Virgin Co-Pilot arrested, allegedly over alcohol limit. No case to answer.
Before this thread goes round & round in circles I suggest reading this thread, and let things lie until either the individual is charged or is proved to be innocent.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...t=virgin+drunk
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...t=virgin+drunk
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OldChinaHand stated "the crew member was arrested on the grounds of suspicion. It has not been proven that he is guilty of any offence. There is no disgrace in being arrested on the grounds of suspicion"
Although I wholeheartedly agree with that, due to the fact he was arrested he is exempt from the majority of Visa Waiver programmes that operate alongside a UK passport, making his long-haul days untenable now.
Although I wholeheartedly agree with that, due to the fact he was arrested he is exempt from the majority of Visa Waiver programmes that operate alongside a UK passport, making his long-haul days untenable now.
Daily Mirror's shameful headline
Cops haul drunk pilot off jet
Virgin flight stopped on the taxiway
Exclusive by Stephen Moyes 29/10/2007
A jumbo jet pilot was arrested seconds before takeoff yesterday - on suspicion of boozing.
Stunned passengers on a Virgin Atlantic flight saw police board their plane and take the first officer away.
The Miami-bound jet with 266 passengers on board was taxiing towards the runway when the alarm was raised.
The plane returned to its stand at Heathrow where police got on.
The first officer, one of three cockpit crew, is understood to have failed a breath test. A source said: "We had pushed back from the gate for takeoff when the plane did a massive U-turn.
"When we made it back to the gate armed police officers boarded and took away a member of the cockpit crew. It was dramatic and we were all open-mouthed.
"Eventually the other pilot came on and said they'd been forced to off-load one of their flightdeck crew. It is frightening that we could have been over the Atlantic with a boozy first officer at the helm."
Police were last night awaiting results of a blood test on the 42-year-old, who was reported by an airport worker to be smelling of alcohol.
The Airbus A340-600 was delayed for three hours while a new cockpit team was found. The arrested co-pilot was himself a relief officer and not a regular Virgin crew member.
Scotland Yard said: "At 11.16am officers at Heathrow arrested a crew member on a Virgin Atlantic flight.
"He was arrested under Section 94 of the Railways and Transport Act 2003 and bailed to a date in December."
Virgin Atlantic said: "Virgin can confirm that one of its first officers has been released on police bail in connection with an allegation made.
"The relief first officer was onboard flight VS5 Heathrow to Miami. The airline will investigate thoroughly."
A Virgin pilot was arrested in a similar incident in April - but he was found to just have bad breath and cleared.
The legal limit for pilots is nine micrograms of alcohol in breath.
A computer program failure caused chaos at Gatwick yesterday when it did not recognise the clocks had gone back and arrival and departure times were wrongly listed.
Virgin flight stopped on the taxiway
Exclusive by Stephen Moyes 29/10/2007
A jumbo jet pilot was arrested seconds before takeoff yesterday - on suspicion of boozing.
Stunned passengers on a Virgin Atlantic flight saw police board their plane and take the first officer away.
The Miami-bound jet with 266 passengers on board was taxiing towards the runway when the alarm was raised.
The plane returned to its stand at Heathrow where police got on.
The first officer, one of three cockpit crew, is understood to have failed a breath test. A source said: "We had pushed back from the gate for takeoff when the plane did a massive U-turn.
"When we made it back to the gate armed police officers boarded and took away a member of the cockpit crew. It was dramatic and we were all open-mouthed.
"Eventually the other pilot came on and said they'd been forced to off-load one of their flightdeck crew. It is frightening that we could have been over the Atlantic with a boozy first officer at the helm."
Police were last night awaiting results of a blood test on the 42-year-old, who was reported by an airport worker to be smelling of alcohol.
The Airbus A340-600 was delayed for three hours while a new cockpit team was found. The arrested co-pilot was himself a relief officer and not a regular Virgin crew member.
Scotland Yard said: "At 11.16am officers at Heathrow arrested a crew member on a Virgin Atlantic flight.
"He was arrested under Section 94 of the Railways and Transport Act 2003 and bailed to a date in December."
Virgin Atlantic said: "Virgin can confirm that one of its first officers has been released on police bail in connection with an allegation made.
"The relief first officer was onboard flight VS5 Heathrow to Miami. The airline will investigate thoroughly."
A Virgin pilot was arrested in a similar incident in April - but he was found to just have bad breath and cleared.
The legal limit for pilots is nine micrograms of alcohol in breath.
A computer program failure caused chaos at Gatwick yesterday when it did not recognise the clocks had gone back and arrival and departure times were wrongly listed.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mostly hotels
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yellow Sun,
100% testing of all crew (pilots, cabin crew and air marshals) when they report for work has now become a norm in some new airlines in India. The acceptable limit is .000.
Cheers!
100% testing of all crew (pilots, cabin crew and air marshals) when they report for work has now become a norm in some new airlines in India. The acceptable limit is .000.
Cheers!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: south east UK
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
twistedenginestarter the last person that "snitched" a VA pilot was wrong and nearly wrecked somones professional life, personally if I was the last guy who was wrongly accused I would of found out who wrongly shopped me and consider legal action for all sorts of arguments, deformation of character, undue stress etc etc.
So many people ready to play supacop with no official training !
So many people ready to play supacop with no official training !
And I would certainly launch my own legal procedings.
Whilst we can get all moralising about wether people's lives are at stake bla bla bla, the fact remains that security and other airport workers are not qualified, are not paid, and are not supposed to be policing the alchohol issue (if indeed there is an issue). Why they take it on themselves to do so is a mystery to me, when they will all go on strike at the drop of a hat if asked to do anything else outside their terms and conditions.
If it is not in their contracts and job descriptions that they should do so (I suspect not), then I believe they will be on very very very thin legal ice If if they take it into their head to make an allegation that subsequently turns out to be incorrect. If it is not a company policy for them to do so (which again I suspect it's not), then the company will wash their hands of the issue and any liablity will fall personally on the individual concerned.
For the sake of being vindictive it could lead to a significant personal loss to the accusee.
Wotmesir?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Darkest Scotland
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The routine with my company is quite simple. Your line manager administers the test. A zero reading and you just get on with the job. A positive breath test under the limit could (depending on the level) initiate a full medscreen urine test and being taken off the job until results are known.
Fail a test then you are down the road at once, no questions. Also there would be little chance of ever being employed again as a driver.
As for the stress involved, it has become a routine thing. No big deal.
Any incident on the line will result in a medscreen if you are suspected of any fault. After a fatality (suicide) some years ago I was breathalysed three times in the space of 90 minutes. Civilian police, transport police and employer.
As I said before, 36 hrs between glass and seat.
Fail a test then you are down the road at once, no questions. Also there would be little chance of ever being employed again as a driver.
As for the stress involved, it has become a routine thing. No big deal.
Any incident on the line will result in a medscreen if you are suspected of any fault. After a fatality (suicide) some years ago I was breathalysed three times in the space of 90 minutes. Civilian police, transport police and employer.
As I said before, 36 hrs between glass and seat.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Swindon
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drugs and Alcohol in the Rail Industry
Train Operating Companies are required to have a system for compliance with the Transport and Works act 1992 which makes it a criminal offence to work on the railway essentially above the drink drive limit. In response to this act the rail industry adopted the lower levels of alcohol (already quoted in this thread) to guarantee compliance with the act. Network Rail, LUL and th Train Operating Companies are compelled through their operator's licensing scheme (previously Railway Safety Cases) to have a system for random selection, pre-employment screening and 'for cause' screening.
In addition it is incumbent on contractors working on the infrastructure (through contract conditions and supplier accreditation) to have similar compatible system.
It is up to each contractror or operator to apply the rules which is subject to audit.
In addition it is incumbent on contractors working on the infrastructure (through contract conditions and supplier accreditation) to have similar compatible system.
It is up to each contractror or operator to apply the rules which is subject to audit.
Originally Posted by casper63
100% testing of all crew (pilots, cabin crew and air marshals) when they report for work has now become a norm in some new airlines in India. The acceptable limit is .000.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Warwick
Age: 42
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue of whether or not airport staff have reported the pilot concerned, while entirely speculative at the moment, and the subsequent posts on the topic raise an interesting question.
If, as has been suggested, it was an entirely malicious report resultant from some form of "squabble" earlier in the day then it is clearly totally unacceptable and the individual should be prosecuted for wasting police time as well as sent the bill for costs from Virgin.
However... the really interesting question (IMHO) is what if it was a genuine report made to the police because the staff member smelt alcohol on the pilot during an normal interaction between them?
As other contributors have said the staff member is most likely not qualified or obliged (contractually) to report the occurrence; however perhaps they have simply reported a smell of alcohol to the police; who have then decided to act on the information as has been reported. The staff member has done nothing more than report a fact "I can smell alcohol," and questionably is reporting this in the interests of flight safety??
So, they are essentially reporting an observation - in good faith - for further investigation by a competent body. It is then down to them how to deal with the matter - I would suggest going and seeing if they could also smell alcohol would be a good starting point!
It is just a thought which occurs to me, that's all. I am neither saying I agree with that standpoint, nor disagree - just my two penneth worth and seeing what the rest of you think!
Craig.
If, as has been suggested, it was an entirely malicious report resultant from some form of "squabble" earlier in the day then it is clearly totally unacceptable and the individual should be prosecuted for wasting police time as well as sent the bill for costs from Virgin.
However... the really interesting question (IMHO) is what if it was a genuine report made to the police because the staff member smelt alcohol on the pilot during an normal interaction between them?
As other contributors have said the staff member is most likely not qualified or obliged (contractually) to report the occurrence; however perhaps they have simply reported a smell of alcohol to the police; who have then decided to act on the information as has been reported. The staff member has done nothing more than report a fact "I can smell alcohol," and questionably is reporting this in the interests of flight safety??
So, they are essentially reporting an observation - in good faith - for further investigation by a competent body. It is then down to them how to deal with the matter - I would suggest going and seeing if they could also smell alcohol would be a good starting point!
It is just a thought which occurs to me, that's all. I am neither saying I agree with that standpoint, nor disagree - just my two penneth worth and seeing what the rest of you think!
Craig.
Last edited by HeliCraig; 29th Oct 2007 at 14:26. Reason: Spelling / Grammar
SOTV & tomahawk_pa38,
Thank you for that information. I think it is important that the aviation industry becomes aware that it is not the only section of industry subject to strict controls and to see that there are other ways of approaching it. The rail operators however appear to have been left room for manoeuvre in the legislation. This does not exist in the aviation field where the breath test blood alcohol (BAC) limit was set at the lowest level that could be reliably detected. It does not imply that there is any impairment of function at that limit. Had the limit been set with more reference to the impairment level (which would still have been well below that for driving) then there would have been room for companies to introduce their own testing regimes below the legal limit. As it is the companies are now in a bind, they would be committed to the legal limit as it is not possible to test below it and as we know there appear to be a disturbing number of false positives at this level.
I am little surprised that no one has commented on my other observation that it might be appropriate to apply similar BAC limits to police and maybe customs officers.
YS
Thank you for that information. I think it is important that the aviation industry becomes aware that it is not the only section of industry subject to strict controls and to see that there are other ways of approaching it. The rail operators however appear to have been left room for manoeuvre in the legislation. This does not exist in the aviation field where the breath test blood alcohol (BAC) limit was set at the lowest level that could be reliably detected. It does not imply that there is any impairment of function at that limit. Had the limit been set with more reference to the impairment level (which would still have been well below that for driving) then there would have been room for companies to introduce their own testing regimes below the legal limit. As it is the companies are now in a bind, they would be committed to the legal limit as it is not possible to test below it and as we know there appear to be a disturbing number of false positives at this level.
I am little surprised that no one has commented on my other observation that it might be appropriate to apply similar BAC limits to police and maybe customs officers.
YS
Join Date: Oct 1998
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said before, 36 hrs between glass and seat.
I appreciate 8 hrs bottle to throttle may well not be enough, but really...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: South of France
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So many people ready to play supacop with no official training
Sounds very easy when written after the event.
Returning from a recent trip, I was in a lift at T3 LHR at 7am with 3 or 4 other passengers and their "complimentary Limo" drivers. I was pushed up pretty close to someone elses driver and when he turned round towards me to get out, he reeked and I mean reeked of alcohol...he also looked pretty rough but I accept that's a fairly subjective state.
So, out of interest, anyone here care to state what they would do next and would it be any different had the guy been a pilot?
Sounds very easy when written after the event.
Returning from a recent trip, I was in a lift at T3 LHR at 7am with 3 or 4 other passengers and their "complimentary Limo" drivers. I was pushed up pretty close to someone elses driver and when he turned round towards me to get out, he reeked and I mean reeked of alcohol...he also looked pretty rough but I accept that's a fairly subjective state.
So, out of interest, anyone here care to state what they would do next and would it be any different had the guy been a pilot?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Age: 55
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been much talk about "what you would do" in certain situations. No one really knows until they are faced with the problem - theory and practice as so different.
Airlines would hopefully seek out the informant to the authorities and get their details. It makes excellent pr anyway for an airline to contact the informant and make them feel as though they have done the right thing - on balance of course they are trying to find out exactly how/why they reported this matter. Do it under the guise of "we are hoping to make our detection rates of these matters better by learning" - say that an informant will probably feel they are high almighty and special and gush out information like there is no tomorrow.
If any vindictiveness is found in the informant's intentions then a clear letter from the airline would be in order that they intend to seek damages and make an example - BUT you would have to prove a link between the two of them to make it clear there was malicious play afoot....
Airlines would hopefully seek out the informant to the authorities and get their details. It makes excellent pr anyway for an airline to contact the informant and make them feel as though they have done the right thing - on balance of course they are trying to find out exactly how/why they reported this matter. Do it under the guise of "we are hoping to make our detection rates of these matters better by learning" - say that an informant will probably feel they are high almighty and special and gush out information like there is no tomorrow.
If any vindictiveness is found in the informant's intentions then a clear letter from the airline would be in order that they intend to seek damages and make an example - BUT you would have to prove a link between the two of them to make it clear there was malicious play afoot....
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: u.k
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOTV,
Jeez I need to be on your Roster, I'm working far far too hard.
36hrs means me having a glass of vino with my dinner once a week before my two days off or on annual leave. Alternatively I could start 1/2 way through a duty and be clear for the next one
Right, I'm off to re-train (pun intended)
Jeez I need to be on your Roster, I'm working far far too hard.
36hrs means me having a glass of vino with my dinner once a week before my two days off or on annual leave. Alternatively I could start 1/2 way through a duty and be clear for the next one
Right, I'm off to re-train (pun intended)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
strake, your point is excellent, but the chauffer in the lift was not an airline pilot responsible for the lives of hundreds of people. Yes, he could have crashed his car and killed people, and yes of course there should be stories written about his lot too, but there is quite obviously a distinction to be made here.
Inconvenient, yes. Embarassing, yes. Costly, yes. Time-consuming, yes. Headline-grabbing for that obsence newspaper the Daily Mail, yes definitely. But a necessary safe guard to ensure safety? I think so.
Inconvenient, yes. Embarassing, yes. Costly, yes. Time-consuming, yes. Headline-grabbing for that obsence newspaper the Daily Mail, yes definitely. But a necessary safe guard to ensure safety? I think so.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: south east UK
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thread drift but:
If you actually look at real risk and real statistics and not daily mail propoganda then actually, yes the limo driver (and all professional drivers) should have zero alchohol limit and yes, should be dobbed in.
To my recollection there has not been a single commercial aviation fatality anywhere in the world, ever due to alcohol, wheras in the UK alone last year 3000 people died on the roads with 10,000s more seriously injured, of which 1/4 to 1/3 were due to alchohol, Including a National Express coach driver.
I'm certainly not condoning drinking before a flight and indeed anyone that does so should get the full force of the justice system, but if anyone wants to play vigilante then start looking where the damage is being done by people drinking when they shouldn't. May I suggest the roads, hospitals and police stations as a more worthwihle crusade than airports.
If you actually look at real risk and real statistics and not daily mail propoganda then actually, yes the limo driver (and all professional drivers) should have zero alchohol limit and yes, should be dobbed in.
To my recollection there has not been a single commercial aviation fatality anywhere in the world, ever due to alcohol, wheras in the UK alone last year 3000 people died on the roads with 10,000s more seriously injured, of which 1/4 to 1/3 were due to alchohol, Including a National Express coach driver.
I'm certainly not condoning drinking before a flight and indeed anyone that does so should get the full force of the justice system, but if anyone wants to play vigilante then start looking where the damage is being done by people drinking when they shouldn't. May I suggest the roads, hospitals and police stations as a more worthwihle crusade than airports.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: London
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
757_Driver: Agreed, that's what the statistics show.
To look at it from another point of view, is it not the case that others should learn from the high standards set by pilots regarding safe conduct and responsible behaviour?
To look at it from another point of view, is it not the case that others should learn from the high standards set by pilots regarding safe conduct and responsible behaviour?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: South of France
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strake,
Is it possible the limo driver just had a terrible cold/flu hence looking awful, didnt sleep well and a really bad case of halitocious or had maybe spilt some alcohol on his unifrom the night before when filling up the vodka decanter in the back of the limo...... Innoncent until proven right
Oh absolutely, anyone of those reasons. I'm not his judge anymore than a police officer would be but the question is, "is it irresponsible not to report him?"
They've got vodka decanters in the back of Virgin limos...??B******s! They've always hidden them from me.....
Is it possible the limo driver just had a terrible cold/flu hence looking awful, didnt sleep well and a really bad case of halitocious or had maybe spilt some alcohol on his unifrom the night before when filling up the vodka decanter in the back of the limo...... Innoncent until proven right
Oh absolutely, anyone of those reasons. I'm not his judge anymore than a police officer would be but the question is, "is it irresponsible not to report him?"
They've got vodka decanters in the back of Virgin limos...??B******s! They've always hidden them from me.....
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: EGLL
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said earlier the aviation industry is not aware of "alcohol free" times. The regulators (SRG) do not do anything to combat this situation. Unfortunately aeroplane crashes will never show a fatigued pilot and I'm sure that more accidents are due to tiredness rather than alcohol. I have done a lot with human factors recently and alcohol is probably the least worrying factor. The most worrying aspect is fatigue and problems on the ground which is not helped by airports and their management. I find the most stressfull time is on the ground where more mistakes can be made due to pressure to get airborne again.
What also tickles me is that Airport Security can turn up and work being under the influence i.e. pissed and can then let someone pass through and because they are under the influence not detect it. BANG bomb. However a pilot can turn up for work after only having half a pint of beer and be arrested. Or the pilot can turn up for work alcohol free and either fly the plane into the ground or get the axe from the cockpit and attack the passengers. I do not know what the world is coming to, I just wish that the people in power would listen to the people in the driving seat.
What also tickles me is that Airport Security can turn up and work being under the influence i.e. pissed and can then let someone pass through and because they are under the influence not detect it. BANG bomb. However a pilot can turn up for work after only having half a pint of beer and be arrested. Or the pilot can turn up for work alcohol free and either fly the plane into the ground or get the axe from the cockpit and attack the passengers. I do not know what the world is coming to, I just wish that the people in power would listen to the people in the driving seat.