|
Originally Posted by firefighterplt
(Post 3050765)
I personally know someone who was a passenger in a vehicle after a night of heavy drinking. He did the right thing and got a ride home. They were involved in a motor vehicle accident, and he lost consciousness. ER docs did the standard labs, to include BAC (I guess to make sure there weren’t any interactions with the meds they were administering) and it came back just under 0.20.
He had some fairly significant injuries and had to submit the hospital documentation for a special issuance. FAA saw the BAC and immediately determined it to be an indication of alcohol dependency/abuse. Cue the pain train. |
Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
(Post 3050909)
So if you go to a bachelor party for your best friend (or your own?) and party hard one night out of the year and the FAA catches you with a high BAC then it's game over?! That's a load or bullshiz
If you drink more than two drinks per day it’s considered abuse. High BAC is considered dependency. |
Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
(Post 3050909)
So if you go to a bachelor party for your best friend (or your own?) and party hard one night out of the year and the FAA catches you with a high BAC then it's game over?! That's a load or bullshiz
It is insane. The worst part is that since CAMI makes the rules, you have no choice but to play their game. People have tried to battle CAMI via the legal system, but they are judge, jury, and executioner. Only way through is to shut up and color. |
Originally Posted by FutureMajor8
(Post 3050942)
Yes. Tread carefully, you don’t want to get caught up with the FAAs abuse/dependence web. It’s a mess.
If you drink more than two drinks per day it’s considered abuse. High BAC is considered dependency.
Originally Posted by firefighterplt
(Post 3050952)
Yep. Their logic is that if you’re not half dead with a BAC over 0.15 or so, you have developed a tolerance. And if you developed a tolerance, you must have been drinking a lot, regularly, for a long time. And if you’ve been doing that, you have dependency/abuse.
It is insane. The worst part is that since CAMI makes the rules, you have to shut up and color. People have tried to battle CAMI via the legal system, but they are judge, jury, and executioner. Only way through is to shut up and color. WHY in the world would anyone voluntarily come forward if they know, even without a legal incident involving alcohol, that they'll lose their certificate and income for a substantial period of time?? Why? Talk about an incentive to hide everything! Obviously someone with a DUI or other legal matter involving alcohol is one thing, I'm strictly talking about the scenarios where there are no legal triggering events like DUI or public intoxication. |
[QUOTE=Bahamasflyer;3050960]That's a GREAT way to get pilots who might have a problem to come forward (sarcasm).
WHY in the world would anyone voluntarily come forward if they know, even without a legal incident involving alcohol, that they'll lose their certificate and income for a substantial period of time?? Why? Talk about an incentive to hide everything! /QUOTE] Same thing for counseling for things like PTSD. Military says take advantage of counseling as we won't hold it against you for things like a security clearance/ career in general etc. If you do get counseling there's absolutely nothing as far as I can tell from the FAAs perspective to prevent it from potentially affecting your medical. |
Originally Posted by Bahamasflyer
(Post 3050960)
That's a GREAT way to get pilots who might have a problem to come forward (sarcasm).
WHY in the world would anyone voluntarily come forward if they know, even without a legal incident involving alcohol, that they'll lose their certificate and income for a substantial period of time?? Why? Talk about an incentive to hide everything! Obviously someone with a DUI or other legal matter involving alcohol is one thing, I'm strictly talking about the scenarios where there are no legal triggering events like DUI or public intoxication. My kid is still getting in trouble if he admits to playing around with the baseball in the house after being told no too; but if he breaks that window and then tries to hide it or lie about it - you bet the punishment is going to be worse. It's one of the things that you signed up for when you joined this aviation career field. Safety sensitive positions have extra rules and they can be tough ones. |
Originally Posted by aeroengineer
(Post 3051017)
Same thing for counseling for things like PTSD. Military says take advantage of counseling as we won't hold it against you for things like a security clearance/ career in general etc. If you do get counseling there's absolutely nothing as far as I can tell from the FAAs perspective to prevent it from potentially affecting your medical. We are still lucky that the rules don't seem to have changed that much after the JetBlue (over Amarillo wasn't it?) and the GermanWings incidents. |
Originally Posted by USMCFLYR
(Post 3051041)
It's one of the things that you signed up for when you joined this aviation career field. Safety sensitive positions have extra rules and they can be tough ones.
|
Originally Posted by Bahamasflyer
(Post 3050960)
That's a GREAT way to get pilots who might have a problem to come forward (sarcasm).
WHY in the world would anyone voluntarily come forward if they know, even without a legal incident involving alcohol, that they'll lose their certificate and income for a substantial period of time?? Why? Talk about an incentive to hide everything! Obviously someone with a DUI or other legal matter involving alcohol is one thing, I'm strictly talking about the scenarios where there are no legal triggering events like DUI or public intoxication. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences |
Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
(Post 3051053)
Except that when the rules make no sense, are over-bearing/heavy handed, or are irrational, then it simply breeds contempt for the rules.
What is considered “alcohol abuse”? 1) The guy who gets hammered once a year on New Years Eve with a BAC of 0.20%? 2) The guy who is a “weekend warrior” and does 4-5 shots every Saturday with a BAC of 0.10% 3) The guy who just HAS to have a nightcap every single night, but never attains a high BAC? None of these 3 examples violate the law and endanger the public. Why should pilots be treated differently by using a substance that is perfectly legal for adults to consume vs a surgeon or other professional in a safety sensitive position?? Marijuana...on the other hand, absolutely legal to prohibit, but even heavy boozing as long as you aren’t violating the law I just don’t see |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:35 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands