Originally Posted by
JohnBurke
I can tell you from personal experience that this is often not the case. In fact, I've had employers approach me to say they received my records, including my "warning letters," long after the they were to be expunged. I used to carry those letters to interviews to ensure there was no misunderstanding..
That's because you authorized your employer to FOIA your records, not just get a PRIA report. There's a difference. An air carrier complying with the PRIA requirements does not have to FOIA your records. Some do, some do not. I called AFS-760 a few months back and asked about this. Some regionals do, some do not. Some majors do, some do not.
Really, when you are talking about Freedom of Information Act, everything is off the table. You were making the point earlier about it being PRIA. It's not, it's FOIA, but you could FOIA all kinds of stuff on any individual, maybe late taxes, maybe other infractions, zoning violations, etc. I don't think pilots really realize the difference between the two, which is why I recommend reading the advisory circular carefully.
And John, you are absolutely correct about using a lawyer, I know myself when I would use one and when I wouldn't. I know I wouldn't use one for everything. Having a much clearer understanding of the processes involved, I may have a big advantage in that case, but none of the information is confidential either. It's not an "inconvenience" if someone gets a lawyer, because all we do is gather information. Even fellow inspectors say they wish pilots were at some point taught more about all of this, so it wouldn't be a mystery or surprising, but the information is out there too.
Heck, I even give the lawyers props (or blades). Most of the time, they are completely reasonable. They know the limits of what they can and can't do, or where they can and can't work within the process. If they realize that a guy did something and it would be best just to say what you did and move on, they'll recommend just that. As someone that is "for hire", they'll do what the client wants for the most part, but they'll make recommendations that are usually based in reality, the rules/regulations and what they think they can or can not prove. If there's a mitigating factor, they'll usually make sure it's brought up.