Comair pilot sues for job back
08-15-2009 | 07:25 PM
#11
C21H30O2
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
From: L/R or workin' the panels!
This is a tough one. The FAA, the manufacturer, and the company decides what goes into the MEL. So since door motor was allowed to be inop, was this really a safety of flight issue?
I understand the company's side of the story. They have a pilot who is refusing to fly over an item that is MEL'able (if that's a word). More so, the item is to ensure the door doesn't hit the ground ... when opened incorrectly. So, how is this going to put passengers lifes in danger?
I understand the company's side of the story. They have a pilot who is refusing to fly over an item that is MEL'able (if that's a word). More so, the item is to ensure the door doesn't hit the ground ... when opened incorrectly. So, how is this going to put passengers lifes in danger?
08-15-2009 | 08:09 PM
#12
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,144
Likes: 801
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
After reading the judges finding, more information comes to light. According to the MEL, "Ground personnel should be instructed to only assist during the closing of the door..." , "Stand clear of door when opening(door opens faster). If the PIC allowed the door to open unassisted, that door would have bounced off the ramp. Possibly causing damage to said door.
The PIC authority extends to taking into account extenuating circumstances, which combined with a legit MEL, might create a problem.
I'm not sure the PIC has carte-blanche to simply refuse an aircraft because he does not like a particular MEL. IMO he needs a good reason...other than just the exercise of his ath-or-i-tay.
Perhaps there's more to this story, but in any case it's always better to have a precedent (correct spelling) that errs on the side of caution.
08-15-2009 | 08:14 PM
#14
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,144
Likes: 801
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
No, it's not really a "very simple MEL"...The way it is written, it basically allows the company to use the MEL to get an A/C from an outstation back into a base which has MX available, to continue flying it after that point gets a little "gray". Also, I guess you've never flown into a station where it is impossible to get their ops to answer the radio, even after repeated calls(kind of hard to communicate with them). This can be especially true at non-company stations, but lately has also been an issue even trying to get ops to answer radio calls at some of our own stations!!!
I would draw the line at normalized deviance, where the same problem recurs repeatedly over time. Maybe he saw the same problem too many times.
08-15-2009 | 08:27 PM
#16
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,144
Likes: 801
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Many companies hire many people to make decisions. Hundreds or maybe thousands get fired every day for making the wrong decision. Being a captain at a regional airline does not grant you dictator-like powers anywhere within 500 yards of an airplane.
We are granted the most leeway (more than most other professions) during in-flight operations because it may not always be practical or expedient to consult with other folks.
Apply some reasonable common sense...you have to comply with things like the OPSPEC and MEL at a minimum. But in the interest of economics, airlines are not going to like it if you create your own standards, higher than those approved by the FAA. Of course you take into account extenuating factors, but if there are none you usually need to go by the book.
We are granted the most leeway (more than most other professions) during in-flight operations because it may not always be practical or expedient to consult with other folks.
Apply some reasonable common sense...you have to comply with things like the OPSPEC and MEL at a minimum. But in the interest of economics, airlines are not going to like it if you create your own standards, higher than those approved by the FAA. Of course you take into account extenuating factors, but if there are none you usually need to go by the book.
08-16-2009 | 04:40 AM
#18
Doing One Pilot's Job
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,889
Likes: 129
One of the PIC's biggest responsibilities is risk management...considering all information, past experiences, and written guidance in order to best manage the risk to the airplane, passengers, operation, and crew's certificates.
To me, it sounds like that's exactly what this captain did.
Yes, at times your decision may differ from dispatch or management...but they're trying to run an airline and you're trying to get an airplane full of people that you're responsible for safely from point A to point B.
Kudos to this captain for leaving the parking brake set and risking his job for what he thought would provide the best and safest transportation for his passengers.
To me, it sounds like that's exactly what this captain did.
Yes, at times your decision may differ from dispatch or management...but they're trying to run an airline and you're trying to get an airplane full of people that you're responsible for safely from point A to point B.
Kudos to this captain for leaving the parking brake set and risking his job for what he thought would provide the best and safest transportation for his passengers.
08-16-2009 | 05:31 AM
#19
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 674
Likes: 8
Many companies hire many people to make decisions. Hundreds or maybe thousands get fired every day for making the wrong decision. Being a captain at a regional airline does not grant you dictator-like powers anywhere within 500 yards of an airplane.
We are granted the most leeway (more than most other professions) during in-flight operations because it may not always be practical or expedient to consult with other folks.
Apply some reasonable common sense...you have to comply with things like the OPSPEC and MEL at a minimum. But in the interest of economics, airlines are not going to like it if you create your own standards, higher than those approved by the FAA. Of course you take into account extenuating factors, but if there are none you usually need to go by the book.
We are granted the most leeway (more than most other professions) during in-flight operations because it may not always be practical or expedient to consult with other folks.
Apply some reasonable common sense...you have to comply with things like the OPSPEC and MEL at a minimum. But in the interest of economics, airlines are not going to like it if you create your own standards, higher than those approved by the FAA. Of course you take into account extenuating factors, but if there are none you usually need to go by the book.
08-16-2009 | 07:42 AM
#20
New Hire
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Without getting into detail, I'm SURE this PIC was terminated for more than this one event. The door operation without assist is not a major problem. Letting it slam to the ground, in my opinion, IS. If you are able to get hold of ops prior to arrival, having two ramp agents open it is an excellent plan. Terminating a PIC because he wouldn't fly an aircraft with no APU, is wrong. It's not really the flying that's an issue, but that pesky 2+ hour taxi in Jfk in 100*, that's the safety issue. These sh$tboxes are uncomfortable as is, pack 50 piggys in there and it's horrible. NO APU on hot days don't bother coming to my gate in Ny. Weighing the Pro's and Con's is our jobs.. Managng risk. CA and FO's alike. On a side note I hope he comes back to Comair and takes an early out, that would be perfect!!!!!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
