Crew travel priority over paying pax?
So to bring it back to United, if the station manager says to you ( the captain) tomorrow , " I know your Purser wants to offload passenger Smith because he spat at her when he was taking his seat but in light of the recent event with Dr Dao I am not prepared to authorise bringing security onto the aircraft" .... are you ( the Captain ) legally resoonsible at that point in time to override the station manager ? Or, as has been suggested, does you legal authority not kick in until the aircraft moves under it's own power?
My position is that even if the exact point in time that the Captains authority kicks in is unclear ( as we are finding out) , the Captain does have the legal authority to grant or withhold operational clearance to initiate, terminate or divert the flight, so the Captain does have the authority to not initiate the flight regardless of what we find out about when his or her authority comes alive.
Ie , no skipper worth their salt will go flying if they think it is unsafe reagardless of which section of law says what.
My position is that even if the exact point in time that the Captains authority kicks in is unclear ( as we are finding out) , the Captain does have the legal authority to grant or withhold operational clearance to initiate, terminate or divert the flight, so the Captain does have the authority to not initiate the flight regardless of what we find out about when his or her authority comes alive.
Ie , no skipper worth their salt will go flying if they think it is unsafe reagardless of which section of law says what.
Re the question when does the nominated PIC assume command of an aircraft, I would think is spelled out in the Ops Manual. One SOP I'm familiar with says upon the closing of doors.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Megan.
I think the answer is that no one knows. We can look at rules and SOPS but practically as they stand it doesn't work.
If its when the doors close, then for example if there is an APU fire during the transit,who makes the decision to carry out the procedure? In my old company that actually became a major argument after the FE who was on board when the fire alarm went of fired the bottle only to have the LAME complain as the engineering handover wasn't complete. The argument was that until the M/R is signed engineering still has authority. Yet in that situation Engineering had no training in evacuating passengers.
In another case after engineering calling a brake fire after parking, an overzealous Policemen detained the Captain before he handed over to the Fire Commander. Who was then in charge of the operation at that time?
To a degree this is a bit like the Gimli episode where the FE-SO was replaced without anyone looking at who would carry out the abnormal fuelling ops. It seems to me that we have moved well away from the old model of Legacy Airlines with their own well qualified staff and replaced them with poorly trained contractors, without adequately examining everything that this now replaced staff did.?
Hopefully this whole shameful episode will at least start such an examination throughout the Industry. But since it will if properly done throw up numerous costs I somehow doubt anything will happen.
Wunwing
I think the answer is that no one knows. We can look at rules and SOPS but practically as they stand it doesn't work.
If its when the doors close, then for example if there is an APU fire during the transit,who makes the decision to carry out the procedure? In my old company that actually became a major argument after the FE who was on board when the fire alarm went of fired the bottle only to have the LAME complain as the engineering handover wasn't complete. The argument was that until the M/R is signed engineering still has authority. Yet in that situation Engineering had no training in evacuating passengers.
In another case after engineering calling a brake fire after parking, an overzealous Policemen detained the Captain before he handed over to the Fire Commander. Who was then in charge of the operation at that time?
To a degree this is a bit like the Gimli episode where the FE-SO was replaced without anyone looking at who would carry out the abnormal fuelling ops. It seems to me that we have moved well away from the old model of Legacy Airlines with their own well qualified staff and replaced them with poorly trained contractors, without adequately examining everything that this now replaced staff did.?
Hopefully this whole shameful episode will at least start such an examination throughout the Industry. But since it will if properly done throw up numerous costs I somehow doubt anything will happen.
Wunwing
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Framer - if a passenger spits at anyone, be they crew or passenger, then a criminal offence has been committed, whole different ball game. The offence is reported to police and it is now their problem. Chances are the pax will be arrested, cautioned and told he has to leave the aircraft, the police are within their remit to physically remove him if he doesn't obey a lawful order.
On Eyre - Not sure about this but I think the Harbour Master has considerable authority when the ship is still tied up.
On Eyre - Not sure about this but I think the Harbour Master has considerable authority when the ship is still tied up.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: not Bungendore
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Framer, it would be pointless of the station manager not to comply with the wishes of the captain, regardless of who has the current legal authority before the aircraft has moved under own power - the captain is the one who chooses if the aircraft moves under own power after all.
Yeah, the sad thing is, like every workgroup, the overwhelming majority are nice, polite and professional people who are a pleasure to work with and tossers like this guy give the rest a bad name if that was some of the local's only experience with that particular workgroup.
Yeah, the sad thing is, like every workgroup, the overwhelming majority are nice, polite and professional people who are a pleasure to work with and tossers like this guy give the rest a bad name if that was some of the local's only experience with that particular workgroup.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a look at Maritime and steps aboard may not be correct - reference is made to a handover including maintenance required and other thing but also a sign off and on. I assume this to be on the bridge and in the log.
But it seems the signature is required to be the "Captain".
Should the Captain of an aircraft not be happy with a passenger or a legal fuel load given to him to begin a flight, the Captain can simply start and begin to "taxi under own power" assume ultimate authority request a return to gate and have a passenger remover or more fuel added.
So any input from a Captain would be considered and discussed and hopefully agreed prior to pushback by any and all responsible persons.
It is comforting to see some have noticed that there is a legal void in who maybe responsible and that may be a big issue if things go real bad one day.
Is it not best to clear the legal mud that we currently have?
But it seems the signature is required to be the "Captain".
Should the Captain of an aircraft not be happy with a passenger or a legal fuel load given to him to begin a flight, the Captain can simply start and begin to "taxi under own power" assume ultimate authority request a return to gate and have a passenger remover or more fuel added.
So any input from a Captain would be considered and discussed and hopefully agreed prior to pushback by any and all responsible persons.
It is comforting to see some have noticed that there is a legal void in who maybe responsible and that may be a big issue if things go real bad one day.
Is it not best to clear the legal mud that we currently have?
Are we perhaps getting a bit confused here... I would suggest that there are many things that the Captain is responsible for prior to departure and once on board but once the aircraft is moving under it's own power, the Captain is completely responsible... just a thought.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is comforting to see some have noticed that there is a legal void in who maybe responsible and that may be a big issue if things go real bad one day.
That's understood AP but......is the Captain completely responsible, not at all responsible, or partially responsible in the United case.
Prior to this event and assuming I was in his/her shoes, I would have thought legally I was completely responsible for Dr Dao's situation but with a strong defence of 'Reasonable Reliance'. Now I am not so sure.
The above is from a document called "The Pilot In Command and the FAR's"
Written by Associate Professor of Law and Accounting, Mount St. Mary’s University, Emmitsburg, MD.; B.B.A, Iona College, 1981; J.D. Pace University School of Law, 1984. Professor Speciale is a commercial pilot and certified flight instructor.
††Associate Professor of Aeronautical Science, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL.; B.S. University of South Dakota, 1997; J.D. University of South Dakota School of Law 2000. Professor Venhuizen has been an active pilot and certified flight instructor since 1990.
Prior to this event and assuming I was in his/her shoes, I would have thought legally I was completely responsible for Dr Dao's situation but with a strong defence of 'Reasonable Reliance'. Now I am not so sure.
Even though a pilot is deemed to be responsible as pilot in command or second in command, there are still defenses that are recognized by regulation and NTSB case law. Most of these defenses can be characterized as “reasonable reliance” defenses. The question that often needs to be answered in this context is whether the pilot reasonably relied on other crewmembers, air traffic controllers, maintenance personnel,
Written by Associate Professor of Law and Accounting, Mount St. Mary’s University, Emmitsburg, MD.; B.B.A, Iona College, 1981; J.D. Pace University School of Law, 1984. Professor Speciale is a commercial pilot and certified flight instructor.
††Associate Professor of Aeronautical Science, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL.; B.S. University of South Dakota, 1997; J.D. University of South Dakota School of Law 2000. Professor Venhuizen has been an active pilot and certified flight instructor since 1990.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are we perhaps getting a bit confused here... I would suggest that there are many things that the Captain is responsible for prior to departure and once on board but once the aircraft is moving under it's own power, the Captain is completely responsible... just a thought.
AP that is absolutely clear and regardless of country or airline.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
parabellum, if you go back through these posts you will see that several Captains have stated that as PIC they are in command and have responsibility.
Now I don't know if in this United case that is true or not but if the PIC is in charge from say time of aircraft entry then your comment of layers of management are not correct.
As many of the posters on this thread now see, there seems to be a void in when responsibility or as said "the can" is handed over.
I personally don't think this Republic Airlines Captain had a clue on what was about to happen or what did happen till well after the event.
From what I have read from FAA I also don't think he can be responsible for being PIC.
But he maybe accountable for the end result if he made or approved the call to bring on board the offending thugs.(That is a maybe).
I will state I have no idea of the procedures or ops manuals for United or Republic Airlines or contracts they have between each other, and in fact this may well be where the final responsibility is known - but I doubt it.
Now I don't know if in this United case that is true or not but if the PIC is in charge from say time of aircraft entry then your comment of layers of management are not correct.
As many of the posters on this thread now see, there seems to be a void in when responsibility or as said "the can" is handed over.
I personally don't think this Republic Airlines Captain had a clue on what was about to happen or what did happen till well after the event.
From what I have read from FAA I also don't think he can be responsible for being PIC.
But he maybe accountable for the end result if he made or approved the call to bring on board the offending thugs.(That is a maybe).
I will state I have no idea of the procedures or ops manuals for United or Republic Airlines or contracts they have between each other, and in fact this may well be where the final responsibility is known - but I doubt it.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
parabellum, if you go back through these posts you will see that several Captains have stated that as PIC they are in command and have responsibility.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone here really believe the good Dr was just sitting there when he as dragged off the flight?
The videos only show the aftermath. Usually more than one side to a story..
The videos only show the aftermath. Usually more than one side to a story..
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Dog House
Age: 49
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually yes, he was just sitting as both videos seem to suggest!
Nor do United claim he was ever a issue!
He simply said he was not de -boarding (getting off) and I believe he had that right as per T's & C's as he was just "sitting"
The side that seems hidden is who called Dad's Army to resolve a seating issue for the contract carrier of United Airlines and there lies the story I think.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Hunter Valley NSW
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh for goodness sake, would you like it translated to Swahili or something for you to get it... FLIGHT CLOSED, PAX BOARDED, THEN OPS CALL AND SAY WE'VE JUST GOT WORD WE NEED FOUR CREW IN XYZ AND YOUR FLIGHT IS THE NEXT ONE TO DEPART... that's HOW, there's not much chance of coordination if the need becomes evident right at the last minute. How can you not understand that... it's no different to a Pilot taxiing to a runway and then being advised of a runway change because of facts that have just come to light... you can't accuse the tower of 'lack of coordination' if the wind just changed right then. Jeeeez, my daughters kitten would have grasped it by now.