UPS Capt. Fired over JS?

[GoABX]

I heard a captain was fired over a jumpseater / captain's authority issue. Can someone provide details.

This is clearly a negotiations tactic, right out of the same playbook Airborne is using.

 

[Falconjet]

I believe the incident you heard about actually occured at FedEx. A captain was fired last week after a disciplinary hearing. The Captain de-planed a "horsehandler" who was to accompany a horse being shipped. This is part of a raging PIC issue between the union and management and the union is attempting to get the Captain's job back. There may be some more info on the ALPA website, I'm not sure.

 

[JethroF15]

Yes, it was at FedEx. A DC10 CPT. He was fired by management at his discipline hearing about 2 weeks ago. His appeal hearing was last week. Senior Flt Ops VP has 15 days from that hearing to render his decision on the appeal.

 

[Alaskaairlines]

Was the guy jumpseating a customer or a pilot? If it was a customer, I don't know what to say.

 

[got_jumpseat?]

Beti Ward used to pull the same horse handler $hit on Polar out of LAX ferrying her employees back and forth to HNL. I recall the CA saying if this person is a horse handler where's the horse? Was there a horse on the FedEx flight or not?

Its a touchy issue with the freight doggers.

 

[active_herk]

Yes, there was a horse or horses on the flight. The company got pretty upset because they had to pull the horses off the plane when the handlers were not going to be able to go with them.

 

[Alaskaairlines]

Oh OK, it was handlers!?

I don't see why the handlers couldn't come along? Did the company notify the CAPT. prior the flight? Or was this a "show-up" senario?

Any idea why the captain did this unwise stunt? He most likely knew he would be speaking to "people" for his action?

I may be looking at this from a perspective of a young pilot, but who cares, let the guys come along! Once I reach that position, I hope to act positivly in all manners.

 

[VaB]

Oh OK, it was handlers!?

I don't see why the handlers couldn't come along? Did the company notify the CAPT. prior the flight? Or was this a "show-up" senario?

Any idea why the captain did this unwise stunt? He most likely knew he would be speaking to "people" for his action?

I may be looking at this from a perspective of a young pilot, but who cares, let the guys come along! Once I reach that position, I hope to act positivly in all manners.

Alaska,

A wise man once said "It's better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you're unknowledgable of a situation, then to open it and remove all doubt".

You know not of which you speak and therefore should not attempt to judge this Captain for what he did. There are alot of things going on at FedEx that most people aren't aware of regarding the J/Sing and PIC authority. Unless you work here, and it sounds like you don't (yet), it would be hard for you to have enough info to "condemn" him. Heck, the original poster even thought it was UPS.

 

[SFR]

I have friends at FedEx, so I know about thecurrent situations. Honestly, I think this is one of those "who cares" situations. If the handler had proper paperwork....let him on...if not...then don't. You can lose sleep or not, either way you guys still make great cash.

 

[dogg]

Alaska, I have to say that I am very much with VaB on this one. If in fact you are as you claim to be, a beginning pilot(not just a flamer)you would do yourself a favor by listening and learning. When you have a little time and experience on your side than run with your thoughts. But for now sit back and watch and listen and learn, quietly. And please take no offense to this, we are all happy to have you with us.........

 

[CatYaaak]

Alaska, I have to say that I am very much with VaB on this one. If in fact you are as you claim to be, a beginning pilot(not just a flamer)you would do yourself a favor by listening and learning. When you have a little time and experience on your side than run with your thoughts. But for now sit back and watch and listen and learn, quietly. And please take no offense to this, we are all happy to have you with us.........

What's with all this patronizing? This is a message board, and all the guy was doing was asking some questions, and explained clearly his line of thinking while he asked them, all the while admitting his inexperience. One thing is clear is that he WANTS to "listen and learn". He hardly deserves the "children should be seen and not heard" treatment.

Keep asking questions Alaska, none of this is rocket science. One thing you'll learn in aviation is that if somebody can't or won't answer a question, it's probably because they don't know the answer themselves. As an F/O, beware the Captains that do this...they are the ones you have to keep an eye on.

 

[WhiteCloud]

What's with all this patronizing? This is a message board, and all the guy was doing was asking some questions, and explained clearly his line of thinking while he asked them, all the while admitting his inexperience. One thing is clear is that he WANTS to "listen and learn". He hardly deserves the "children should be seen and not heard" treatment.

Keep asking questions Alaska, none of this is rocket science. One thing you'll learn in aviation is that if somebody can't or won't answer a question, it's probably because they don't know the answer themselves. As an F/O, beware the Captains that do this...they are the ones you have to keep an eye on.

I'm with you. Frankly, I think people that are not mired in a political pissing match can see the situation better. Just because Alaska has not been around doesn't mean he can't comment or ask questions. Here's my comment.....This issue (as posted) sounds stupid to me and sounds like it didn't have to happen. Either horse handlers were allowed on board or not. I hope the Captain had some written policy or company precedent to back up his actions. Ziggy1

 

[sleepy]

As I recall from doing horse charters at my last airline, they were required to have a certain number of grooms per horse on the flight. I can't remember the number. The grooms actually rode in back with the animals, not on the jumpseat.

 

[Chickenhawk]

CatYaaak wrote

As an F/O, beware the Captains that do this...they are the ones you have to keep an eye on.

$hitty generalization...claiming this Captain is just like all those out to break the rules. $hitty.

 

[FoxHunter]

Just a little background on the J/S at FedEx. FedEx gave all employees the ability to jumpseat system wide. There is a Jumpseat Department, Reservation System, jumpseat waiting rooms etc. Pilots really had no say as to who was riding in their cockpit or in the seats in the back. Our ALPA reps obtained a ruling from the FAA that said that the PIC had to approve the cockpit jumpseater, and that jumpseater had to meet the requirements of 121.547. The seats in the back were still available to noncrew.

On September 11, 2001 life as we knew it changed. Jumpseating by nonpilots ended with the exception of some employees that used the jumpseat to commute to work. This group consisted mostly of mechanics and others that worked in the Flt Ops Department.

FedEx saved millions of dollars a year using the jumpseat to send business travelers rather than buying airline tickets. I've been told it was $40 million a year. This gave management a great incentive to start the business jumpseat program back up. The MEC said they supported the resumption of the program subject to some safety and security concerns.

Around the middle of last year the company announced that the Business Jump Seat program would restart. The FOM was revised with new cockpit door procedures. In the two man crew of the MD11, MD10, A300/310 when there is no jumpseater we have to leave the cockpit door open is we go back to the LAV or the galley. It is impossible for the remaining pilot to operate the the bolt. Now if you have a business jumpseater he/she is not normally allowed in the cockpit. The FOM now says that the PIC can designate one of the jumpseaters as the SSA (Security Supernumerary Assistant). In the event that one pilot must leave the cockpit this individual is to be brought up to th cockpit to lock the door when the pilot leaves and open it when the pilot returns. It is the union position, correctly, that the PIC is not required to appoint a SSA. In the event that one of the jumpseaters is a crewmember the union has encouraged PICs not to use that individual as the SSA. Thus frustrating jumpseating by non pilots.

The three man crew on the DC10 is more of a problem for the anti business jumpseat view. The union has implied that 121.543 does not allow more than one required crewmember out of the seat at a time. Neither of the two remaining crewmembers are permittted to get up and lock/unlock the door. This will not stand because the same requirements to lock the door exists with or without a jumpseater. The POI has since sent a letter that says since the procedure is in the FOM no violation can occur. No one believes this letter was sent without guidence from Washington. The union now has advised DC10 crews that they can no longer use 121.543 as a reason to bump a jumpseater.

The big problem is that one Captain has been fired for bumping a horse handler. I believe there are two other cases of bumping horse handlers since the first one. We may in the very near future find three Captains fired. The union is totally confident that they will regain the job, or jobs. I'm not as confident.

I believe the union has made it very clear that they want crews to frustrate the business jumpseat program. Now we have one pilot fired, possibility of more fired because they have gotten in the middle of a dog fight. It is all about control of the seats outside the cockpit. The fact that we started bumping customers brought this whole issue to a head. The horses we fly are all high value type, owned by people that usually have lots of power, influence and money. They may not only be shipping the horse but may also control millions of dollars of business with FedEx. If I was the Captains involved I would also be concerned that these owners may claim that it cost them a huge amount of money as a result of the horse getting bumped and they will try to recover from the responsible party.

I would hope that cooler heads prevail and we resolve the problem. We have a case where we have several pilots at risk because they took a stand in support of their union position. It looks like that position as supported by very thin ice and I blame those that put them there. The other issue is that non-FedEx pilots will never see our jumpseats until this is all resolved.

 

[Alaskaairlines]

Hello guys!

Of course I admit I am a 100 hour PP and working on my Instrument.

I find it very interesting to discuss aviation with guys who are already in the industry.
I want to learn, learn everything I can now, rather than later.

Thanks to those who don't have a problem with that.

BTW, foxhunter, well said!

 

[Huck]

Foxhunter - great summary.

Now's the time to let your opinions be known to your reps.

I wish we spent one tenth the energy on getting offline pilots back on our jumpseats. That is impacting me directly, as I am a commuter.

At my previous (cargo) carrier, our customers chartered the whole aircraft. We carried anybody they wanted, from secretaries to Miss Brazil once. All pre-9/11, of course....

 

[busdrver]

A very factual post, Foxhunter.

Of course, the union says they are going to get their jobs back. They better, because the union (ALPA) got them fired.

 

[Midnight Mike]

The Captain should have called operations and spoke with the Chief Pilot, Director of Operation, union duty
pilot, before kicking a customer off of the flight. These horse handlers have a tremendous amount of power
as they pay top dollar to move these horses. At Polar, if there was a question with the jumpseat, we would
wake the Chief Pilot out of bed before kicking a horse handler out of the jumpseat, & yes, they would ride in the
jumspeat, without horses, sometimes they would be getting to where the horses were or just dropped them
off & hitching a ride home & they had the proper paperwork.

 

[USNFDX]

The whole thing makes me sick. The union has brought up some legitimate safety concerns, but it's not about that, it's about posturing and the union trying to flex their muscles and tell the company who's in charge. I have myself witness captains refuse jumpseaters without even taking the time to find out who they are and what they are doing. Sure, if you've got someone who has only been with company for six months, and is of middleastern decent, he's out of there. But we've got guys booting mechanics, schedulers, and others who have been with the company for 10-20 years. They are not a legitimate safety concern. The Captain is in command of the jet, but the company owns it. Many have forgoten who signs their checks.

Note: I have been told the company is now assigning reserve pilots to act as SSA for horse charters. Not sure if this true.

Edited note:

As others have stated further on down, it is not wise to air MEC dirty laundry. I agree with them and apologize for this.