Search

Notices

Yikes Part 2

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-14-2018 | 06:25 PM
  #41  
Dirtdiver's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
From: 767A
Default

[QUOTE=Tailstand;2572338]
Originally Posted by Excargodog

FWIW PE is 50, according to ALPA records. While I have never worked with him or know him personally I do know a few around his seniority who returned to AD post 911 to earn 20 active and return to line flying years later, so it's possible what she said is accurate.

Also, PE has $5M+ in future potential earnings (W2 and DB) should he fly another 15 which would make a financial settlement interesting. Whether guilty or not, I can't imagine he will return to flying status. I find it interesting that she has been awarded a May schedule and not also on paid administrative leave.
Just for clarification, that is the answer to my post, not my quote!

I too did 8 AD and 15 Reserve. And way more combat time Reserve. And if you threw out the AD nonproductive days, I worked almost as many productive days per month in the later.
Old 04-15-2018 | 06:31 AM
  #42  
Banned
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,378
Likes: 0
From: 7th green
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Second, she's not his subordinate. He's not her boss or her supervisor.
Actually, he is as designated Captain. That goes for the rest of the crew as well.
Old 04-15-2018 | 06:40 AM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 679
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Excargodog
Apparently you are a little late to the party. What he has already admitted to, taking a drunk female subordinate to his room, would have gotten him disciplinary action in every active duty unit I was in.
I didn't see where he admitted taking her to his room.
Old 04-15-2018 | 07:16 AM
  #44  
Adlerdriver's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,064
Likes: 37
From: 767 Captain
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
Actually, he is as designated Captain. That goes for the rest of the crew as well.
Being the PIC on an aircraft with a crew and the PIC relationship to that crew isn't the same as being a supervisor to a subordinate (in terms of improper relationships, sexual harassment, etc.).

He has no influence to ply in terms of promotions, job performance reviews, etc. that would put him in a position of authority he could abuse. When the a/c blocks in and the flight is over, he's just another employee on a layover.
Old 04-15-2018 | 08:05 AM
  #45  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Being the PIC on an aircraft with a crew and the PIC relationship to that crew isn't the same as being a supervisor to a subordinate (in terms of improper relationships, sexual harassment, etc.).

He has no influence to ply in terms of promotions, job performance reviews, etc. that would put him in a position of authority he could abuse. When the a/c blocks in and the flight is over, he's just another employee on a layover.
Though if he's writing her a probation report, that could be a problem. Hmm....wonder how that report would go as far as "Observation of Layover and/or Off Duty Behavior", or whatever Alaska's equivalent is. Well above before she reported him, well below afterwards?
Old 04-15-2018 | 10:51 AM
  #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,485
Likes: 0
From: Taco Rocket Operator
Default

Basically what I figured. They both go out, get smashed, and bust company rules on alcohol consumption. They get caught, he comes clean to the company, and they get deadheaded back which is bad, but not as bad as showing up to the airplane in violation. Because Pina is on probation, she comes up with this "I was drugged" story to save her ass.

Occams razor at work, in order to believe the drugging, you would have to make a bunch of assumptions to get there, while the story that they were both drinking, got drunk off their asses, violated company policy on alcohol, and then, because she is on probation, this drugging story was concocted to keep her job makes the most sense.

Now their behavior while they were smashed still needs to be investigated in regards to inappropriate hehavior, but the idea that she was drugged will be tossed unless she can come up with a some kind of solid evidence.
Old 04-15-2018 | 12:29 PM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 304
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by Excargodog
Apparently you are a little late to the party. What he has already admitted to, taking a drunk female subordinate to his room,
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Ok. Didn't know that.IMO.

Whoa!!!, back up there. I don't know that we *do* know that. Excargodog, do you have a link to a source which shows him admitting to that? I've followed this pretty closely and I haven't seen anything of the sort. It's certainly possible I've missed it, if so, I'd be interested to see exactly what he has said.

The thing about this deal is that until this latest lie detector results announcement, the *only* bit of information I have seen whcih didn't come from Pina was mention in an AK airlines statement at time the lawsuit was filed that the captain in question remained on leave and of course the obligatory statement that "We take these issues seriously" . other than that, every single bit of information I've seen so far has come from Pina, either from her court filings, or in statements she has made to the media. Yes people speak of her allegations like they are established fact.

Like I said, it's certainly possible I missed a statement issued by the captain. If so, I'd be interested to read that if you can provide a link. Failing that, I don't believe that he has admitted anything.
Old 04-15-2018 | 12:33 PM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 304
Likes: 1
Default

Originally Posted by Excargodog
Read the last paragraph. The woman is waving the flag to excuse behavior that - if not criminal - is at least reprehensible.
Well, no. It is not to excuse behavior, because we don't know what behavior occurred, we only have allegations of behavior from one party. The purpose of the flag waving was to bolster his credibility in the face of *allegations* whcih may or may not be true.
Old 04-16-2018 | 11:24 AM
  #49  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Being the PIC on an aircraft with a crew and the PIC relationship to that crew isn't the same as being a supervisor to a subordinate (in terms of improper relationships, sexual harassment, etc.).

He has no influence to ply in terms of promotions, job performance reviews, etc. that would put him in a position of authority he could abuse. When the a/c blocks in and the flight is over, he's just another employee on a layover.
Probably not true. Alaskas’ FOM designates the captain to be in charge of the crew from the time the captain shows up to work until the time the captain leaves on the last day. I think it might be gray if she was an FA and they came in on different flights or leave on different flights, but I think it is pretty clear that a CA and an FO on the same pairing the CA would be considered the supervisor in this situation at Alaska.
Old 04-16-2018 | 11:37 PM
  #50  
Klsytakesit
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Originally Posted by AltoCumulus
Probably not true. Alaskas’ FOM designates the captain to be in charge of the crew from the time the captain shows up to work until the time the captain leaves on the last day. I think it might be gray if she was an FA and they came in on different flights or leave on different flights, but I think it is pretty clear that a CA and an FO on the same pairing the CA would be considered the supervisor in this situation at Alaska.
Missing the point of the FOM: On a layover, at Alaska Airlines, there is no chain of command. Each employee is expected to behave in a manner that does not bring bad light upon Alaska Airlines. Additionally, there is no expectation of supervisory behavior/subordinate behavior at all! The Captain is in charge of a very narrow slice of the operation at Alaska Airlines. It begins and ends at the aircraft door and it only relates to the operation of that aircraft on that flight.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
GWBic
Aviation Law
18
05-18-2018 02:13 PM
jetfuelonly
Corporate
9
08-30-2012 03:07 PM
N618FT
Regional
34
11-19-2007 07:28 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices