Gaunty: Will you please explain to my feeble mind how a position allegedly causing harm becomes redundant? If the aircraft then left with one pilot on board, I might be willing to accept your premise, but the POSITION is still there, but not the pilot. How can it then be redundant? The 146 has been a bone of contention for many years, always for the same reason, and nothing, it seems, can be done to resolve the problem.. .Surely, in executing their "Duty of Care", a company would have to remove the possibility of contamination, by whatever means. The fact that a crew member, tech or cabin, has an adverse reaction to a problem is indicative of the problem as well as the reaction, and both must be addressed for satisfactory resolution. Nothing has been, nor can be, done to improve the situation by management or manufacturer, so what would happen to the airline if ALL crew mwmbers refused to crew the type? I understand your analogy of your son, poor fella, and it is difficult to refute your argument there, but I still feel that NJS is taking the easy way out.
TJ: I know of one female Captain who lost her license some years ago, hasn't flown since.
Kind regards,
TheNightOwl. <img src="mad.gif" border="0">