UA pilot falls foul of idiotically low UK alcohol law
Hellsbrink:
Alcohol, by definition, IS a drug and also a poison. Let's not get caught in definitions. Fact is that alcohol-related diseases kill more people than heroin, and that alcohol is considered a hard-drug by scientists.
Rananim:
Not true. I think the same limit applies throughout Europe for alcohol.
LH
Alcohol, by definition, IS a drug and also a poison. Let's not get caught in definitions. Fact is that alcohol-related diseases kill more people than heroin, and that alcohol is considered a hard-drug by scientists.
Rananim:
Not true. I think the same limit applies throughout Europe for alcohol.
LH
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: guildford
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.I fly for UA and yes, they have a very effective intervention program.
1. They have one
2. They need one
3. The cpt was so unforgivably unprofessional in the first place
Guest
Posts: n/a
Old Lizzy. When you started this thread had you completely forgotten what you'd written in the one about Pablo Mason?
Then again you also wrote the following......
............which puts your behaviour here in perspective I suppose. Then again I've got you marked down as a troll so none of it matters.
Originally Posted by Old Lizzy
Breaking the rules or adjusting them to your purposes is one thing, doing it with a plane full of paying passengers is quite another..........There was not the slightest hint of justification for breaking the law.........I don't care who was who, or what was what; it is breaking the laws of both the land, and of common sense, it's that simple....
Then again you also wrote the following......
Originally Posted by Old Lizzy
I live on a little island and like being the local idiot.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: guildford
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VS-Toga
Does it concern you that all airlines have safety programs and that they need them - aren't they all perfectly safe?
Does it concern you that all airlines have safety programs and that they need them - aren't they all perfectly safe?
The UA Intervention programme is another phrase for rehab.
Your analogy is ridiculous.
For his colleagues to describe him as an outstanding professional is pretty insulting considering what he's done.
And, for the record, I am not without vice. I smoke a bit and I like a glass of wine.
I do agree with you that 20mg would cover all bases, however.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point is that there are pilots who never drink,smoke,curse or break a rule but yet they may well be the last person youd want sitting next to you in an emergency.The CP realized the world is full of pen-pushers and probably didnt want to lose a good pilot on a technicality.My compliments to the judge for his/her wise decision.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kerry Eire
Age: 76
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously Old Lizzy, coming from the US is far more scared of TERRORISTS
than he is of flying innocent passengers around when outside legal drink limits, given his contradictory views on rule breaking.
I just wonder if he'd like to explain the difference (for all involved in the aircraft, the building and the aftermath) between a fully loaded 747 hitting a building due to terrorism and a fully loaded 747 hitting a building due to pilot error caused by being sluggish due to drink.
than he is of flying innocent passengers around when outside legal drink limits, given his contradictory views on rule breaking.
I just wonder if he'd like to explain the difference (for all involved in the aircraft, the building and the aftermath) between a fully loaded 747 hitting a building due to terrorism and a fully loaded 747 hitting a building due to pilot error caused by being sluggish due to drink.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Basingstoke
Age: 48
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps I can add a slightly different perspective. I'm a UK police officer and have arrested numerous drink drivers, and perhaps more important was a custody sergeant in a busy custody suite for a long time. I must have booked in a lot of drink drivers.
60mg alc in 100ml blood is way too high to be fit to fly. I think the current 20mg rule is about right a it allows for any residual alcohol/mouthwash issues etc...
To give some idea of scale: 1 standard pint of beer = 2 units alcohol = approx 30 mg alc in 100 ml blood.
The average body will absorb approx. 1 unit or 15 mg or 1/2 pint of beer per hour.
Do the maths and work out how much he must have been drink in the hours before his flight. He was either coming down from a BIG session or he has a drink problem and was 'topping up.'
If it's the former there are some serious questions his employer needs to ask about professional standards. If it's the latter he needs to be thoroughly assessed over many months before he is allowed to fly again.
60mg alc in 100ml blood is way too high to be fit to fly. I think the current 20mg rule is about right a it allows for any residual alcohol/mouthwash issues etc...
To give some idea of scale: 1 standard pint of beer = 2 units alcohol = approx 30 mg alc in 100 ml blood.
The average body will absorb approx. 1 unit or 15 mg or 1/2 pint of beer per hour.
Do the maths and work out how much he must have been drink in the hours before his flight. He was either coming down from a BIG session or he has a drink problem and was 'topping up.'
If it's the former there are some serious questions his employer needs to ask about professional standards. If it's the latter he needs to be thoroughly assessed over many months before he is allowed to fly again.
Apache for HEMS - Strafe those Survivors!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like a drink as much as the next man (I have one just now). I work for a company where we regularly spend several days away down route. Many of my colleagues enjoy a glass of wine with dinner, and nothing more, good for them. As I am not sure that I could exercise that level of control, and to avoid doubt on my part, I do not drink alcohol from the night before I start a tour until I get home at the end of the last day.
It is not because I am a stronger man than them, but because I am weaker. We are all responsible for our own behaviour, but also if I felt my colleague was "unfit" to fly, I would discretely invite him to call in sick and suggest that he might like to seek some help. I know a few former colleagues who had serious problems, and, with support, not only overcame them but also became outstanding councillors for those with similar issues.
I think UA should be praised for taking a firm but fair line to rehabilitate this pilot. Thankfully nothing terrible happened, and throwing someones whole life away when the opportunity for redemption exists would be very harsh.
Let he who is without sin........
It is not because I am a stronger man than them, but because I am weaker. We are all responsible for our own behaviour, but also if I felt my colleague was "unfit" to fly, I would discretely invite him to call in sick and suggest that he might like to seek some help. I know a few former colleagues who had serious problems, and, with support, not only overcame them but also became outstanding councillors for those with similar issues.
I think UA should be praised for taking a firm but fair line to rehabilitate this pilot. Thankfully nothing terrible happened, and throwing someones whole life away when the opportunity for redemption exists would be very harsh.
Let he who is without sin........
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The UK alcohol limit for flying is as far as I can see effectively zero as it's set such that a teetotaller who'd drunk some out of date orange juice would pass (just) but someone who'd had an alcoholic drink is likely to fail.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cambridge, UK
Age: 46
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's about consequences, not whether it's okay or not.
It seems to me that nobody is disputing whether alcohol is okay when flying, nor even whether the guy in question's conduct was unprofessional. Most of this thread seems to centre around what should or should not have happened to him.
Now, I'm SLF so I welcome the perspective of the professional community - however I do drive. What always struck me about drink driving laws is that there's no spectrum.
If the limit here in the UK is 80mg, then the bloke at 79mg who has an accident is not criminally culpable, yet clearly his driving was impaired. In this situation, the police have no means of sanctioning the driver's bad behaviour, and only a civil case can be made.
The bloke at 81mg *is* criminally culpable, even if his bad behaviour was only incrementally worse than the 79mg chap. He will at least lose is licence - or if the situation warrants it - go to jail. The difference of 2mg (vanishing to zero) seems disproportionate to the difference between a criminal conviction or not.
Of course, there must be limits codified in law that tells a police officer, judge or jury when a case becomes criminally liable.
So why isn't there a graduated penalty? If 20mg is the threshold set to allow for legitimate medical conditions, slight miscalculations from the night before (tut tut), personal variation, etc, and under which public safety is not threatened, there must be some amount above that - say 40mg - in which the consequences recognise the misconduct, but stop short of criminal conviction. You screwed up - made a mistake and were unprofessional - but the worst that will happen is that you get fired. Above that, you're into the realm of criminal negligence, and ought to answer to a judge.
Where to set the thresholds is another matter. The second threshold still needs to be low enough to send the signal but without presenting undue risk to the public[1] but some spectrum or graduated consequence would better reflect the magnitude of a person's misactions.
It seems rational for driving potentially lethal cars. Is it rational for aviation?
strix.
[1] note that there are lots of risky behaviours which go unregulated. Lack of sleep, for example - and probably only because it can't easily be quantified. If you buy the idea, then the rest becomes an exercise in evaluating risk. (and lets not forget that crossing the road carries a nonzero risk.)
Now, I'm SLF so I welcome the perspective of the professional community - however I do drive. What always struck me about drink driving laws is that there's no spectrum.
If the limit here in the UK is 80mg, then the bloke at 79mg who has an accident is not criminally culpable, yet clearly his driving was impaired. In this situation, the police have no means of sanctioning the driver's bad behaviour, and only a civil case can be made.
The bloke at 81mg *is* criminally culpable, even if his bad behaviour was only incrementally worse than the 79mg chap. He will at least lose is licence - or if the situation warrants it - go to jail. The difference of 2mg (vanishing to zero) seems disproportionate to the difference between a criminal conviction or not.
Of course, there must be limits codified in law that tells a police officer, judge or jury when a case becomes criminally liable.
So why isn't there a graduated penalty? If 20mg is the threshold set to allow for legitimate medical conditions, slight miscalculations from the night before (tut tut), personal variation, etc, and under which public safety is not threatened, there must be some amount above that - say 40mg - in which the consequences recognise the misconduct, but stop short of criminal conviction. You screwed up - made a mistake and were unprofessional - but the worst that will happen is that you get fired. Above that, you're into the realm of criminal negligence, and ought to answer to a judge.
Where to set the thresholds is another matter. The second threshold still needs to be low enough to send the signal but without presenting undue risk to the public[1] but some spectrum or graduated consequence would better reflect the magnitude of a person's misactions.
It seems rational for driving potentially lethal cars. Is it rational for aviation?
strix.
[1] note that there are lots of risky behaviours which go unregulated. Lack of sleep, for example - and probably only because it can't easily be quantified. If you buy the idea, then the rest becomes an exercise in evaluating risk. (and lets not forget that crossing the road carries a nonzero risk.)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under bar stool
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone tell me which aviation accidents have been attributed to alcohol?
With CAP 371 now being seen as a target to achieve/exceed and fatigue often being worse than drink are we not missing the biggest danger?
With CAP 371 now being seen as a target to achieve/exceed and fatigue often being worse than drink are we not missing the biggest danger?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First, this:
Phil, get a grip - we're deadly afraid of EVERYTHING in the US...
Next, I'm not a pilot and don't want to become one, but really enjoy pprune because of the "intercourse" between pilots, wannabees, and maintenance folks.
I've known several alcoholics, and I can honestly say that many of them are much better overall left to their own devices - some are much better doing anything when they stick to their normal routine.
Now, I'm not saying said pilot is an alcoholic - and I'm not defending him either - but if it's his habit to have a couple martinis with dinner, and his dinner happened late that day, what should we think?
Natch, I'd prefer to have "human robots" on the flight deck. Perfect people who don't fart, don't smoke, don't drink and don't swear. (Thank god we don't have to say hello to the crew anymore when we fly... LOL!)
It seems to me we should be thinking about the guy's normal habits at this point, thinking about whether or not there's a problem brewing in his future.
The issue doesn't go a long way in putting that nasty old "I'll have what the pilot's drinking" airport bar joke to rest, does it?
...
Obviously Old Lizzy, coming from the US is far more scared of TERRORISTS
than he is of flying innocent passengers around when outside legal drink limits, given his contradictory views on rule breaking.
than he is of flying innocent passengers around when outside legal drink limits, given his contradictory views on rule breaking.
Next, I'm not a pilot and don't want to become one, but really enjoy pprune because of the "intercourse" between pilots, wannabees, and maintenance folks.
I've known several alcoholics, and I can honestly say that many of them are much better overall left to their own devices - some are much better doing anything when they stick to their normal routine.
Now, I'm not saying said pilot is an alcoholic - and I'm not defending him either - but if it's his habit to have a couple martinis with dinner, and his dinner happened late that day, what should we think?
Natch, I'd prefer to have "human robots" on the flight deck. Perfect people who don't fart, don't smoke, don't drink and don't swear. (Thank god we don't have to say hello to the crew anymore when we fly... LOL!)
It seems to me we should be thinking about the guy's normal habits at this point, thinking about whether or not there's a problem brewing in his future.
The issue doesn't go a long way in putting that nasty old "I'll have what the pilot's drinking" airport bar joke to rest, does it?
...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deja vu all over again...
There was a long, drawn-out discussion about this a few years ago.
The FARs are very clear about how much alcohol is allowed, when this man was over the limit. That is open-and-shut.
The FAA has a procedure for someone to resume flying that is very rigourous, meant to ensure that he will have his drinking under control the next time he flies.
Then there is a program in place with his airline, perhaps part of the way he can get back to flying under the FAA rules. Most if not all of the major airlines have such programs nowadays and it is an accepted part of the scene. It is not as if United Airlines runs some sort of unique, private sanatorium!
If you really don't like the idea of flying with an airline that has a program meant to help crew with their health problems (when alcohol abuse falls into this basic category - more modern thinking) then you are probably out of luck using any of the majors. Perhaps you would feel much safer on an airliner without seat belts as well. Seeing them along with that nasty little safety briefing card hints that there might be a problem.
In reality, of course, we just try to spot problems and deal with them in a reasonable way, whether it's alcohol abuse, having a crash or any of the other manifold complications inherent in zooming along packed into a thin alloy tube. You are still safer than driving in your car, doing that.
The FARs are very clear about how much alcohol is allowed, when this man was over the limit. That is open-and-shut.
The FAA has a procedure for someone to resume flying that is very rigourous, meant to ensure that he will have his drinking under control the next time he flies.
Then there is a program in place with his airline, perhaps part of the way he can get back to flying under the FAA rules. Most if not all of the major airlines have such programs nowadays and it is an accepted part of the scene. It is not as if United Airlines runs some sort of unique, private sanatorium!
If you really don't like the idea of flying with an airline that has a program meant to help crew with their health problems (when alcohol abuse falls into this basic category - more modern thinking) then you are probably out of luck using any of the majors. Perhaps you would feel much safer on an airliner without seat belts as well. Seeing them along with that nasty little safety briefing card hints that there might be a problem.
In reality, of course, we just try to spot problems and deal with them in a reasonable way, whether it's alcohol abuse, having a crash or any of the other manifold complications inherent in zooming along packed into a thin alloy tube. You are still safer than driving in your car, doing that.
may I be REALLY pedantic and point out that alcohol is NOT a drug, by definition?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LONDON
Age: 51
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read this thread and I do withold judgement as I do not know the circumstances.
But what I will say to all of you that have passed sentance consider the the following:-
1 the guy was found in a situation whereby he exceeded his limit, is it a one time screw up or does he have a problem.
2. If he has a problem, could the airline have done more to recognise this before the situation occured
3. If he has a problem, what is the best way to re-educate the people that helped conceal the problem.
4. How do you deal with the problem.
There are always going to be occaisions where the rules by thumb dont pan out - different alcohols get absorbed at different rates - if your drinking shots then they are pretty immediate, wine takes longer to be absorbed and beer longer still - dont ask me why I am not a doc.
But as a functioning alchoholic trying to kick the habbit there is alot more to be drunk in any one situation than just the drink taken.
You can argue whether alcholol is a drug or not - it matters little - the facts are that the social aspect alone draws people into the circle.
I dont know if this guy had 1 too many or had thought he would be okay, but what I do applaud is the fact that regardless he got support if he had a problem or not. That support leads to him having an option to regaining his life and career - such support I have never known outside the aviation industry.
I personally think you should really consider - there but the grace of god go i - because it is all too easy to fall into. I know and are trying to deal with it.
And no I am not a pilot
But what I will say to all of you that have passed sentance consider the the following:-
1 the guy was found in a situation whereby he exceeded his limit, is it a one time screw up or does he have a problem.
2. If he has a problem, could the airline have done more to recognise this before the situation occured
3. If he has a problem, what is the best way to re-educate the people that helped conceal the problem.
4. How do you deal with the problem.
There are always going to be occaisions where the rules by thumb dont pan out - different alcohols get absorbed at different rates - if your drinking shots then they are pretty immediate, wine takes longer to be absorbed and beer longer still - dont ask me why I am not a doc.
But as a functioning alchoholic trying to kick the habbit there is alot more to be drunk in any one situation than just the drink taken.
You can argue whether alcholol is a drug or not - it matters little - the facts are that the social aspect alone draws people into the circle.
I dont know if this guy had 1 too many or had thought he would be okay, but what I do applaud is the fact that regardless he got support if he had a problem or not. That support leads to him having an option to regaining his life and career - such support I have never known outside the aviation industry.
I personally think you should really consider - there but the grace of god go i - because it is all too easy to fall into. I know and are trying to deal with it.
And no I am not a pilot