. . . . . something else.
Fair enough if what actually happened was that he delegated the identification of whether contamination was present to the guy doing the walkround, which may be what they meant to say, quite another if he let him make the "decision" on whether they should do something about it.
Last edited by captplaystation; 30th Jan 2009 at 12:43.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All seems very odd this.
Firstly, since when can a Captain defer his legal responsibility to ensure the safe operation of his flight as is required under his command.
Secondly, I've never heard of an accident caused by de-icing, there have certainly been ones caused by icing, so why take the risk ? If it was caused by commercial pressure then that is a Captain's decision.
What a truly bizarre and petty case this is. Anyone who knows even the slightest thing about Kegworth will see the foolhardiness of the situation. Hopefully the F/O gets taken to the cleaners.
Firstly, since when can a Captain defer his legal responsibility to ensure the safe operation of his flight as is required under his command.
Secondly, I've never heard of an accident caused by de-icing, there have certainly been ones caused by icing, so why take the risk ? If it was caused by commercial pressure then that is a Captain's decision.
What a truly bizarre and petty case this is. Anyone who knows even the slightest thing about Kegworth will see the foolhardiness of the situation. Hopefully the F/O gets taken to the cleaners.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: out there somewhere...
Posts: 763
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last time I looked, Canada has a "zero tolerance" policy on wing contamination. In addition, to operate into Canada, any foreign carrier must have an Operations Specification awarded by the regulator (Transport Canada) which stipulates that the operator MUST abide by Canadian regs, which (if the statements are true) puts the Flight deck boys in the poo...you cannot avoid de icing if it has been brought to your attention by a qualified observer. In this case it would seem to be someone on the ground in Calgary, plus the cabin crew...maybe this so called law suit is a red herring to obfuscate any real evidence...you know, the ole baffle em with BS trick?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It looks like the story of the Dryden accident except for the fact that this time the there was no final hole in the swiss cheese (and no accident) because the CC spoke up.
If the story is as the article states, it is really weird that the companies involved didn't realize the implications/precedents it sets in the CRM field.
If the story is as the article states, it is really weird that the companies involved didn't realize the implications/precedents it sets in the CRM field.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The flight attendants reported the pilot to the FAA after the aircraft was deiced and flew safely to PHX. Vengeful act?"
Uh, just how would they report to the FAA - BEFORE - arriving safely in PHX?
Yeh, just maybe the F/O resented being told his job, triggering an exchange of unkind words.
GB
Uh, just how would they report to the FAA - BEFORE - arriving safely in PHX?
Yeh, just maybe the F/O resented being told his job, triggering an exchange of unkind words.
GB
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What type of aircraft was this? 737's are now allowed to depart with frost on the upper part of the wing, as long as it's within a defined area. Of course each operator need approval for this procedure, but Boeing says it's OK.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where is the captain in all of this? Has the F/O consulted him. For sure he will be called to testify before any hearing. If it is this serious why are the pilots not joining forces in this suit, or is it that the captain represented himself at the FAA & thus had no costs? How come the FAA could not substantiate anything if Calgary also filed a report? There was written evidence of their observation. There seems to be a few hidden facts which would help clarify the matter.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: LONDON England
Age: 52
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion the Flightdeck crew showed negligence in this matter. If cabin crew are unhappy about wing contamination, you de-ice...simple. They are part of the team and as professionals would KNOW if a wing contaminated ,didn't look right. Its sounds to me like the skipper couldn't be bothered to argue with his crew and left the task of arguing to the first officer. This is exactly the reason accidents happen as Cabin Crew feel "they don't want to look silly " for pointing something out. I'd rather be told, do something about it and have a happy crew and safe flight thank you.
WELL DONE TO THE CABIN CREW. PROFESSIONAL.
WELL DONE TO THE CABIN CREW. PROFESSIONAL.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite right - I will always listen to cabin crew, however 'silly' it might seem. After all their asses are in that aluminium tube as well as mine! On occasions they hear something 'strange' during taxi-out or take-off and if I don't have a logical answer then I consider it worthwhile further investigation.
I recall an incident where fuel was pouring from a vent on the wing, spotted by cabin crew and subsequently returning to stand uncovered two faults in the plumbing that might not have been picked up for some time. Not life threatening I know, but may have led to arriving with a lot less fuel than expected. (I'm sure our switched on F/E would have spotted the increased fuel consumption in flight)
Cabin crew are an invaluable part of the crew and anyone who thinks less of them should re-think their position.
Rgds
CL747
I recall an incident where fuel was pouring from a vent on the wing, spotted by cabin crew and subsequently returning to stand uncovered two faults in the plumbing that might not have been picked up for some time. Not life threatening I know, but may have led to arriving with a lot less fuel than expected. (I'm sure our switched on F/E would have spotted the increased fuel consumption in flight)
Cabin crew are an invaluable part of the crew and anyone who thinks less of them should re-think their position.
Rgds
CL747