His final bust was LOE. Most operators don’t want to lose someone at that point. A pertinent question would be how many hours of LOE were provided to him prior to termination. If I were interviewing him for a future job I would check his logbooks to see what LOE he received. 25 hours I would give him the benefit of doubt. 40 or more and I would have concerns.

 

Not IOE, i did not pass the LOE. I think it's line orientation exam. The ATP checkride.

 

Wording sounds harsh, but not inaccurate. Recommend you hire someone for one on one interview prep about how to answer the related questions to help you successfully navigate the future. That will probably be cheaper and more effective than trying to fight pria etc.

 

Sounds like he means a LOFT ride.

Frequently I've heard that a LOFT is "non-jeopardy." It's not.

I've represented people in termination proceedings who got there based on their LOFT ride and other "non-jeopardy" events.

There's no such thing as a "non-jeopardy" event.

 

No, he means a LOE (Line Oriented Evaluation). It's a similar type of session to LOFT but like has been said, it's the main jeopardy event in the AQP process. It's the session that results in the issuance or notice of disapproval of a type rating / ATP (if required). It has to be conducted by a check airman (APD in the case of type rating / ATP issuance). LOFT can be conducted by an appropriately qualified instructor.

 

"Termination involuntary due to poor performance/ poor conduct. Do not rehire " - poster

Termination due to performance is easy to support via a pass fail on your ride.
The "poor conduct" is a more difficult assertion. It is highly subjective and often based on personalities or grudges. Large company HR departments would require a file a foot thick detailing every action the employee took that would lead to termination for "conduct". The cost of litigation requires it.
The "Do not rehire" is a very risky statement. A candidate terminated due to performance, who gains additional skill or experience, would be allowed a chance to reapply by most reasonable employers. For this reason, I think the "do not rehire" is coupled to the "poor conduct" statement. If there is info in your file to support their claim then take some time to reflect and learn from it. If there is an absence of supporting or correct data in your file you may have reason to bring suit. This link might may help:
CIVIL LIABILITY UNDER THE PILOT RECORDS IMPROVEMENT ACT - Legal Guides - Avvo

 

Yeah all rides, and most all sim sessions put numbers up on the board with the employer (and ultimately the FAA) which determine how long they'll continue trying to work with you.

In this context "Jeopardy Event" means an event which would flag as a failure on PRIA.

But be advised that "non-jeopardy" events may still be apparent on the PRIA report due to the sequence of events, amount of OE, etc

 

That does help. I'll have to put some time into reading it after I get off work.
No, there was nothing ever mentioned to me about conduct through training or in my separation phone call. Simply, "a board decision since i wasnt meetint the teaining desdlines and didnt pass my checkride".
There was never even a hint that i had done anything wrong during training.
I was never written up nore spoken to about conduct during my time at this regional. That's why I'm so confused about it. Since I'm not getting any responses from them about the situation, I'd like to investigate and have the false statement removed.
AOPA has a legal department that I pay into, but none of the lawyers I contacted responded about thr situation either. So I'm just kinda stuck here seeing if anyone would suggest someone I could consult

 

You failed not one but two events and they sent you home. You’re doing everything you can to find someone who can fight this for you over a few words but in reality your true intention is to have the entire statement removed. Then after having the entire statement removed you can walk into your next interview and downplay your failures as much as you’ve been downplaying it on these forums.

 

Ok, thanks
How does this statement help anyone?
I am curious, how have I downplayed my failures here? I'm simply trying to find out why I was stamped with a "poor conduct" which I believe is false.

If you're just implying that "poor conduct " on my pria is nothing I should be worried about, and should just let it go. Then there are better ways to say that.