Professional Pilots and Professional Indemnity Insurance
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professional Pilots and Professional Indemnity Insurance
Having had my ATPL for twelve years or so I still worry about the 'what ifs'. What if I make a mistake which leads to me needing to defend my actions.
That defence may be in front of my employer, the Authority, a customer or whoever.
As far as I can tell as long as there is a 'reasonable prospect of a successful outcome' I may be able to convince Balpa to fight my corner. But how is 'reasonable' defined? What counts as a successful outcome? Maybe they can help or maybe not.
I have found insurance policies which cover legal costs for aircrew but they also have the same caveat.
So what are my chances if I have made a genuine mistake for which any defence has little prospect of a successful outcome? Other than, maybe, that of a mitigated penalty (which may actually be a great success in itself).
How could I fund a defence whatever the circumstances?
In other professions one can buy professional indemnity insurance which pays out if a mistake leads to a claim for damages.
So, I'm thinking of seeing if I can persuade an insurer to write a policy which combines the concepts of 'legal costs cover' and 'professional indemnity'.
What do you think, would that be of value to individuals in our profession?
ATB
RW&B
That defence may be in front of my employer, the Authority, a customer or whoever.
As far as I can tell as long as there is a 'reasonable prospect of a successful outcome' I may be able to convince Balpa to fight my corner. But how is 'reasonable' defined? What counts as a successful outcome? Maybe they can help or maybe not.
I have found insurance policies which cover legal costs for aircrew but they also have the same caveat.
So what are my chances if I have made a genuine mistake for which any defence has little prospect of a successful outcome? Other than, maybe, that of a mitigated penalty (which may actually be a great success in itself).
How could I fund a defence whatever the circumstances?
In other professions one can buy professional indemnity insurance which pays out if a mistake leads to a claim for damages.
So, I'm thinking of seeing if I can persuade an insurer to write a policy which combines the concepts of 'legal costs cover' and 'professional indemnity'.
What do you think, would that be of value to individuals in our profession?
ATB
RW&B
If you can convince an insurance company to offer cover like that I think it could be a better option than currently available.
Someone I know recently did something silly and they are now facing a disciplinary armageddon with their employer. I imagine a policy like this could well have helped.
I would be keen to hear more if you make headway.
Someone I know recently did something silly and they are now facing a disciplinary armageddon with their employer. I imagine a policy like this could well have helped.
I would be keen to hear more if you make headway.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update
I have persuaded a well respected insurer based in the UK to consider how such a policy would be structured and they are working on it.
Hope to have news soon, but would still welcome feedback.
RW&B
Hope to have news soon, but would still welcome feedback.
RW&B
Obviously it would all depend on cost, but union fees are costly and they will only think about fighting your corner if they know they'll win. What you need is an 'insurance' policy to cover eventualities. That make sense?
It would have to be less than the BALPA rate I think.
It seems to be going more and more down the route of 'Look after #1' unfortunately.
It would have to be less than the BALPA rate I think.
It seems to be going more and more down the route of 'Look after #1' unfortunately.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An insurance policy could be expensive & may not cover you if overseas....BALPA are expensive & from my experience will be selective of whom they represent.
As an individual I have found the T & G to be very good body from whom to gain representation. They will not cover pilots as a group but will as an individual; they have massive funds behind them & vast experience representing all sorts of individuals in difficult circumstances & are in my experience feared by pilot management. At a previous company on the few occasions they were called in to help individuals they sent fully trained professionals who wiped the floor with the company representatives. And all for @£11.50 per month...great value & peace of mind..........one caveat though not sure what the situation would be if stuck overseas or working for an overseas company.
As an individual I have found the T & G to be very good body from whom to gain representation. They will not cover pilots as a group but will as an individual; they have massive funds behind them & vast experience representing all sorts of individuals in difficult circumstances & are in my experience feared by pilot management. At a previous company on the few occasions they were called in to help individuals they sent fully trained professionals who wiped the floor with the company representatives. And all for @£11.50 per month...great value & peace of mind..........one caveat though not sure what the situation would be if stuck overseas or working for an overseas company.
Last edited by BarrowBoy; 2nd Dec 2009 at 11:52.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the UK companies are required to take out and maintain employer's liability and public liability insurance. This insurance covers the company in respect of potential claims by employees in the former case and by third parties (for example, passengers) in the latter.
Employers are covered in respect of these claims by actions of their employees undertaking their LAWFUL duties in connection with the employer's business.
Professional Indemnity Insurance is usually required to be taken out by practitioners when providing a service as principals in private practice. This insurance, whilst optional in law, is usually a requirement of membership of the relevant professional body governing the professional person.
PII insurance is not normally required to be taken out by employees of companies as this requirement is covered by the vicarious liability of their employers.
It should also be noted that PII covers the 'professional negligence' of practitioners that might arise out of liability for a breach of a duty of care in tort. It is not taken out to cover for an criminal liability which might arise in the course of employment.
Whilst it may be possible for actions to be brought against pilots for 'negligence', it is also possible for criminal action to be brought against the pilot. Such liability would not be covered by PII. Just as a speeding ticket is a criminal offence for the driver of a car, so might the 'negligence' of a pilot breaching the relevant air law. So PII would be inappropriate in that case.
I understand the concerns of pilots in respect of PII, but its relevance is questionable in law.
Therefore, I think to consider PII for pilots would be opening a hornets' nest of potential issues and problems - not least of which is cost.
If this area of insurance was relevant I'm sure the regulators and the airlines would have imposed conditions on pilots already. I think it is because it would be inappropriate both as an employee and in law that no action has been taken over many years to provide this form of cover.
Please don't try in impose an expensive additional cost to pilots, when its relevance is questionable in any event.
KR
FOK
Employers are covered in respect of these claims by actions of their employees undertaking their LAWFUL duties in connection with the employer's business.
Professional Indemnity Insurance is usually required to be taken out by practitioners when providing a service as principals in private practice. This insurance, whilst optional in law, is usually a requirement of membership of the relevant professional body governing the professional person.
PII insurance is not normally required to be taken out by employees of companies as this requirement is covered by the vicarious liability of their employers.
It should also be noted that PII covers the 'professional negligence' of practitioners that might arise out of liability for a breach of a duty of care in tort. It is not taken out to cover for an criminal liability which might arise in the course of employment.
Whilst it may be possible for actions to be brought against pilots for 'negligence', it is also possible for criminal action to be brought against the pilot. Such liability would not be covered by PII. Just as a speeding ticket is a criminal offence for the driver of a car, so might the 'negligence' of a pilot breaching the relevant air law. So PII would be inappropriate in that case.
I understand the concerns of pilots in respect of PII, but its relevance is questionable in law.
Therefore, I think to consider PII for pilots would be opening a hornets' nest of potential issues and problems - not least of which is cost.
If this area of insurance was relevant I'm sure the regulators and the airlines would have imposed conditions on pilots already. I think it is because it would be inappropriate both as an employee and in law that no action has been taken over many years to provide this form of cover.
Please don't try in impose an expensive additional cost to pilots, when its relevance is questionable in any event.
KR
FOK
Last edited by FlyingOfficerKite; 2nd Dec 2009 at 16:55.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlyingOfficerKite
Thank you for your post. Just for the record I'm not trying to impose anything on anyone.
What I seek to do is to try to find something that is of value to professional pilots on a purely voluntary basis. Much in the same way as I choose to buy cover against loss of licence. Expensive maybe, but it is my choice.
Your opinion is of both great interest and value. If I may I would ask you to expand on your thoughts.
I am concerned that a professional pilot may fall between the cracks of being an 'employee' and a 'principle in private practice'.
I say that because a pilot exercises the privileges of his/her own licence and while the operator clearly has raft of responsibilities, the crew also have a raft their own responsibilities.
While I understand that PII insurance is not normally required to be taken out by employees of companies, as this requirement is covered by the vicarious liability of their employers, what happens when in the execution of those responsibilities the two parties are at odds?
Will my employer, or their insurers, offer me a defence if the employer feels a issue was in no way their responsibility, or worse if it wants to cover up deficiencies or failings? I doubt it.
Now if BALPA feel it is not for them, what next?
Where does that leave me and my livelihood?
I guess that the crux of my concern, is to find a solution which offers me support to overcome problems whatever the circumstances. No “reasonable prospect of a successful outcome” caveat, just the offer off a solicitor/barrister if and when I need one.
The value of support might be capped at £x if it concerns common law or £y if criminal. Whatever. Just support for a defence. Simple. O.K. I'm sure there will be some exclusions.
Now that may be expensive or the cost may be reasonable – that is up to the underwriters to work out.
But, from a layman's point of view, isn't it worth a look?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
RW&B
What I seek to do is to try to find something that is of value to professional pilots on a purely voluntary basis. Much in the same way as I choose to buy cover against loss of licence. Expensive maybe, but it is my choice.
Your opinion is of both great interest and value. If I may I would ask you to expand on your thoughts.
I am concerned that a professional pilot may fall between the cracks of being an 'employee' and a 'principle in private practice'.
I say that because a pilot exercises the privileges of his/her own licence and while the operator clearly has raft of responsibilities, the crew also have a raft their own responsibilities.
While I understand that PII insurance is not normally required to be taken out by employees of companies, as this requirement is covered by the vicarious liability of their employers, what happens when in the execution of those responsibilities the two parties are at odds?
Will my employer, or their insurers, offer me a defence if the employer feels a issue was in no way their responsibility, or worse if it wants to cover up deficiencies or failings? I doubt it.
Now if BALPA feel it is not for them, what next?
Where does that leave me and my livelihood?
I guess that the crux of my concern, is to find a solution which offers me support to overcome problems whatever the circumstances. No “reasonable prospect of a successful outcome” caveat, just the offer off a solicitor/barrister if and when I need one.
The value of support might be capped at £x if it concerns common law or £y if criminal. Whatever. Just support for a defence. Simple. O.K. I'm sure there will be some exclusions.
Now that may be expensive or the cost may be reasonable – that is up to the underwriters to work out.
But, from a layman's point of view, isn't it worth a look?
Your thoughts would be appreciated.
RW&B
