Did anyone read the attachment with the last ALPA email? It was the labor board ruling on the firing of a comair capt.. first of all he won so thats awesome but my favorite part of the whole thing was "
Comair makes it “very clear” in its training program that the MEL “usurps” the pilot’s authority
and that “we [Comair] don’t give the pilot the authority to say no on an MEL item.” (Tr. 252
-
53). In support of this statement, Briner offered hypothetical examples, such as a pilot who
refuses to fly because of a broken reading light or an inoperative lavatory. (Tr. 253-54). Asked
whether a pilot could exercise discretion in a situation involving “something more serious,”
Briner responded that the pilot has “some discretion,” but then appeared to limit this to s
ituations
in which “MEL items won’t work together,” or two or more MEL items “wouldn’t fit together
and wouldn’t work.”
Id. However, Briner acknowledged that a pilot “has decision-making
authority in a broad spectrum of areas, and it’s hard to define what that is.” (Tr. 254). He also
testified that he does not know how the FAA reconciles the pilot’s authority with the MEL, and
believes that “some of Part 91 still applies and some of it does not.” (Tr. 255). Briner also
explained that a pilot may not disregard the MEL by choosing to fly when the MEL does not
permit; however, that it is not the issue in this case. (Tr. 249-
50). I find Briner’s testimony on
this subject to be contradictory and unclear. Despite several opportunities to do so, Briner never
directly addressed the situation where a pilot legitimately and reasonably believes that the MEL
does not adequately ensure safety." first of all HAHAHAHA. and secondly obviously this judge dosent know that its everyday like this. if anyone missed out on this PM me and ill foward it. its a bit long and full of all kinds of legal talk but its a pretty good read