Is this an airline or Eastenders ? 😂😂😂

Just to clear up one point, only 100 Pax were ´affected´, because the rest were rebooked. Not that it matters, given the actual discussion at hand.

If those so-called "clowns" are law enforcement agents of the land you're in and you're under suspicion, lotsa luck with your "I'M in command here, I'm throwing you off!" plan.

That's friggin hilarious! This person thinks they're Clint Eastwood. I'd love to see this false sense "command ship" play out in real life, I'm thinking they'd piss their pants and start weeping like a 2 year old that just lost his blanket.

I got banned from Rumors and News section, for stating facts that Mod Captains don't like.

"Once I enter my aircraft, I have command and any unpolite clowns will be thrown off."


Often an incorrect statement - certainly is in this case. The Captain is in command in many countries once the aircraft is moving under its own power.

A few countries is once they enter the aircraft but then I am sure a law can be overriding that and am sure many guys with big guns will tell you, you have the right of appeal off the aircraft as you are dragged out in front of many more people than just those on the aircraft. Probably then having grounds for a mandatory D&A blood test only to find both - the string of charges 3 miles long and never to see outside jail again.

Yep me to love to see the I am In Command statement made.

I also think as posted this happened in Australia so Drug and Alcohol limits of Australia apply, also the D & A of the aircraft rego country will apply and any D & A crew licences in any and every country they hold. (the lowest level can be used in my opinion)

Command means you are responsible for the safety and lawful operation of the aircraft and flight. It does not make you Lord and Master despite what some 'Commanders ' think!

You can only operate within the Law, step outside that and you are on your own.

Kapitan, the guy you mention should have sued for wrongful dismissal. Alcohol ban applies to a period before sign on. That is when you are on duty. You are not on duty on the way to sign on. You might be in uniform and you might be in a crew bus or your own transport. But, you are not on duty until you sign on. The ignorant & arrogant response of the employers saying "That is not how we interpret the rules" is astonishing. Rules are rules and are not open to interpretation.

Landflap, just out of interest, have you ever worked for a ME airline? Do you honestly think that there is a snowballs chance in the Dubai summer that a wrongful dismissal case from a semi-govt entity who can operate with impunity, is going to EVER succeed?
Suspend your indignation and understand that the rule of law is applied in these countries in anyway is deemed best by those who write the laws.
Don't believe me? Just remember that in the ME, some are more equal than others.
I'm sure in a unionised airline in a semi civilised country like Australia that the case you are referring too may indeed have some merit, but the employer and employee aren't based there.
As to the Perth situation, 0 sympathy, we all know the rules, and many of us refrain from anything else than a quiet pint whilst down route for this very reason....he must have been steaming.

Am I the only one that thinks it's pretty sad if you are trying to 'time' your zero reading?

Sorry to bring this thread back on topic but the rumours I am hearing is that apparently he even passed the test, having repeated it a couple of times. Seems to get stranger the deeper you dig.

As far as I'm aware a refusal is grounds for termination according to the OM-A; even if a test is subsequently passed a little later...

I agree White Knight, however what I am hearing (and of course it is only pure speculation)is that it wasn't refused. If this is true then it's a worrying development.

Asked to resign? He is leaving!

I know where you're coming from Schnowzer and agree but at the same time it's not right if a test shows an individual fractionally over the limit at the hotel 2 hours before a sign-on.

Personally I'm too much of a lightweight to drink anything near the amount that would leave me close to limits prior to pick-up... I can't get a proper normal rest even after only a few pints the night before - messes with my sleep cycle.

I dont think the below paragraph out of the ERM allows for much interpretation...

2.1
The Company maintains a zero tolerance approach to the consumption of alcohol and drugs, and therefore employees should not be under the influence of alcohol or drugs while :

carrying out duties on behalf of the Company - on or off Company premises, during official breaks (including meal breaks), and on periods of standby subject to being called on duty

in uniform (on or off duty)

driving a Company vehicle (on or off duty)

I find the use of the word "should" in the above quote interesting. Surely, a firm rule would use the word "shall" instead?

Odins Raven: all confirmed, unfortunately its true!

I'm a bit late catching up with this but here I go...

According to the newspaper article the Captain was reported by the F/O. Looks like a major breakdown in CRM to me. I can think of much better ways of handling a potentially intoxicated crew member than ringing the company. I only hope the F/O tried to have a friendly chat first before picking up the phone.

Would be interesting to see make up of crew on 424/425. Is this 2 Capts & 1 FO now?

2FOs and 1 Capt.