US EMS Pilot Sues Operator after being sacked over safety complaints about aircraft

[SASless]

This link takes you to the court filing made by a US EMS pilot's attorney seeking legal redress for the pilot's dismissal by Corporate Jets. CJ dismissed the pilot after he filed several complaints about the quality of aircraft maintenance and serviceability.

The matter is an on-going proceeding which comes at a time when the US Helicopter EMS industry is under close scrutiny by the FAA, NTSB, and the Media.

CJ had four crashes within one ten week period recently.

http://www.clerk.co.montgomery.oh.us/pro/image_onbase.cfm?docket=8811607


A related news article.




Team 4 Investigates Medical Helicopter Crashes
The following report by Team 4 investigator Paul Van Osdol first aired Feb. 21, 2006, on WTAE Channel 4 Action News at 5 p.m.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Medical helicopters rush accident victims to hospitals every day, saving minutes and lives. But a Team 4 investigation finds an increasing number of these helicopters are crashing and costing lives.

The National Transportation Safety Board is concerned enough about medevac safety that it just completed a special investigation.

One of the leading players in the medevac industry is a West Mifflin company, CJ Systems. Last year, the company had four crashes around the country in the space of just 10 weeks.
On Aug. 14, 2005, a medical helicopter crashed near a busy interstate in Jacksonville, Fla. No one was injured.

That wasn't the case on Sept. 29, 2005. A helicopter crash into Puget Sound near Seattle killed the pilot and two crew members.

Just a week later, on Oct. 7, 2005, a helicopter getting ready to take a patient to Pittsburgh crashed near Bradford, Pa., killing the pilot.

Then, on Oct. 28, 2005, a helicopter carrying a patient crashed just after taking off from a hospital in Olympia, Wash. A nurse suffered minor injuries.

Four crashes in four locations -- and all four helicopters were operated by CJ Systems. The company also supplies pilots and helicopters for STAT MedEvac, which flies for UPMC, Mercy and other local hospitals.

Van Osdol: "Why so many accidents in such a short period of time?"

Larry Pietropaulo, CJ Systems president: "The answer to your question is, we don't know."
Pietropaulo says he is taking steps to prevent future accidents, hiring an outside company to conduct a safety audit and doing more safety training. He's also working with the NTSB to figure out what caused last year's rash of accidents.

Pietropaulo: "We really can't understand why these accidents happened at this time."

Van Osdol: "How frustrating is that?"

Pietropaulo: "Very frustrating. As a company, we take every one of these accidents extremely serious."
Sheri Eachus is also frustrated. Her sister-in-law, Erin Reed, was a flight nurse who died in the Sept. 29 crash near Seattle.

Van Osdol: "CJ Systems was involved in several other accidents within a very short time frame of Erin's accident. What do you think of that?"

Eachus: "It is cause for concern for us."

The NTSB says it's a growing problem, and not just for CJ Systems.

The NTSB found the number of medevac crashes nationwide has gone up dramatically in the past 15 years. From 2002 through 2004, NTSB tracked 55 air ambulance crashes resulting in 54 deaths.

Mark Rosenker, NTSB chairman: "The people that are launching here are out to save people's lives. Unfortunately, many times they get out into a situation where they're not able to make the landing and save the person, many times killing themselves in the effort."

The NTSB found one reason for the increase in crashes: lax rules for many medevac flights.

Flights carrying patients or organs are under one set of Federal Aviation Administration rules. Flights carrying nurses but not patients or organs are under less-strict rules -- for example, no requirement that pilots be rested.

The NTSB found the flights under looser rules crash much more often. In fact, three of the four CJ Systems crashes last year -- including the crash that killed Reed -- came under the less-restrictive rules.

Eachus: "It just sickens us to think they were under less-restrictive requirements because there was not a patient on board or an organ on board."

The NTSB has recommended all medevac flights be under the stricter rules. The board recommended other changes to improve safety, such as requiring night vision goggles for pilots.

Rosenker: "You combine all of those, and you will significantly lower the accident rate."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Link: NTSB Report On Medevac Crashes (PDF file)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The NTSB says it's a critical time to improve safety because the air ambulance business is growing.

The medevac business is certainly booming in western Pennsylvania. The helipad at Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh is the busiest non-commercial helipad in the country.

Pietropaulo says he agrees with most of the NTSB recommendations.

Pietropaulo: "We'd like to see higher standards in this industry that makes it as safe as possible to fly."

Reed's family says the changes cannot come soon enough.

Eachus: "As a family, we all knew what she did was something she was destined to do. She loved this part of the medical industry. I think we never understood the dangers involved."

It is up to the FAA to decide whether to adopt tougher rules.

The FAA is still reviewing the NTSB recommendations.

The NTSB would not comment on the CJ Systems crashes last year because they are all still under investigation.

[ron-powell]

Sasless:
Very interesting suit, especially using state whistle blower safety laws against the hospital and operator. But the most fun I see with this is the "third party" influence by the hospital manager. I've heard these stories before but gladly never experienced them. Individuals should know there are consequences to their actions and conversations.
Hopefully actions such as this one will chill some of those external pressures to fly when things aren't right.
One prediction though: If the pilot wins, he gets some money, doesn't get his job back and the hospital manager retains her job- to do the same thing again later.
Ron Powell
PHI Air Medical
Albuquerque NM

[SASless]

Ron,

The use of state law is unusual but is yet another way of addressing this situation. I would love to hear what the FAA has done regards the definitive issues and events raised within that filing as well. At the very least, there appears to be sufficient grounds for them to investigate the allegations to determine if any FAR's were violated. If I were the Insurance Carrier for the operator, I for sure would be down there with some very capable folks asking very direct questions of the operator in an effort to validate the underwriting assumptions involved in the rate setting process.

I have noticed some advertisements for safety related jobs by that operator recently. Successful Safety Programs require a Top Down environment. If the CEO does not consider Safety a core value, any Safety Program installed will not be successful. That includes telling the customer when to butt out of the aviation business and stick to the medical side of things. Contracts for the EMS business should have very specific wording to protect the Pilots and Mechanics in that regard.

The FAR's are quite specific. The Pilot-in-Command is the final word on the safe operation of the aircraft. Management should provide the environment that confirms that and sets forth specific guidelines so there is no confusion about what the safe parameters are and who has the authority to make the decision. The need to relay timely and accurate information to the customer should also be clearly spelled out and set forth in an SOP so there is no confusion as well.

If you recall the Air Heart BO-105 crash near Destin, Florida a while back. All of the unit pilots reported they had at some point felt pressured by the Program Manager. That was stated in the published accident report.

Anyone that has flown EMS for any length of time knows too well the pressures that are exerted on the crews, either directly or indirectly. That is part of the EMS business.

[chuteless]

hi sasless
there's a lot of accidents do you think that pilot's are reponsible or company
as a pilot there is a point where you say to yourself this is not good i'm calling it quites.
is there commercial as opposed to personal pressures (we got to save this kid)i've got a three year old I can't say no or is this bean counters saying you will fly

lots of love and kisses

[HOGE]

If you're flying EMS, none of your decisions should be based on either commercial or personal pressures. Flight safety is the only factor!

[ron-powell]

Sasless:
You are absolutely right by your comment about the insurance carrier getting involved, but that would mean they are “pro-active” to the problem. Hummmm…. We’ve talked about this around here before – insurance company steps in, no more night VFR EMS until you have NVGs or double the night mins or you don’t get insurance.
Chuteless:
I think most of that “I have to fly to save someone” mentality is going away from the business. Maybe slower than what’s needed but none the less going away. Of the 20-30 pilots I have been associated with in the last 8 years, perhaps one exhibited this tendency.
The age of the pilot apparently isn’t a factor, at least not with this one guy.
HOGE:
>If you're flying EMS, none of your decisions should be based on either commercial or >personal pressures. Flight safety is the only factor!
Well, I think that’s the point of the suit. This pilot was not letting the external pressures influence his safety of flight decision-making and he got terminated. This pilot was trying to do the right thing by bringing attention to maintenance problems (could have very well been weather issues) and no one supported him – neither his company nor the crew. This is due in part to the relationship with the hospital. The pilot and mechanics are/were CJ employees and the medical staff and their management and probably the flight program management are/were hospital. This is the basis of numerous “third party” influence problems. This structure also creates the possibility for what I consider the most insane situation – a medical crew complains about a pilot who is trying to be as safe as possible, yet they’re the ones climbing in the back of the aircraft the pilot is concerned about.
Ron Powell
PHI Air Medical
Albuquerque NM

[topendtorque]

Certainly a very interesting case, one thing I don’t understand is the ‘front pay” bit. Is that lost opportunity?

Could a worst case scenario be that the case outcome is held over pending a further federal action on some FAR’s or your aviation Act although I cannot hazard a guess which areas. That could/might mean a bog down while a state verse federal action ensues for some years with appeals etc. The pilot might become a pawn in the ensuing battle with no real outcomes for safety and EMS managemennt generally?

Surely the “I have to fly to save someone” mentality will not be missed by the presiding judge and therefore maybe the third party ‘offenders’ will be well and truly had by the state laws. That might be the thinking of the pilots counsel.

I assume that if allowed your HAA will have a legal and strong prescence at the trial?????
I guess it could only argue the case for safety in maintenance and the ‘pilot in command has ultimate resposibilty’ scenario as per the scrip.

It’s a pity that the case doesn’t involve the pilot being forced to fly in adverse weather as well; some real headway might have been made for an adoption of SOP’s making judgements and therefore flights, as routine operations. The recent Nick Lappos thread regarding CFIT picked up many issues regarding that.

One issue that was mentioned briefly there was the “chain of responsibilty” fad which is being talked about in many industries now. I.E. A tired, cattle truck driver crashes on the highway, he will be had for fatigue, driving dangerously etc, so will his boss, his employer, the truck owner if it’s a different person, the person that loaded his truck and the company that employed the person that loaded his truck. Many big pastoral companies have protecting paperwork for that reason when trucks are loaded it is signed to say the driver has had sufficient rest or its nogo.

I have no idea whether Mr Evans is a member of HAA and it maybe better if he is not but he may need some solid support to see a just resolution I.E. a hat passed around.

At least I would hope that HAA has some possibilty of making sure that expert witnesses for his defense are that - if they are allowed under the Ohio state legal system.

I have personnally witnessed a so-called expert witness for CASA run from the court when he was humiliated on the arithmetic around a bell 47 G5 weight and balance problem. He was a licenced instructor at the time, with G5’s. Needless to say CASA lost.

I guess we will watch developments closely and I wish Mr Evans well.

[ron-powell]

TET:

From the findlaw.com site:
Front pay. A type of damages award in an employment lawsuit that represents the amount of money the employee would have earned if the employee was reinstated or hired into the higher-paying position from which he or she was illegally rejected.