It was up or out that got him.

CRJ to EMB, with no previous EMB time... not trivial.

Up or out was never really a big deal... except for the upgrade + transition scenario.

 

How is that not considered age discrimination?

 

Didn't he stall it on the ride, and not during the maneuvers portion.

 

Pretty sure they paid them guarantee at CRJ rates... good way to see the world as a nonrev.

 

Don't recall much, although TW told me about it at the time.

But the bro was on PC at the time, not AQP so it would not have been MV/LOFT format.

 

Caution, slippery slope. I flew with one of the LCA at Colgan who was one of the instructors with Renslow. Sounds like he was basically passed around until someone eventually signed him off. Definitely someone who the “company” and ALPA should have noticed and let go.

 

ALPA (or any union) would never decide to "let someone go". They are essentially required by law or legal precedent to back a union member to the hilt in all cases, disciplinary, training, etc... even though the union membership and leaders might personally prefer not to. Union can argue for higher admission standards (ie 1500 rule), but once you're in they have to stand up for you.

I think there are exceptions only for anti-union activity.

 

Having a TRB doesn't mean that pilots who cannot satisfactorily pass get passed around. It means you get to tell your side of the story to people (one of which is a union rep) who aren't emotionally invested in your situation.


Federal law states that every covered person, whether they are a dues paying member or not, have a duty of fair representation. In other words, everyone has a right to be represented at a disciplinary hearing (nothing to do with a TRB although everyone has a right to that as well but in a different context of DFR that you are alluding to). But that doesn't mean that just because you have the right to representation that you have the right to get away with things. In cases of obvious egregious misconduct, the Rep is there to ensure the grievance process is as the contract requires. I always advised guys to be honest, take your lumps, learn from it, and move on. And that's pretty much all you can do as a Rep when someone was obviously in the wrong, make sure they get their due process and that they don't make it worse for themselves.

 

Yes, this is as it should be and certainly did not mean to imply otherwise. Union's duty is to assist, not judge or filter members. Otherwise internal union politics would inevitably mean some folks got more than their fair share of representation, and some folks less.

 

I've been at an mec meeting where a Rep outright refused to represent a certain pilot because of his history of antics even though this particular time was a minor issue. The attorney represented him despite it not being a termination event, when the attorney normally gets inserted.