Random Breathalyzer Tests in LHR

[a330pilotcanada]

Good Afternoon All:

In the interests of Aviation Safety the "Star Chamber" aka security at LHR/EGLL will ask for a breathalyser if a crew member is "suspected" of being impaired of alcohol or drugs. I would guess this would be determined by a blood test.

Can someone who is more knowledgeable on the medical side go into non-prescription cold medicines or pain medications and the ramifications of a random blood sample would have if a crew member has the above or any medication that could be considered "dodgy" as the Brits would say.

My experiences at Control Post Security have been mostly of amusement at the hoops one jumps through to wondering what process is undertaken to "train or vet" the screeners at the C.P.?

With a majority of them one would suggest they were not invited to join MENSA.


Here is the link to the website section for the actual legislation:
Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/20/part/5/crossheading/offences)
Here is a copy of the applicable legislation with some important sections highlighted:
Section 1 (b) outlines that even riding on the crew bus and or being at the airport in uniform can put you in jeopardy.
Section 6 (b) below explains how they can get a breath sample from us. They ask the question if we have had a drink the night/day/24 hrs before and then 6 (b) will apply and we need to comply.
Offences
92Being unfit for duty
(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)he performs an aviation function at a time when his ability to perform the function is impaired because of drink or drugs, or
(b)he carries out an activity which is ancillary to an aviation function at a time when his ability to perform the function is impaired because of drink or drugs.
(2)In this section “drug” includes any intoxicant other than alcohol.
(3)Section 94 defines “aviation function” and “ancillary activity” for the purposes of this Part.
93Prescribed limit
(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)he performs an aviation function at a time when the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit, or
(b)he carries out an activity which is ancillary to an aviation function at a time when the proportion of alcohol in his breath, blood or urine exceeds the prescribed limit.
(2)The prescribed limit of alcohol is (subject to subsection (3))—
(a)in the case of breath, 9 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres,
(b)in the case of blood, 20 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres, and
(c)in the case of urine, 27 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres.
(3)In relation to the aviation function specified in section 94(1)(h) the prescribed limit is—
(a)in the case of breath, 35 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres,
(b)in the case of blood, 80 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres, and
(c)in the case of urine, 107 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres.
(4)The Secretary of State may make regulations amending subsection (2) or (3).
(5)Section 94 defines “aviation function” and “ancillary activity” for the purposes of this Part.
94Aviation functions
(1)For the purposes of this Part the following (and only the following) are aviation functions—
(a)acting as a pilot of an aircraft during flight,
(b)acting as flight navigator of an aircraft during flight,
(c)acting as flight engineer of an aircraft during flight,
(d)acting as flight radio-telephony operator of an aircraft during flight,
(e)acting as a member of the cabin crew of an aircraft during flight,
(f)attending the flight deck of an aircraft during flight to give or supervise training, to administer a test, to observe a period of practice or to monitor or record the gaining of experience,
(g)acting as an air traffic controller in pursuance of a licence granted under or by virtue of an enactment (other than a licence granted to a student), and
(h)acting as a licensed aircraft maintenance engineer.
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1)(h) a person acts as a licensed aircraft maintenance engineer if—
(a)he issues a document relating to the maintenance, condition or use of an aircraft or equipment in reliance on a licence granted under or by virtue of an enactment relating to aviation, or
(b)he carries out or supervises work on an aircraft or equipment with a view to, or in connection with, the issue by him of a document of the kind specified in paragraph (a).
(3)For the purposes of this Part a reference to an activity which is ancillary to an aviation function is a reference to anything which falls to be treated as such by virtue of subsections (4) to (6).
(4)An activity shall be treated as ancillary to an aviation function if it is undertaken—
(a)by a person who has reported for a period of duty in respect of the function, and
(b)as a requirement of, for the purpose of or in connection with the performance of the function during that period of duty.
(5)A person who in accordance with the terms of an employment or undertaking holds himself ready to perform an aviation function if called upon shall be treated as carrying out an activity ancillary to the function.
(6)Where a person sets out to perform an aviation function, anything which he does by way of preparing to perform the function shall be treated as an activity ancillary to it.
(7)For the purposes of this Part it is immaterial whether a person performs a function or carries out an activity in the course of an employment or trade or otherwise.
(8)The Secretary of State may by regulations—
(a)amend this section;
(b)make an amendment of this Part which is consequential on an amendment under paragraph (a).
Section 6
Power to administer preliminary tests
In place of subsections (2) to (5) the power to require a person to co-operate with a preliminary test shall apply where—
(a)
a constable in uniform reasonably suspects that the person is committing an offence under section 92 or 93,
(b)
a constable in uniform reasonably suspects that the person has committed an offence under section 92 or 93 and still has alcohol or a drug in his body or is still under the influence of a drug,
(c)
an aircraft is involved in an accident and a constable reasonably suspects that the person was undertaking an aviation function, or an activity ancillary to an aviation function, in relation to the aircraft at the time of the accident, or
(d)
an aircraft is involved in an accident and a constable reasonably suspects that the person has undertaken an aviation function, or an activity ancillary to an aviation function, in relation to the aircraft.
Sections 6A to 6E
Preliminary breath test, impairment test, and drug test
In place of sections 6A(2) and (3), 6B(4) and 6C(2), a preliminary breath test, preliminary impairment test or preliminary drug test may be administered by a constable—
(a)
at or near the place where the requirement to co-operate with the test is imposed, or
(b)
at a police station specified by the constable.
In section 6B(3) a reference to unfitness to drive shall be treated as a reference to having an impaired ability, because of drink or drugs, to perform an aviation function or to carry out an activity which is ancillary to an aviation function.
Section 7
Provision of specimen

In subsection (1) the reference to an offence under section 3A, 4 or 5 of the 1988 Act shall be treated as a reference to an offence under section 92 or 93 of this Act.
In subsection (3)(c) the reference to an offence under section 3A or 4 of the 1988 Act shall be treated as a reference to an offence under section 92 of this Act.
Section 7A
Specimen of blood taken from person incapable of consenting
Section 8
Choice of specimen of breath
In subsection (2) the reference to 50 microgrammes of alcohol shall, except in relation to the aviation function specified in section 94(1)(h), be treated as a reference to 15 microgrammes of alcohol.
Section 9
Protection for hospital patient
Section 10
Detention of person affected by alcohol or drug
In subsection (1)—
(a)
the reference to driving or attempting to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road shall be treated as a reference to performing an aviation function of the kind in respect of which the requirement to provide a specimen was imposed, and
(b)
the reference to an offence under section 4 or 5 of the 1988 Act shall be treated as a reference to an offence under section 92 or 93 of this Act.
In subsection (2) the reference to driving a mechanically propelled vehicle shall be treated as a reference to performing an aviation function.
In subsection (3) the reference to driving properly shall be treated as a reference to performing an aviation function.
Section 11
Interpretation
For the definition of “the prescribed limit” there shall be substituted the definition given in this Part.

[fmgc]

Who made airport security responsible for ensuring that a crew member is fit to fly?

It has nothing to do with them, they are all about security.

With a majority of them one would suggest they were not invited to join MENSA.

To be fair, you would struggle to get them to do that job for min wage if they were able to join MENSA. Comments like that just detract from the just issues that crew have with security.

[a330pilotcanada]

FMGC

Although it has been a while going through a C.P. I can only go by what colleagues have told me.
in one case a while back a crew member was suspected a security person at the CP of being under the influence and after a two day fiasco this was cleared by a blood test showing 0 percent alcohol which was taken after a inconclusive breathalyzer test.

Who is the driving force here no one has identified same but based on previous experience when a Hindi speaking F/A overhead a conversation in Hindi on how two screeners were going to make life miserable for this crew the Captain when told of this stopped the process and had the duty manager address the issue and I was told that the two enjoyed some time off without pay.

If you want to see security screening that is well done go to TLV, ZRH or FRA they are light years better then LHR.

I will withdraw the MENSA comment as you are most right as minimum wage will only attract a certain demographic.

[fmgc]

I don't disagree with your sentiments at all. Trouble is these guys seem to have taken upon themselves to be the guardians to screen crews for alcohol.

It is not their remit.

[Checkboard]

The thread title needs to be changed; "Random Breathalyzer Tests in LHR" - isn't remotely accurate.

There is no power for random tests for aircrew in the UK - the legislation is clear that any alcohol testing:
must meet a "reasonable suspicion" test, and
be performed by a constable in uniform.


If security suspect you, they can call a constable to administer the test. I doubt they have any powers to detain you for the time it would take for a constable to arrive.

[Pub User]

If security suspect you, they can call a constable to administer the test. I doubt they have any powers to detain you for the time it would take for a constable to arrive.

Note from the wording of the act above, it must be the 'constable in uniform' who has the suspicion. Others can report their suspicions to the constable, but the constable themselves must be satisfied that the suspicion exists. In the meantime, I too doubt if airport security have the power to detain you whilst waiting for the police.

There may, of course, be by-laws at LHR to cover this issue.

[Old Grouch]

I doubt they have any powers to detain you for the time it would take for a
constable to arrive.


What about whether they would be able to refuse entry through the control post, were they to have reasonable grounds to do so? I recall a colleague who had such an experience in 2006 or 2007. Their suspicions were proved wrong. For the record, I do recall the LHR security staff being rather abrupt and hostile to aircrew on a nunber of occasions.


you would struggle to get them to do that job for min wage

Just to add clarity, the BAA security staff are not paid the minimum wage; I believe it is more akin to £24000 per year (i.e. approximately double). Comparatevely, about the same as what some major LHR handling companies' redcaps are paid.

[racedo]

So who will randon test and challenge the security staff ?

Do remember at an aiport as a pax going through security where I smelt the alcohol on member of security staff who was pretty obnoxious to the pax in front..........started the same way on me until I asked another member of security to request the supervisor.

Supervisor stood person down, apologised and then explained person was an alcoholic who had fallen off the wagon. I accepted apology, said thank you and walked away.

[RoyHudd]

Said alcoholic should have been fired on the spot.

Security staff cannot directly detain you unless it is a security-related issue, but they can request and retain your I.D., which effectively stops you from going anywhere.

As crew, we need to be vigilant and report security staff who are behaving incorrectly, and perhaps putting us under undue stress. An over-zealous young man was suspended having caused me to postpone a flight as a result of his unnecessary actions. I did not feel good about this, simply satisfied that he was suspended and hopefully re-trained properly.

[VH-UFO]

So do you guys and girls have any objection to being submitted to random breath tests ?

[blaireau]

Whilst contracted to an Indian carrier, we were required to sign on in the presence of a doctor. we signed as being fit to fly and were frequently required to take breathalyser check. This even happened as far afield as Toronto on one occasion.

My attitude was that this was as much a test of intelligence as it was sobriety, inasmuch as you had to be some kind of nutter to risk your career in the face of this procedure.

In essence then, I have no great objection to random alcohol/drugs testing.

[ManaAdaSystem]

Not me. I don't drink and fly, so I don't care.

[Capn Bloggs]

So do you guys and girls have any objection to being submitted to random breath tests ?
No, when it is done by the right people, in your case CASA-appointed/delegated. That does not include the security staff, nor should it.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Perhaps more to the point we should ask if "security" have the power to prevent someone passing through the checkpoint if they suspect they are under the influence.

If so then they may be able to detain them by default, as they will (do) maintain you cannot return through the "in" lane once past the scanner, even though you can be sent back through the scanner a second time, but no one expects consistency from those gnomes anyway. Thus you would be effectively held in security until said constable in uniform materialised.

I doubt they'd let you through without strenuous objection if they suspected alcohol but never forget they have the right of citizens arrest - and claiming they were in fear for the safety of scores of lives would probably be reasonable grounds for exercising that right.

Just don't drink and fly and there's no problem.

Quite what the OP meant by his question on cold medicines has not been addressed, not is it clear to me what he meant. How might a cold medicine affect alcohol level, unless you'd taken your lemsip with rum? Cold medicines don't contain alcohol in the same way they contain all those illegal steroids and testosterone that only shows up in athletes when they are checked...

[McGoonagall]

Quite what the OP meant by his question on cold medicines has not been addressedCold medication often contain codeine which is metabolised into morphine. Sympathomimetics such as pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, and phenylephrine are used as decongestants. All of the above can result in a positive test if screened for drugs as well as alcohol. It is wise to keep a written note of any medication taken and tell the screener before the test is carried out.

[Johnny767]

I do not drink alcohol, never have!

However, the clowns that (are) security in LHR are out of control.

On my last flight out of Heathrow, I plan on using the cheapest rot gut whiskey I can find and use it for aftershave.

Cancel the flight and we are heading straight for a Blood Test.

As a Profession we can only stand for zero tolerance.

Putting up with the nonsense from the uneducated, overpaid, underachievers who think they contribute to Airport Security (the joke that they are,) has gone too far.

[Capn Bloggs]

More info on drugs:

Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Over-the-counter and Prescription Medications (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_100026)

[Johnny767]

It is very simple, if you get a runny nose on your overnight;

BOOK OFF SICK

The Airlines can't have it both ways, taking some over the counter cold meds is just too risky.

There are no hero badges for keeping the operation going.

[ShyTorque]

So, are we talking here about truly "random" testing for alcohol, as per the thread title, or are we talking about testing where there is reasonable suspicion of a member of flight crew being impaired by consumption of alcohol? The latter should come as no surprise, it has been the situation for some years (I've never been tested and they would get a negative result if they did). I would hope that being "pulled" for testing isn't seen as some small minded way of "getting one over" on flight crew.

By the way, those intending to operate in and out of LHR should ensure they put "EGLL" in the FMS, not "EGGL" as the latter doesn't exist ;)

[a330pilotcanada]

Shy Torque

Good catch I owe you a pint (outside of 24 hours of course) :O

[A and C]

I can't see the problem with random testing as long as it is carried out in a properly controlled way we had ths in a part 121 operator that I worked for.

The big problem is with the attitude of some of the security screeners in the UK who are so bored with the job that they turn to using their limited powers to bait airport employees and of course the more senior the victim the better the amusement factor.

From a leagal point of view I would think that if the security screener tryed to detain you the best thing would be to let them keep your security pass and return to landside and report the facts to your company. I would also think that at this point bringing in the police would be a good idea as a negative alcohol test would reinforce any malpractice from the security screeners.

At this point I should say that on the whole most of the security screeners in the UK are just enforcing a bunch of over restrictive rules mandated by the DfT and most of them do it as well as they can, the problem is with the small minority who have so poisoned the security screening atmosphere that all airport staff are deeply distrustful of airport security staff.

In my opinion the DfT security system is to blame for most of the problems by insisting that airport staff who have already been security checked to get a security pass are imposed to the same rules as passengers when going airside. This attitude shows a basic lack of respect to staff or is an admission that their security checks on staff are inadequate.

[LNIDA]

One assumes that security staff are not subjected to the same 8-12 hour alcohol ban that people carrying out an aviation related function, ditto baggage handlers. I frequently night stop at various airports through out Europe and the most annal in terms of security by a long mile are in the Uk & LHR in particular, I agree that some of the staff try their best, but they have no discretion or are allowed to apply common sense, last month i night stopped in 10 different locations, not one crew screening station even mentioned my antiperspirant, London Heathrow did!! next time through, i shan't shower and will leave a mobile phone in my pocket and they can have the pleasure of patting down my sweaty arm pits.

[racedo]

Said alcoholic should have been fired on the spot.

Nope

Alcoholism is a disease and should be treated accordingly as otherwise you will have people hiding it refusing to get treatment.

Frankly it would have been better had his colleagues supported him by keeping him off interaction with people and handling it internally.