When did 0.035 begin qualifying as drunk?

 

It always qualified as operating under the influence. The laws are written like they are to allow for flexibility. If they just wanted to use .04, they would have left out the other words and phrases. Look up DUI vs DWI.

 

I couldn't agree more. Most positions are strictly volunteer with no pay involved. I have been involved in the past although not currently and have often felt no appreciation for my time. If you feel strongly about the direction of the union, by all means get off the sidelines and get involved. If you just want to stand back and cast stones, you are in no way helping the effort, but just *****ing with nothing to back it up. Just my 2 cents.

 

There's nothing more I hate than someone pointing out that we're pilots when we're out at the bar.

Just turns that 4 day trip into 4 days from hell.


I am and will always be a Brazilian/Swedish systems analyst.

 

I tell people I'm a dolphin trainer at seaworld

 

There are three classes of people:

Those who drink occasionally, those who are drinkers who know how to drink, and those who are alcoholics.


The occasional drinkers are idiots who don't know how to drink or how it affects them.


The regular drinkers know when to say ” when”.

The alcoholics need help.... And sometimes help happens After they have been caught.

Alcoholics are addicts that need to seek help. The others are acting badly.

 

First off fair point on the hotel staff, however most of us see more layovers then we care to admit on a monthly basis. That said I gotta say never have I met a group more lacking in basic social skills then airline pilots. When I was a capt at a regional I had to constantly shut up or ditch the FO and FA as they moaned on and on about work gossip at some place like a Chili's by the airport hotel. Unfortunately a few times I heard the 22 year old with SJS brag to the bartender about his career status.

When I got to a legacy I learned that you can figure out quickly whether your CA is worth having a 2-5 beers with at a long layover. Most of the time I went out on my own and had a WAY better time. Incidents like the thread starter prove that our profession has a LONG way to go towards having any game.

 

That's a stupid statement. He made the news because he is an idiot, and he is giving the rest of us a bad name. If you stop drinking at 7pm like he claimed and still blow a .35 in the morning, you either have a hangover or you drink so much that you need help anyways. So he was going to operate a flight in this condition. It could be your family on his flight

 

HIMS cant help you when you show up to work and blow past your company legal limit. ymmv

 

Then the FAA needs to revise the regs:

"Alcohol concentration. No covered employee shall report for duty or remain on duty requiring the performance of safety-sensitive functions while having an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater. No certificate holder having actual knowledge that an employee has an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater shall permit the employee to perform or continue to perform safety-sensitive functions."

As far as the FAA is concerned, as long as he hadn't consumed alcohol within 8 hrs. and was not impaired, he could've quite legally hopped in his RJ and gone along on his merry way. My airline (owned by SkyWest) doesn't add to the FAA limit-- our FOM says 8hrs and .04 are the limits. While it is stupid and reckless to duty-in so close to the legal limit, this could have been a non-event if he had been employed by another carrier.