Continental loses captain over colleague's alcohol allegation

[~~~~O~~~~]

Enjoy your lifetime of being an idiot.

It is pretty obvious, you have that one covered!

I am not!
You are to!
am not
are to
not
to
not
to
not
to
not
to
not to not to not to not to
nottonottonottonotto

 

[A Squared]

HA. We don't know too much... A press article?

you're right, we don't know too much, assuming that the article isn't inaccurate, which I realize is a leap of faith, we know that the pilot reported for duty for duty with a BAC over the limit, and the pilot was fired. That seems to me entirely appropriate.

Do-over? Like NWA's Capt. Prouse. He retired on the B747 after flying drunk from FAR to MSP.

Yes, I'm well aware of Prouse's' story. Northwest was amazingly generous to take him back, after he had been fired, after he had been incarcerated in a federal penetentiary, and after he had turned hs life around. Prouse will be the first to say, without hesitation, that he did not deserve the second chance, that it was a gift, and that he absolutely did deserve to be fired and thrown in prison. I think that perhaps it is this attitude that lead to him being given a second chance.

And one doesn't have to choose. You can protect passengers and help co-workers. It doesn't have to be a drive thru version of judge, jury and executioner. Unless one is scripted to think that way....

Yes, I agree, it would be nice if you'd be given the opportunity to call in sick and seek help, nice, but you don't necessarily deserve it. And if you didn't get that courtesy extended to you, and you did get fired, you'd have no-one to blame but yourself.

The co-worker has an absolute, indisputable obligation to see that the pilot did not take the flight. There is no obligation to see that it's done in a manner that the pilot avoids the consequences of his decision. Like I said, it would be the nice thing to do, And I personally woud chose the "ummm, I think you ought to call in sick here buddy" routine, but there is no moral obligation to do so.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

you're right, we don't know too much, assuming that the article isn't inaccurate, which I realize is a leap of faith, we know that the pilot reported for duty for duty with a BAC over the limit, and the pilot was fired. That seems to me entirely appropriate.

That is fair as it is company policy. Do we have to jump and down like howling screech monkey's condeming this guy as we claim professional status. Or am I being presumptious to our professional status?

Yes, I'm well aware of Prouse's' story. Northwest was amazingly generous to take him back, after he had been fired, after he had been incarcerated in a federal penetentiary, and after he had turned hs life around. Prouse will be the first to say, without hesitation, that he did not deserve the second chance, that it was a gift, and that he absolutely did deserve to be fired and thrown in prison. I think that perhaps it is this attitude that lead to him being given a second chance.

So what's wrong with having a guy call in sick, get admitted to a program, comply with the program and continue to work. Getting thru an alcohol program is no easy task, it takes along time and the programers ensure one is not a risk. What is wrong with helping a guy get his life back and continue to take care of his financial. legal, family and personal obligations. Wouldn't you want that for you? Or would you rather be spit out onto the street?

BTW, the other two pilots who flew with Prouse took the tough road. They refused to take responsibility and paid big time. That was thier choice, however, professionals gave them the choice.

Yes, I agree, it would be nice if you'd be given the opportunity to call in sick and seek help, nice, but you don't necessarily deserve it. And if you didn't get that courtesy extended to you, and you did get fired, you'd have no-one to blame but yourself.

but you don't necessarily deserve it.

This is where you cross over. Respectfully, who are you to judge? There is a system in place to handle these situations. I trust the professionals in charge of these programs to treat alcoholics properly. Since I trust them, I don't need to judge. You?

The co-worker has an absolute, indisputable obligation to see that the pilot did not take the flight. There is no obligation to see that it's done in a manner that the pilot avoids the consequences of his decision. Like I said, it would be the nice thing to do, And I personally woud chose the "ummm, I think you ought to call in sick here buddy" routine, but there is no moral obligation to do so.

There is no obligation to see that it's done in a manner that the pilot avoids the consequences of his decision.

I have never argued that the pilot should not avoid the consequences of his actions. I have been discussing win/win. What part of win/win don't you like?

Moral obligation? One has to be of good moral character to be an ATP. Where does morality fit into professionalism? Professionalism means does not have to be policed. So as professionals if we can fix our problems internally without the FAA, company and law enforcement, then why not?

Of course many are hopping on thier keyboards saying if the drunk pilot was professional then he wouldn't have been drunk at work in the first place.

Well, now we are going in circles because even professionals are not perfect. In fact I consider myself an imperfect professional.

:beer:

 

[bizicmo]

Enjoy your lifetime of being an idiot.

Yeah ok

 

[A Squared]

So what's wrong with having a guy call in sick, get admitted to a program, comply with the program and continue to work.

Uhhh, nothing at all, I think I said that I would use this approach, if possible.

What part of win/win don't you like?

And I would ask, what part of "I personally woud chose the "ummm, I think you ought to call in sick here buddy" routine", didn't you understand?

Or didn't you notice that part. The way you are carrying on would suggest that you didn't read that or didn't understand that, hence my directing your attention back to it once again.

[/QUOTE]

I think we agree that the company's response in terminating the pilot was apropriate. It seems that your position is that the pilot, after having reported for work intoixicated is *owed* a chance to not get fired. My position is that the passengers are owed having the intoxicated pilot removed from the flight. That is the only *obligation*, if that is accomplished while giving the pilot the opportunity to address the problem without losing his job, that is admirable, (and again that is the approach I would try) but the pilot is not owed that. Besides, we don't know whether the pilot was offerd that opportunity or not, perhaps he was and he turned down than opportunity.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

It seems that your position is that the pilot, after having reported for work intoixicated is *owed* a chance to not get fired.



Besides, we don't know whether the pilot was offerd that opportunity or not, perhaps he was and he turned down than opportunity.

No that is not my position. My position is.... no position. As professionals do we really need to take a stance on this?



Perhaps he was..................

:beer:

 

[siucavflight]

I still stand by my original statement-Flying drunk is bad umm kaay!


And look at it this way, there is one more airline job available.

 

[pipe]

It's a shame that people can't see this stuff for what it is. There are two pilots (or more) for a reason. It's a system designed not only to share workload, but to provide checks and balances on judgment decisions.

If you don't like a guy's choice on where to fly through an area of cells on the radar (or out the window), do you ride along and call the CP afterwards?

If you don't like a guy's judgment about the maintenance status of an airplane do you fly it with him anyway and then call the CP?

If you think the guy flying should be initiating a go-around do you just sit there and then call the CP afterward (if you make it)?

If you think a guy seems too sick to be flying do you make a suggestion that he call in sick or do you put on your surgical mask and fly with him anyway, then call the CP?

I sure hope there are no "professionals" here that answered yes to any of these.

Talking to someone you are working with about what you percieve to be the problem and then offering solutions, alternatives, and options is good risk management and CRM.

Doing otherwise is just being an A$$HOLE. If you think a guy may have had one too many consider handling it as you would any other problem. If your problem solving skills have kept you alive in an airplane they will probably serve you just fine in this scenario as well.

Or you could be an arrogant, sanctimonious, holier than thou a$$hole and just blow the dudes life, career, and family up right there.

Your choice.

PIPE

 

[AC560]

Or you could be an arrogant, sanctimonious, holier than thou a$$hole and just blow the dudes life, career, and family up right there.

As opposed to an arrogant, sanctimonious, holier then thou a$$hole that shows up to work with a BAC above the legal limit jepordizing the aircraft, crew, passengers, and company?

 

[pipe]

As opposed to an arrogant, sanctimonious, holier then thou a$$hole that shows up to work with a BAC above the legal limit jepordizing the aircraft, crew, passengers, and company?

I'll say it again.

If you're flying with an arrogant, sanctimonious, holier than thou a$$hole who is about to do something stupid do you:

a) ride along, hope to live, and call the CP to tattle?

or

b) identify the problem, offer constructive solutions, and try to fix it at the lowest level?

One of these options certainly seems more professional to my simple little mind. From the tone of your response, I'm afraid you might actually choose option "a".

PIPE

BTW AC560, when you do finally fly an airplane that requires two pilots, please feel free to comment further.