Conducting a poll about your employer(s)

[TIS]

I'm planning on writing a piece about what happens when the FAA decides you've been a bad little airman.

What I need is some information from as many of you as would care to share your thoughts. What I'm interested in is what, if anything, your employer would do to assist you in your defense against FAA charges.

I know that at the airline level defense of a pilot so charged is assisted in a variety of ways by the Union if there's one on the property. But what about those of you in corporate or fractional flying. Do your companies respond to FAA meddling in your affairs with a pink slip or with an attorney to help you?

I would appreciate your input. I have a feeling there's a lot of not-so-nice stuff to know about just where you stand if you make a mistake. I'd like to know what those things are.

I will not mention anyone by name, by company, or even by allusion to corporate culture in what I write. I just need to know what you all would be facing if you got busted.

Thanks in advance for your help!

TIS

 

[jergar999]

The company I work for has two policies:

1. You are on your own if violated.

2. If you decide not to go or not to do something, they will never second guess your decision.

I think that's pretty fair. I think the may also try to help if possible, but I'm sure their first concern is their Air Carrier Certificate, as it should be.

Don't screw up.

 

[TIS]

Comcerned about their certificate?

If yotu receive a violation while operating on their certificate, THEY will receive a violation too!

The very reason I'm thinking about writing this thing is because it seems to me that if you do something wrong while operating for a certificate holder, the certificate holder may well be liable for your actions in any subsequent civil litigation that might arise. It thus follows that their best and most resolute defense begins with standing behind YOU and your actions. NOT doing so speaks volumes about their confidence in you, particularly if they keep you after an investigation has begun. In defending themselves they must, by extension defend YOU. That's the way it works in the rest of the real world.

But, maybe that's just a fantasy abhout the way things oughtta be in aviation.

TIS

 

[jergar999]

Are you sure they violate the companies too? I used to work for a company where the CP hit a cherokee while taxiing, he was violated, but nothing ever happened to the company. I suppose individual situations are all different. Also, I don't remember if he was on a 135 or 91 leg, I suppose that could be why he got drilled and the company didn't.

 

[TIS]

I suppose there might be times...

...when the FAA would focus exclusively on the pilot but in the case of the tale you relate you're talking about what sounds like an accident. I can just about guarantee you there would be some kind of problem for the company in such a case if the flight were under Part 135.

I know that the actions of its pilots are very much considered a reflection on the activities of a given Certificate Holder by the FAA. You can at least expect an early colon cancer screening if anything ever happens o a flight under 135. One the reasons Part 135/121 even exist is to provide a mechanism by which oversight and scrutiny can be provided.

TIS

 

[DCitrus9]

TIS, usually the FAA will go after the airman OR the company. If the airman didn't follow company procedures, he's on his own unless the company promises the FAA they can retrain this guy. It's up to the FAA to allow that. If it's a procedural issue approved by the company, the FAA generally deals only with the company, but may also take issue with the airman. There are always exceptions, but very few of the cases I've witnessed have the FAA violating company and the airman.

 

[jergar999]

Having researched it, the pilot was departing on a 135 leg when he hit the light aircraft. And yes, only he, and not the company got the nastygram from the Federal Friends.

 

[flyndesk]

If a company "self discloses" a violation to the FAA, they might have immunity (like if a pilot flew over duty time, or something like that.) BUT THE AIRMAN DOES NOT! The FAA can still violate the airman. The FAA may also tell the company to "punish" the airman (suspension or something) and the incident may or may not stay at the company.

I can think of numerous time at my airline pilots over-flew the 34/7 rule, or did more than 16 hours of duty in one day, or a Capt flying with a second class medical, or one captain that flew a 121 leg with an open write up in the logbook- the company called the FAA on all of these to disclose it and the company got immunity. The airman did not.

Biggest fears of the freight pilot.

1. Getting violated.
2. getting killed.

 

[UPSFO]

As an FO in the commuters, my Captain and I were the subject of an FAA investigation for a possible violation regarding the company's deice procedures. It was a cold, clear day but the station manager failed to remove remarks in the station report that a deice program was in effect. The ops folks failed to give us those papers so we never knew. I certainly wouldn't have deiced even if we did know but maybe we would have saught clarification.

The company stood behind us 100% and got their POI to end the investigation. I was told by another manager that the DO took a violation for it in lieu of any action against the crew. I was never able to validate this fact. I have seen this company do this many times to protect crews. This was a non-union company, so there was no Union to assist us.

If you would like further information, please feel free to contact me.

 

[thisiswitty]

UPSFO,
i am very impressed w/ what u said about the company taking the heat for the crews. what company? i may have a new goal as far as where to work torwards. not that i plan on screwing up, but who does? incredible loyalty though!