|
Originally Posted by ph-sbe
(Post 10537648)
Remember that most of the elected representatives have no clue about what they are talking about. Afterall, a 25 year old bartender was able to get elected to congress.
I'm looking at this from UK so perhaps not as informed on US stuff as those of you left pond side but:
|
Originally Posted by triploss
(Post 10538402)
You should look up the origins of the 4th amendment sir. Comes straight from the UK from what I can remember.
|
Airbanda knows nothing. About professional piloting. Which is what this website ie supposed to be about. Why is an NPPRUNE (Non Professional Pilot Rumour Network) opened to allow such people the opportunity to voice their views? So may are political, ill-informed, and frankly rubbish,so as to demean this site.
|
Originally Posted by Small cog
(Post 10539378)
cappt: Do you have a reference for that? My understanding is Chief counsel of the FAA. This ruling has been long known. https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...rpretation.pdf "Requiring pilot to change status to "fatigued" or "ill." You next ask whether a certificate holder can require a PIC who is unwilling to concur with an extension to change his or her status to "fatigued" or "ill." As discussed in the answer to the previous question, § 117.19 is silent as to the details of how concurrence with an FDP extension is to be achieved. Thus, it neither prohibits the certificate holder from requiring the PIC to change his or her status to "fatigued" or "ill" nor prohibits the PIC from refusing to comply with the certificate holder's requirement. As mentioned previously, we expect this issue to be addressed as part of the certificate holder and PIC's employer-employee relationship.i 3. Disciplinary action for refusing an FDP extension. In your next question, you ask whether a certificate holder may take disciplinary action against a pilot for refusing to concur with an FDP extension. During the rulemaking process that created part 117, commenters asked the FAA to add a non-retaliation provision to part 117 to protect flightcrew members from disciplinary action. However, the FAA rejected this suggestion, explaining in the final rule that: [C]arriers are entitled to investigate the causes for an employee's fatigue. If a carrier determines that the flightcrew member was responsible for becoming fatigued, it has every right to take steps to address that behavior. However, if the flightcrew member's fatigue is a result of the carrier not following the regulatory requirements of this rule, the FAA may initiate enforcement action against the carrier. 6 As discussed in the final rule preamble, part 117 does not prohibit air carriers from investigating the causes of their employees' behavior and acting on the results of their" |
For those using civil liberties as a justification for not wanting to be breathalysed before every flight - remember what your job is, the impact of making mistakes and the responsibility you hold to the people sat behind you. If you value your civil liberty more than their lives, go find a new job you irresponsible and selfish fool.
I don't know a single passenger that would want to risk their life at the hands of a pilot who was drunk so quite why you have an issue proving that you're fit to do your job is beyond me. . |
Originally Posted by gtseraf
(Post 10538620)
Sadly, this has already happened in Japan but it is even worse. Alcohol check with a breathalyser at sign on, a check at the end of the flight (just in case one felt the urge to have a nip inflight). If there is a stopover of more than 2 hours, then a post flight check at the end of the sector PLUS another check before starting the other sector. Add to that a ban on alcohol consumption a certain time period before sign on during layovers ( the time period is twice as long s the no-drink rule in force)
oh yes, also endless emails and training courses about alcohol consumption, education and checks. Welcome to the new era. Most of this protects the bureaucrat sitting behind the desk rather than the consumer. It is enough to drive one to drink! |
Originally Posted by Small cog
(Post 10539766)
cappt: you wrote I don’t read the FAA ruling the way you do. A company would have to prove the employee wasn’t fatigued, and only then may they take what would be normal disciplinary action. If they couldn’t prove the fatigue the FAA may take action against the carrier. Any responsible crew member who is fatigued and believes it to be as a result of their employment, should not operate. If a witch hunt follows the I think you work for a poor employer. If your fatigue has been caused by your own stupidity, more fool you. |
Originally Posted by serf
(Post 10536561)
Why would you drink anything on a layover? |
"but let me just have a water/ coke/ club soda with my fine meal.".....
or a couple of glasses of a fine wine, but not the whole cask....you sound like a 5 year old....what is needed is moderation...but if people keep doing this, yah, the airlines will impose their own restriction on drinking downroute.....think how much this cost the airline... |
Originally Posted by viking767
(Post 10540479)
Let me think....I am in Paris, Rome etc. on a 24+ hour layover, but let me just have a water/ coke/ club soda with my fine meal. |
Every time somebody gets caught over the limit, these things turn in to a slinging match between those saying “just drink in moderation” and then tee-totallers arguing that if you can’t have 24 hours without a drink then you’re an alcoholic.
Some people drink, some people don’t, some people drink on 12/24/36/48 hour layovers in perfect moderation, some people drink too much on those layovers. The trick is moderation, as previously discussed. If on a nightstop/layover and you fancy a glass of wine with a meal then that if you’re choice as an adult and as a professional. It does not mean that person has a drinking problem. In fact if as an adult and a professional, even if on a single occasion you have too much to drink on a layover you can still act as an adult and a professional and call in sick (unfit for duty as you are!) even that doesn’t define you as having a drinking problem. Of course if it becomes a pattern of behaviour then it may indicate an issue.We are all human and make mistakes. It’s how we deal with those mistakes that defines us. The reality is, we do not need more blanket rules such as “no drinking down route”. We just need professionals to behave like professionals. |
Originally Posted by GingerFI
(Post 10540789)
The reality is, we do not need more blanket rules such as “no drinking down route”. We just need professionals to behave like professionals.
|
Originally Posted by ironbutt57
(Post 10540493)
....what is needed is moderation...but if people keep doing this, yah, the airlines will impose their own restriction on drinking downroute.....
Government already considers airline pilots chattel property. Don't feed the beast. You don't want to be subjected to the monitoring system that's been described in Japan. Testing for cause ? Certainly. Testing everyone ...all the time ? Nope... |
United has now imposed a company 12 hour rule instead of the FAA mandated 8 hours. |
Originally Posted by viking767
(Post 10541016)
United has now imposed a company 12 hour rule instead of the FAA mandated 8 hours. I can also remember domestic folks being surprised that international pilots drank alcohol while deadheading in civvies on a company ticket. Flying international on a cockpit jumpseat at United in the past I was allowed to go back to a seat in the cabin and guzzle champagne as long as I didn't return to the cockpit with eight hours according to the UAL FOM. And, airlines with eight hour rules are sometimes surprised to find that local regulations in places like SIN prohibit alcohol consumption within 12 hours or more of operating a flight. You will have sea lawyers here and elsewhere tell you that those rules don't apply to you but I'm not sure that will impress the local judge. |
A United Express flight attendant seems to have been under the weather... .204 blood alcohol. Passengers reported her to United.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/new...UC4?li=BBnbfcL |
And, it's not just pilots allegedly showing up drunk for a flight. Air Wisconsin is colloquially known as 'Air Whiskey' for some reason.
Drunk flight attendant passes out on plane, doesn’t know what city she is in, cops sayAirport police officers learned the flight attendant was either drunk or having a “medical issue” after the United Express airplane departed O’Hare International Airport on Aug. 2, according to an arrest affidavit. Passenger Aaron Scherb tweeted at United Airlines while on the flight, saying he and others recognized her impairment. Scherb told McClatchy newsgroup the flight attendant bumped seats and travelers, dropped things and slurred the safety announcement .
“After everyone boarded the flight and we were still parked at the gate, the flight attendant began the security announcement, which seemed very slurred,” Scherb told McClatchy in an email. “She stopped after about 10 seconds without finishing.” While the plane taxied to the runway, the flight attendant took her seat and appeared to “pass out” or fall asleep, Scherb said. A video taken by Scherb shows the flight attendant become “briefly alert” when pilots called on the internal telephone, which she didn’t answer, he said. When the plane landed, airport police officers and United Airlines employees boarded the airplane and met with the flight attendant, prosecutors say. A few of the passengers said they were “scared for their lives,” according to the arrest affidavit. When police at South Bend International airport asked the flight attendant where she was, she answered “Chicago,” prosecutors said. Once in a private airport office, officers evaluated the flight attendant for medical issues but found none, prosecutors said. Instead, they noticed she had bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, poor balance and the smell of alcohol on her breath, according to the affidavit. While on the way to jail, the flight attendant told an officer that she drank two vodka “shooters” before work that morning, according to the affidavit. A breath test later showed her blood-alcohol content level was .204, prosecutors said. Julianne March, 49, of Waukesha, Wisconsin, was charged with public intoxication on Thursday, according to the affidavit. She could serve up to six months in jail, a spokeswoman for the St. Joseph County Prosecutor’s Office said. “(She) was found in a public place or a place of public resort — specifically, a commercial airplane — in a state of intoxication caused by the person’s use of alcohol or a controlled substance,” the affidavit states. “(She) endangered the life of another person...the passengers on the flight.” The flight was operated by an Air Wisconsin crew, an airliner that partners with United Airlines for United Express flights, a spokesman for United said. The spokesman referred McClatchy to Air Wisconsin for comment. Air Wisconsin said Thursday that the flight attendant is “no longer an employee of the company.” “We will continue to cooperate with local authorities and assist them as necessary,” an Air Wisconsin spokesperson said in an email. Scherb said United Airlines offered him a $500 voucher or 25,000 miles, in addition to a refund for the flight. But Scherb hasn’t yet accepted the offer, he said. “Given that the safety and well-being of all 50 passengers on that flight was jeopardized, I find United’s response to be insufficient,” Scherb said, explaining that another would-be passenger appeared to have received a $1,200 voucher because the flight was overbooked. However, Scherb said he doesn’t want the flight attendant to be terminated by the airline. “I hope this flight attendant is not fired,” Scherb said Wednesday in the email. “I would hope that United Airlines and Air Wisconsin...treat this person as an employee, not as an expendable commodity, and that they will help her get treatment for addiction, if that’s in fact what she suffers from.” But he also believes airlines should consider a zero-tolerance policy for flight attendants to ensure safety. “Given the significant safety and security roles that flight attendants have, United (and other airlines) should consider adopting zero tolerance policies for flight attendants going forward,” Scherb said. This isn’t the first report this week of intoxicated crew members on United flights. On Saturday, two United pilots were arrested on the suspicion that they were intoxicated as they were set to pilot a flight from Scotland to New Jersey, the Associated Press reported. One was charged for being over the legal alcohol limit. The other was released without being charged, according to the news outlet. |
Originally Posted by GingerFI
(Post 10540789)
The trick is moderation, as previously discussed. If on a nightstop/layover and you fancy a glass of wine with a meal then that if you’re choice as an adult and as a professional. It does not mean that person has a drinking problem. In fact if as an adult and a professional, even if on a single occasion you have too much to drink on a layover you can still act as an adult and a professional and call in sick (unfit for duty as you are!) even that doesn’t define you as having a drinking problem. Of course if it becomes a pattern of behaviour then it may indicate an issue.We are all human and make mistakes. It’s how we deal with those mistakes that defines us.
The reality is, we do not need more blanket rules such as “no drinking down route”. We just need professionals to behave like professionals. |
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10541143)
But the pilots would always disappear about 10 hours before the planned pre-flight briefing (which typically started about two hours before we boarded the aircraft so ~12 hours bottle to throttle).
After the 1990 Fargo alcohol incident Northwest had a policy where you could turn yourself in to the HIMS program and not be disciplined up until the preflight checklist was read. Nowadays if you report for work drunk as a crewmember you don't have to make it to the plane to be in violation of alcohol rules. I'll be the first to agree that this seems to play out a little differently in every case in different jurisdictions. |
"United Airlines is to enforce stricter rules after one of its pilots was accused of failing a breath test ahead of a flight from Scotland.
The Chicago-based operator has now lengthened the amount of time from when a pilot drinks to when they take control of a flight. A spokeswoman for the company confirmed it is now 12 hours. It was previously eight hours." https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland...-west-49364140 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 16:19. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.