Liability of the PIC

[yellowmonster]

Recently I've been wondering about the consequences of negligence by the PIC causing a crash and fatalities.

Let's just say the captain of a passenger jet makes a mistake which causes the death of multiple passengers.
What are the legal consequences for this person's private life and financial state.

Can someone who KNOWS what he is talking about please answer this question in both of the following cases : (preferably a legal expert or union delegate)

1. Human error that was avoidable by following SOP's which were inadvertantly not executed.

2. Human error by willingly taking a risk and/or not adhering to company policies and SOP's.

Assumptions :
- The airlines can not be blamed for anything according to the judge
- no external errors from ATC or local authorities (airport - state infractructure etc...)

Again - the question is : "To what extent will the captain be held accountable and what will happen to him (jail and/or financial penalties) ?"

[B737900er]

The PIC can go to jail for negligence or even manslaughter.
The PIC is an employee of the company so therefore the company take on the financial part. Usually through insurances.

Not adhering to company policies without good cause is setting you up for a fall.

[ExSp33db1rd]

One of my early Captains remarked - before you take any action, always say to yourself - "at the subsequent Court of Enquiry, can I categorically justify why I took such action ? "

[westhawk]

That's quite a hypothetical. Obviously any answer could be true according to the specific circumstances and locale. Absolutely the captain and other crew could be held legally liable. Some countries might lop your head off for you. More so in some jurisdictions than in others. Most countries have a more reasoned standard. Certainly not all. That should answer the original question. If one objects to the remote possibility of being held legally responsible for a mistake, then piloting aircraft is the wrong business to be in. Flight safety is by far best served by accepting responsibility for being competent at the job.

Personally, I would never waste my time worrying about the legal ramifications of failing in my duties as an airman. I've already committed myself to carry them out to the best of my abilities when I signed my certificate. Though as a pilot, I've often had occasion to ask myself how the accident report might read if I make the wrong decision. That's a nice little psychological device to add some perspective! My main focus is on the preservation of life, the airplane and my hard-earned pilot certificates. In that exact order. Economic and other concerns may be considered only once the first three are satisfied. I simply must trust that the rest can be worked out.

So the simplest and most direct solution to this worry is to endeavor not to make a mess of it! The fewer misjudgments made, the less there is to go wrong. The PIC and other crew have accepted their respective moral/ethical responsibilities willingly. There's little to be gained by worrying about what the courts might do if you make a mistake that injures or kills someone. Enough reasons not to allow that to occur already exist. Don't let it happen on your watch!

[noflynomore]

1. Human error that was avoidable by following SOP's which were inadvertantly not executed.

2. Human error by willingly taking a risk and/or not adhering to company policies and SOP's.

1) Inadvertent Human Error is just that, error, and thus usually inappropriate for punishment to be considered in a European/US environment. That may not be the case in some Asian countries however.

2) Conciously taking a risk or not adhering is clearly NOT human error. Considered actions or negligence resulting in failure to adhering to policies/SOP is much more likely to result in some action, though I suspect by no means certainly. Negligence is usually the criteria for action. Follow-up action in such cases seems to be increasing with time in many juristictions as people get more litigious.

[yellowmonster]

Thank you all for your responses.
Can you, however, think of any examples, where the crew was at fault and the captain survived ? In these particular cases : What happened ?

- Did he spend time in jail ? If so, how long ?
- Was a financial burden imposed on him by the court ?
- Is he still flying for the same airline, or did he get a job with another airline ?

Maybe some of you have specific examples in mind ?


Thanks for your time...

[B737900er]

Yellowmontster - whats with all the questions? Are you in trouble or something?

[B737900er]

If you want good examples look up all the crashes that involved Asian crew, starting with Asiana at SFO and Lion Air in Bali.

[Piltdown Man]

You appear to like fault. Fault by who's standards? A lawyer arguing in court? The NTSB (who have made some real howlers) or a panel of peers?

Risk? Well we all take risks, what you talking about is choosing to do something that has an adverse outcome when possibly a different decision may have resulted in a better outcome. But again, according to who?

A good lawyer can nail jelly to a ceiling one handed, but it doesn't make him right - just convincing.

As far as Britain is concerned, I don't believe we have charged let alone convicted any airline pilot who was a member of a crew who were in an accident. By some people's standards, some of these guys may have been criminally liable - but according to the UK's legal system. Which gives rise to another question, which country?

[Centaurus]

Can you, however, think of any examples, where the crew was at fault and the captain survived ? In these particular cases : What happened ?

- Did he spend time in jail ? If so, how long ?

Suggest you buy "A Band of Brothers" by author Ernest Gann. Many copies available on the internet. Basically the story of an American Boeing 727 captain flying for an airline in Taiwan in the 1950's (?) that crashed well short of the runway at Sung Shan (spelling probably incorrect) in Taipei due to false information from an NDB part of the instrument approach procedure.

He commenced an instrument let down based upon an erroneous overhead signal from the NDB.
The false information was due to military authorities testing a nearby missile system at the time of approach and which affected the NDB bearings leading to premature descent by the 727. 727 Captain is arrested and jailed.

A bunch of the captain's friends got together and bought an old Junkers 52 and quietly tested the NDB over several weeks and confirmed the crook bearings did occur at the exact time the missile batteries were tested.

Faced with this proof the military authority eventually released the incarcerated captain.

I was interested in reading the book because I used to operate into Sung Shan airport , Taiwan, flying the F28 of Air Nauru in 1976 and the same NDB call-sign was there. Might have been ident Golf Mike?

I believe the book was fiction based upon fact that a US captain was jailed in Taiwan over the crash. A very enjoyable read.

[safetypee]

Maybe something of interest in this:- http://www.safetydifferently.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Is-It-Time-To-Purge-Legal-Constructs-From-Safety-Investigations.pdf

And http://sidneydekker.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/sidneyijcjs2009.pdf

https://www.academy.jccbi.gov/ama-800/Summer_2010.pdf Page 31