Easyjet pilot grounded for whatsapp message to friends
 

I hope they get the help they need.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/201...-was-suicidal/

"they" ???

Really doesn't need to be a thread on this. This is someone's life - they threw out the flags, they got noticed and action was taken. End of story.

Really? what about those who don't 'throw out the flags' and get noticed?

"They" is now being used as a "singular neuter" pronoun, because . . . well, because English doesn't have one and, for some reason, younger folks find constructions like "he or she" unsatisfactory. I hate it and think it's simply stupid, but it seems to have become standard usage.

I agree, Auxtank. There's nothing to see here. Everything seems to be working just as we would hope.

After the German Wings crash in 2015 no one is going to take any chances and I think that's the end of his licence. He's probably looking at a ground job from now on.

If you need professional help then go to the appropriate place, social media isn't that place. The better employers have counselling available from professionals for flight crew with problems such as stress or alcohol. Sadly, he's almost certainly blown his career when he could have sought help and been taken off the roster for a while instead.

Oh do p**s off. Comments like 'blown his career' are why people keep quiet and don't bring their issues to the company. That aside, I'm not sure a whatsapp group is really social media, yes it's online, but a private conversation isn't inherently social media.

Do you really think that a Whatsapp group is a better option for someone with a problem than a professional counsellor ? Whilst confidentiality is part of the process, any counsellor would recommend he be taken off the roster if they thought he was a safety threat. This could have been done quietly and he could have received the help he needed and been returned to flying status if deemed fit.

By effectively going public with his issues he's backed the company into a corner and they have no other option than to ground him

I for one wish him a good outcome. Hopefully the company will provide help and support. With the right intervention, he could be back in the seat again, given time.

For those who advocate that after good councelling he could go back on the line, I have this question: Would you feel comfortable to fly (both as crew or pax) with a pilot who has a mental history? In truth it's quite a dilemma for the airline.

I'd far prefer to fly with someone who has acknowledged their mental health issues and believes themselves, with the agreement of mental health professionals, to be in control of their mental state than with someone who has unacknowledged and/or unmanaged problems, especially if they are problems that are actively being hidden.

Given the prevalence of mental health issues in the general population, it is not unlikely that there are at least some pilots that should not be flying. This means it is very important to provide the greatest possible support to those who put their hands up and ask for help so that others feel encouraged to do so. This is not about judging people, it is about achieving the best outcomes.

Would you fly with someone who had had chicken pox in the past? What about if they'd had a heart attack? What if they were short sighted and needed glasses?

I felt suicidal once for a couple of days after a relationship breakup. I got over it. Would you fly with me? What about someone who was diagnosed bipolar? What about someone who's just a miserable git?
​​​​​
Mental health is the same as physical health. It's not black and white. Some things are temporary and go away with no risk to ops. Some things don't. And some things are completely out of the question.

He would need to be assessed by a psychiatrist approved by the CAA before returning to flying duties. The psychiatrist would have to be satisfied that he would put his own family onboard with the pilot concerned, and would be mindful of any liability he might incur if his decision proved incorrect, so very little benefit of the doubt would be given. It's now gone beyond Chief Pilot/Director Flight Operations level as his fitness to hold a medical certificate has been brought into question.

It matters not on iota how it was picked up - the treatment of the illness is the same. Of course ideally he should have contacted his AME if he felt unable to speak to his employer but he was ill.

when his illness is treated and he is no longer ill, why should he not work provided the regulator is satisfied?

I am interested in Easyjet's comment . My AME must have forgotten this part of the examination last time....and the time before...and the time before

A lot of you should read this again. And again. If people and companies had this attitude there would be a lot of people helped. People who desperately need help but who haven't been strong enough to step forward because they are afraid of being judged and "blow" their career.

CP

Some authorities are starting to look in pilots mental health as part of the annual/6 monthly medical. Approved doctors have guidelines and may refer a candidate for further investigation if in any doubt. Subtle questions may be asked in general conversation and responses noted, rather than a session on the couch.

The Chief Pilot is seldom a trained mental health professional but is expected to decide on someones fitness to operate his company's aircraft. He should be able to make lower level decisions such as time off if a pilot is going through a marriage break up or is dealing with the death of a close relative. Peer counselling or someone approved by the union could be appropriate in some cases requiring a more indepth response.

Alcohol or prescription drug abuse at a lower level would require a company grounding and treatment of the employee by an outside specialised agency.

Illegal drug abuse would definitely have to involve the regulator as a breach of the law would be involved.

Anything suicidal requires immediate grounding and the regulator to be involved, followed by a lengthy period of assessment to determine if a return to flying duties is going to be possible at all. The liability issues at stake are horrendous if a disaster were to happen and comparable to what Boeing are going through with the MAX and its MCAS.

Is it not only a requirement to check new employees according to new regulations?

CP

Absolutely yes. I hope that, post-Germanwings, all airlines have stronger procedures to protect the public from suicidal pilots than just grounding the ones who admit their feelings before locking the door and setting FL000.