FACTS FOUND
3. The Tribunal heard evidence over the course of 3 days from the applicant, Captain John Leslie (Captain Leslie), Captain Clarke a pilot employed by the respondent (who accompanied Captain Leslie at disciplinary hearings, appeals and other meetings) Captain Lawrie the Crew Resource Manager of the respondent, Captain lain Cullen the respondents Chief Pilot and Mr Damien Fletcher, Company Personnel Manager. We also considered two substantial bundles of documents and a letter from a Dr Cresswell dated 19 September 2001, a copy of which was provided to both parties for comment prior to the Reserved Decision on 9 October 2001
9, We make the following findings of fact on the balance of probabilities.
13. The respondent is a well known household name company operating domestic and other flights from Heathrow Airport, 9ritish Midlands Airport end elsewhere. It had three thousand employees at Heathrow alone and employed some ninety-six pilots.
11. Captain Leslie, the applicant, was born on 13 January 1946. He was employed by the respondent BMI British Midland (British Midland) as an airline pilot. He had previously worked for Manx Airlines and his service with them was counted as service with British Midland. He was continuously employed from a date in April 1994 until his summary dismissal with effect from 26 January 2000.
3
Case No: 2600427/01
12. A letter of engagement was issued to him by British Midland dated 1 October 1996. This provided terms of employment including an entitlement to three-months notice to terminate his contract after he had completed six-months service.
13. Captain Leslie’s employment was governed by an agreement for service (AFS) which was incorporated by the letter of engagement into the contract of employment. This document contains more detailed provisions as to the terms and conditions of employment. In particular it provides for medical examinations, discipline and termination of service, grievance procedures and flight Time Limitations. We considered this document during the course of the hearing. At paragraph (A) Section 9, Part 1 the document says that:
“Pilots shall not be required to maintain medical standards higher than those required by the Civil Aviation Authority for the issue of a Commercial Pilots Licence, a Senior Commercial Pilots Licence or an Airline Transport Pilots Licence as appropriate.’
14. At Section 18 of Part 1 it provides:
(2) ‘In the event of any other incident, breach of discipline, regulations, etc, necessitating investigatory action, the reason for such action, together with any suspension and duration of same will be confirmed in writing to the pilot concerned within twenty-four hours of notification of the suspension.”
At Section E subparagraph (3) there is provision that the Company may service, or suspend from duties pending an investigation “any pilot Who shall,..
become through gross neglect or omission ……sick or disabled or otherwise unable properly to perform allocated duties or to do so without being a nuisance or menace to others (a certificate from a property qualified Medical Practitioner approved by the company and the Association being sufficient to evidence).”
This showed at least that on some occasions it may be necessary to have a medical examination of a pilot.
At Section H of Section 18 the agreement states:.
“The employment of a pilot shall not be terminated for medical reasons providing the medical standards laid down by the Civil Aviation Authority as necessary’ for the holding of the licence appropriate to the pilots employment are satisfied.”
The grievance procedure is contained within the document at Section 2O. There is provision for appeals in relation to disciplinary action in two stages.
4
Case No; 2600427/01
15. In section 7 Part 2 of the agreement there are provisions as to the limits on time spent flying by pilots. This states that for reasons of avoiding fatigue pilots would not be required to fly more than three consecutive duties that occur in the period 0100 to 0659 local time.
16. Where accommodation was provided for pilots within 15 minutes travel time of the airport the prohibition covered duties occurring in the period 0100 to 0559 local time.
17. British Midland had introduced a written Code of Conduct for flight crew and other staff. This document, although not specifically agreed with Captain Leslie, set out procedures for resolving differences between flight crews and ground staff dealing with crewing of aircraft.
18. This in broad terms required disputes over crewing of aircraft to be referred to line managers by ether the pilot or the crewing department. If the dispute remained the duty should be completed and differences resolved afterwards.
19. Captain Leslie was licensed to fly aircraft by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and its USA equivalent. The CAA licence required him to satisfy the CM from time to time as to his medical fitness to fly aircraft. We saw examples of his licence with the fact that medical examinations had taken place recorded upon them. Captain Leslie attended at a G.P’.s surgery for these medicals. The doctors at that practice were authorised and trained to provide acceptable medical examinations of pilots on behalf of both the CAA and its USA equivalent, Attending the same practitioners for these medicals also had the advantage of continuity from one examination to another.
20. The normal course of events was that British Midland would remind pilots of the need to have their medicals renewed and thereafter the pilot would choose which medical practitioner to go to.