Dui and skywest
 

Hey guys does anyone know if Skywest has an issue with DUI. I have a friend who wants to go there but he has a DUI from February of this year.

Wouldn't every air carrier have an issue with a recent DUI?!

Huge red flags regarding judgement, dependency issues, future liability, disregard for the law, etc!

How come everybody's friend who has a DUI needs someone to ask this question?;)

Sounds like all positive attributes to me?!?

Better tell your "friend" to not get their hopes up. But, then again, all "they" can do is apply.

I was thinking the same thing...

To the OP, if it's you who got the DUI, who cares? We don't know know you are. To answer you question, I don't know the answer to your question.

Skywest is a Mormon company so they probably look even more down at a dui.

You'd be surprised. Acceptance of full responsibility with a showing of contrition and completion of all legal dues, he's got a shot. SW is into second chances ( for some...) as long as you've been honest and made a demonstrated change.

Holy crap.. Did I just write that? I think I blacked out for a second.

I know of at least one pilot that was hired here (Skywest) with a dui. So there is a chance.

i think the problem lies with travel to and from Canada. From my limited knowledge of Canadian regs, there is an issue entering and exiting the country if you have had a DUI within the past 7 years. No airline will touch you if you do not have the ability to cross borders.

Having a DUI period, let alone one after you start your flight training shows a serious lack of judgement. I would hope Skywest or any other airline would show more sense than hiring someone like your friend.

I recieved a DUI in 2006. I have spoken with recruiters from virtually every regional, even interviewed at one. I can tell you that at 2900/130 hours, a bachelors degree, no checkride failures, and being a jet mechanic in the guard, I can not get anyone to hire me. Most of them do not have a problem with the DUI itself since its been 5 years, its not being able to go to Canada that they have the problem with. This must just really mess with their schedules because I've talked to recruiters, chief pilots and even a CEO's and everybodies hands are tied.
Your friends options are:
(1) apply for a temporary resident permit if it is less than 5 years old. This option however is the least likely to result in success, especially since it was recent. A single entry TRP is hard to get, a multiple entry even harder.
(2) after 5 years, apply for crimminal rehabilitation. From what I here this is much easier than the TRP, but can cost any where from 200 to 1000 dollars if you do it yourself.
(3) after 10 years you are considered rehabilitated.

The time starts after the end of your sentence, so if your friend is on probation, he'll have to wait 5 years from the end of his sentence. Keep in mind that once you are elegible to apply for these, there is a lot of leg work, ie police certificates from every city you've lived in since 18. And once you do submit the paperwork it can take them a while to process it. I just recieved a letter from the Canadian consulate in Seattle and they said their processing times are for criminal rehabilitation is 3 years.

All the information is on the Canadian government website under criminal inadmisability. Of course if you have anymore questions you can let me know.

I was fortunate to land a CFI job with a company that actually pays good in 2008 right before things went south. I've been there 3 and 1/2 years and since my 5 years won't be up until Jun 2012, I'm trying to get on with a part 135 company to build my turbine time, and getting my ATP/737 type in february. With any luck in two years I'll have the minimums to apply for the majors and the Canada issue resolved. Yes I am well aware the majors are a long shot but if they won't take me, a regional will. Anyhow my point is you might need to come up with a plan like that.

I have recieved job offers from two airlines that fly EAS routes, and at least three regionals have told me to contact them as soon as I recieve the Canada waiver. If you want it bad enough, there is a chance you can make it, but it will take a while.

Thanks for sharing, very interesting. I have no stake is this personally, as I am at a regional now, but it is nice to get an insightful response. Pilots helping pilots. Not trying to play down the gravity of the situation, but if a person is able to better their judgement and move on, good for them. I hate to see this world become one strike and you're out.

This^^^^^^^

BINGO! What ever happened to "live and learn"? Yes, people make mistakes. Smart people learn from them.

The way DUIs are so liberally issued these days, you can't really say, without a doubt, that it reflects poorly on one's judgment. I've heard of people getting a DUI on a bicycle! To me, riding a bicycle home from the bar actually shows good judgment as opposed to driving.

Or, how about the guy who thinks he is okay to drive home. As soon as he gets in his car, he decides it isn't a good idea, and decides to sleep it off in his car. 1 hour later, a cop shows up to find him sleeping, wakes him up, does a sobriety test, and issues a DUI under the guise of "operating" the vehicle.

Don't take this as a defense for drink and drivers, because it isn't. I'm just offering the perspective that many DUIs are bogus, for lack of a better term. First offense, depending on the severity, shouldn't be treated so harshly. Repeat offense, throw the book at them, and then some.

Just my $0.02.

OP, good luck with your situation.

Apply and find out. As stated many times before, the worst they can say is no.

100% incorrect, not a chance in hell with a recent DUI.

SKW of all places might actually be understanding, but they cannot send you to Canada with a DUI for at least 5 years.

With a seniority-based scheduling system (like all airlines) it would be totally non-feasible to accomodate the needs of a pilot who cannot fly many of their trips. They already have enough guys with that problem who were already employed when the cannucks came up with the rule.

Only shot will be with a small, non-jet commuter which does not fly to Canada.

You are 100% incorrect. There are guys there that can attest to that.

I heard the same thing - this was discussed by someone at the ASA interview center. I think there is a long process you have to go through with the canadian authorities to get cleared to enter, and that is pretty much a pre-requisite for any airlines operating into Canada. I'd advise your friend to find out what issues this poses and start working on getting access to Canada now, so that he can at least say that he's taken the initiative and it's in progress when he applies.

Ehaeker - I disagree. I think a DUI does show, without a doubt, a major lapse in judgement. Granted, not everyone who gets one is blackout-drunk behind the wheel. But it doesn't take blackout-drunk to kill yourself. All you have to do it be buzzed enough to not notice a red light or stop sign, and you could kill / maim / cripple a whole family or worse.

In your example of a cop waking up someone sleeping behind the wheel to give them a DUI, I don't think that's even possible (assuming the COP isn't breaking the law). Sitting in a parked car isn't "operating" a motor vehicle. The crime is "driving" while intoxicated, not sitting in a stationary object. Even if this was the case, he/she could have made better arrangements that wouldn't have put him/her in that situation in the first place. How about just having good enough judgement not to get so drunk you would need to sit in your parked car to sleep it off?

You are going to have a really hard time coming up with any scenario in which getting a DUI was the result of good judgement or decision-making. Now, whether it's possible to change your attitude, atone for your mistake, and be reliably professional in the future is much more debatable. But if you are going to try to argue that getting a DUI doesn't always indicate poor judgement and decision making at the time it happened, I just don't think you have a case.

These facts are always (or so nearly always that there is no distinction) true:

1) You got behind the wheel of something that can kill people, knowing you could put someone's life at risk
2) You did it knowing it was illegal to do so
3) You did it knowing the huge risk to your career aspirations
4) In spite of the above, you did it anyway.

If you are someone hiring at an airline, you'd have to think the following:

1) Someone with a DUI is much more likely to have problems with alcohol abuse or dependency than someone without.
2) Someone with a DUI is much more likely to exhibit poor judgement, risk management, attitude towards risk-taking, etc than someone without.
3) Someone with a DUI made a decision that put his/her immediate desire to drive somewhere ahead of the elevated risk of killing/injuring himself or others.

That doesn't sound like someone you want in your cockpit. No?

drrhythm -

If you are making a distiction between a state's actual interpetation of DUI as a singular form of the wider body of Drunk Driving Offenses, then you might be right. If you are, as most people do, lump DUI, DWI, and in OK - APC (Actual Physical Control) together under the same umbrella, then your interpetation is incorrect and you would be charged with APC in the state of OK in the above stated scenario which carries like penalties and would most likely be viewed by a prospective employer in the same manner.
As an example:
I know of many other states that you will be charged with some type of offense if found passed out in your car with the keys anywhere NEAR your possession. The thought process is much more along the lines of the person wasn't exhibiting the good sense not to drive while drunk rather than passed out prior to getting the chance. There isn't much slack given in favor of the driver in these cases and therefore your thought process should be one of leaving NO DOUBT; which is why I don't have single drink if I am driving nowdays. The possible one-in-million shot just isn't worth it for a beer with my chicken wings :)

Now as far as riding a bicycle or walking home from the bar after having too many, and still getting hit up with some type of drunk in public charge, which inhibits your chances of getting hired on in this challenging environment is just a reflection of the winds blowing a certain way. If you want to fight against the winds then you take your chances knowing full well the possible consequences of your actions.

USMCFLYR

This happened to a friend of mine. He claims he never intended to drive the car, but since it was a cold night he started it to run the heater so he could sleep it off. A couple hours of later a cop showed up and busted him and it held up in court. Sucked for him. Good thing he doesn't want to be an airline pilot.

No one is arguing that making the decision to drink and drive shows bad judgement at that moment. But one DUI does not establish a pattern of making bad decisions.

Dui
 

In my state keys in the ignition engine running equals operation ...I have a friend who was in a ski town same situation ..he claims he was cold so had the engine running but
the court system had heard that claim many times before and was unimpressed

the problem here IMHO is the recency of the DUI...Was the case even adjudicated yet ?Did he recieve a sentence ?Was his license reinstated ? Need more info .Also how old is he ?

At a SADD event decades ago, we were instructed that if you want to sleep it off in your car, give your keys to a buddy or lock them in the trunk. Since you can not physically operate the vehicle, you can not be charged with DUI.

Keys in your posession = DUI.

People love casting stones when they likely have taken the wheel at least once when they were "ok to drive." Don't get me wrong, I'm not letting anyone off the hook. Fact is, everyone makes mistakes, but DUI is a big'un. If its past lawyer'ing up and fighting it then you need to find a flight school, corporate or 135 gig. Getting into 121 is gonna be very tough. Got a buddy with a full-on DUI that flew in Saipan VFR 135, then went to a small corporate gig in the midwest, then twin-cessna's on Cape Cod, and now scheduled 135 in the midwest. Getting work isn't impossible, and getting into 121 isn't impossible, but your buddy may have to accept an alternative career path. A clean record post-DUI and a record of doing what you can to continue flying will make getting hired down the road easier (not to mention that the word of previous employers can carry a lot of weight).

**I know I said "you" a lot, but I meant your buddy...

With a recent DUI? Such that they cannot enter Canada?

No, there are not any RECENT HIRES unless his parent or uncle is a SGU heavy.

There are plenty who got DUIs after being hired, or were hired before the cannucks got so anal about it.

Yes recent hires. Yes Can go to Canada. I was just correcting your 100%

It actually happened to the UND CFI that killed himself via nosing a Seminole in the ground in SD. If I remember right it was his second DUI and felt his career was over. Was winter, after a night of drinking he turned the car on for heat and hopped in the back to sleep it off. Cop rolled up and got hit with a DUI. The key was that even if he put the keys under the car, in the trunk, or sat in the back seat with car running, the understanding of it according to my cop friends is that a person still had "access" to the car to drive. Only "safe bet" is to toss the keys into the woods with your back turned and eyes closed. Still just call a cab.

Yes, as long as they can enter Canada SKW is very tolerant (for an airline).

But if they have a recent DUI the only way they are getting in is with family connections and senior-management over-ride of the seniority system to keep them on the EMB and out of canada.

That was my whole point, a RECENT DUI is a problem.

I hadn't heard that story, and that's really tragic. I can understand how that could happen, and how he must have felt.

Obviously, it's a bad law that says sleeping in the back of a car while drunk can result in a DUI charge. That seems ridiculous. No disagreement there.

That being said, I think the problem was that he was out for "a night of drinking," this after already having a DUI, and already knowing how potentially devastating that could be for his career. Really good judgement would be to not go out drinking in the first place, or limit yourself to two drinks, or have a DD lined up, or take a cab, or any of 100 things he could have done other than sleep in his car. And I really hate to say this, but ignorance of the law has never been and never will be an excuse for breaking it, nor is disagreeing with the law. I really feel for that guy. I know for every guy caught with a DUI there are 10 (or more) that don't, and there is an element of luck involved. But... for every guy who gets a DUI for sleeping in the back of a running car while drunk, there are probably 50 who get one for legit driving while intoxicated, wouldn't you think? And you can't really ask the airline to try to sort that one out.

But the bottom line is that you have to take responsibility for yourself. You are responsible for knowing the law and acting within it, even if it's silly. You are responsible for using judgement to keep yourself out of situations where you might have to, for example, sleep in the back of your car instead of driving.

But the bottom line is that you have to take responsibility for yourself. You are responsible for knowing the law and acting within it, even if it's silly. You are responsible for using judgement to keep yourself out of situations where you might have to, for example, sleep in the back of your car instead of driving.

Keep in mind that sleeping in the back of a car with windows up, car running and heater running, you could wind up dead!! (Carbon Monoxide!!)

Huh?

In a garage, maybe.

I drive around all the time with the heater on and my windows up!

Oh, well, I see. I am usually in the front when doing this, though. Must be the "sleeping in the back" part that's dangerous :)

You can actually get carbon monoxide poisoning from a car parked outside if it's not moving. My uncle had a mild case of this when he fell asleep in his running car parked outside waiting to pick up his daughter from school.

Uncle Buck.

What about a DUI that has been reduced to reckless operation which is my case? Future employers still look at it as a DUI and do we even have to disclose it?

I thought it was this one at E-R:

On September 6, 1998, about 2323 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA-44-180, N922ER,
registered to Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, crashed on runway 7 left at Daytona Beach
International Airport, Daytona Beach, Florida, while on a Title 14 CFR Part 91 personal flight.
Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time and no flight plan was filed. The aircraft
was destroyed and the commercial-rated pilot was fatally injured. The flight originated from
Daytona Beach, the same day, about 2304.
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University personnel stated the pilot was employed as a flight
instructor. At 2249, the pilot attempted to use his issued key to gain access to the Embry-Riddle
flight line. Due to the late hour, the security computer system would not allow him access. The
pilot then climbed the 8-foot, barbed wire topped fence to the flight line and gained unauthorized
access to N922ER.

No the one at ER was that the instructor was tired of being picked on about his weight or something.

Here is a summery of the UND crash:
(I guess looking at the story, looks like he was in the front seat not back seat like I remembered)
Suicide suspected

Pilot charged with second DUI night before fatal flight

Law enforcement officials in Rapid City, S.D., suspect suicide in the Monday plane crash and death of a 22-year-old UND flight instructor. Robert Thomsen of Wild Rose, Wisconsin, died in the crash Monday evening at Rapid City Regional Airport one day after being charged with his second drunken driving offense in two and a half years. Thomsen was employed by UND as a flight instructor, and was flying a UND-owned twin-engine Piper Seminole, which crashed at 7:32 p.m. Suicide is suspected because of Thomsen's last radio message to the Rapid City airport control tower, said Rapid City Police Department spokesman, Capt. Christopher Grant. His father Paul said* his son's message to the Rapid City tower, was "Tell everyone I love them."**

The school knew of Thomsen's first offense, in May 1998, but Bruce Smith, dean of UND's John D. Odegard School of Aerospace Sciences said it didn't violate any of its policies in employing Thomsen, who is also a graduate of the UND school. Thomsen was hired in August 1998. Smith said the school didn't violate any law in Thomsen's employment. Smith said Wednesday "we were not aware of the Sunday morning charge." Smith said the school follows the Federal Aviation Administration's requirements with its pilots and like many other aviation employers subjects pilots, to random drug tests. Thomsen's pilot certification was suspended by the FAA for his 1998 offense, but he passed the needed steps to regain his credentials, Smith said. The steps included alcohol evaluations. After completing FAA steps and regaining his certification, Thomsen was hired as a flight instructor.

Smith and other UND aerospace officials declined to release Thomsen's personnel file, considered public under North Dakota law. The dean said, however, there's nothing in the file that would indicate a problem. He called Thomsen an exemplary pilot and student. Thomsen graduated on top of his class in December 1999 with a 3.84 grade-point average. Smith said, UND isn't declaring the accident a suicide. He said he wouldn't know the cause of the accident until the NTSB completes its investigation.

DUIs are often career-enders* "It depends on the hiring practices of* businesses," said John Vold, an operations inspector with the FAA's Fargo office.* If a pilot has one offense, aviation companies typically won't hire that pilot.* Airlines "absolutely" won't hire a pilot with two offenses.

According to Grand Forks police, Thomsen was found sitting in a parked car with its engine running, in a gas station lot in the 600 block of South Washington Street* about 3 a.m. Sunday. Police said Thomsen was alone in the car, hunched over behind the steering wheel. Police said Thomsen failed every sobriety test administered to him Sunday morning. The results of a Breathalyzer test showed his blood-alcohol level was nearly twice the legal limit, at .194 percent. Thomsen was arrested and jailed briefly Sunday morning at the Grand Forks County Correctional Center. He was bailed out later that day, according to a correctional officer.

Thomsen received his first DUI in 1998 while he was still an aviation student at UND, according to court documents. According to court records he was fined $300 and ordered to meet with an addiction counselor at UND student health. He was also sentenced to a year of supervised probation and ordered to take part in a 12-hour DUI offender's seminar. Thomsen's probation was completed in May 1999; he had no driving or alcohol violations since his 1998 DUI conviction, until he was arrested again Sunday.

Grand Forks Herald, Thursday, October 5, 2000

Well done :)

That really is tragic...

Being said, he wasn't "in the back seat sleeping it off" like the previous poster said. He was in the front seat. He was WAY over (almost 2.5 times) the legal limit, and this after sleeping for some period of time. He was at a gas station, not in the driveway of a friends house, it was 3am, and it seems pretty obvious he was the one who drove there, since he was hunched over the steering wheel alone with the engine running.

You can't tell me the situation still doesn't reek of bad judgement, especially in light of a previous DUI conviction. He may have been at a bar or party a block away, and made a good call to stay off the streets, but there are a million ways he could have avoided putting himself in a situation where he was passed out drunk in a car in a gas station parking lot at 3am. Really it sounds like he had a textbook problem with alcohol abuse, and needed more help to deal with it. If you can't stop yourself from getting that drunk and getting behind the wheel (even if a short distance) after having a previous DUI and being in the aviation business, you may need counseling to help.

Anyway, I feel really bad for that guy. I don't know what's next but I hope he's in a better place.