When to call in sick?

Call in sick when you're sick, don't call in sick when you're really not sick.

Defining abusive usage, well, I'm in my early 40's and in good health.

Stuff that goes wrong in your 20's graduates to a whole new level in your 30's, then accelerates in your 40's, I can't even imagine what the 50's and 60's are like.
 
Call in sick when you feel like it. The company doesn't care about you....why do you care about them? I certainly don't....I use my sick time when I feel lazy....I'm sick or just don't wanna fly.
 
Jesus GOD, people. You're actually arguing over the fact that a policy exists. The policy exists so the company can point to a hard and fast offense. If there is no policy, then there's a nebulous "pilot vs management" your word vs mine. If the guy is lying to the company, unless he does something MONUMENTALLY stupid, there's very little hard way to prove it. "You called in sick before vacation. We think you were just trying to get another day off." "Nope. I was REALLY sick, sir." If there is no policy in place, how exactly are you going to discipline that guy? You can accuse him of lying, but short of hiring a private investigator to follow everyone that calls in sick prior to a vacation day, how do you PROVE he's lying? Should he be fired for lying? Yep. Have people in the past been fired for lying? Yes, absolutely.

Again, I love how people that don't work here are suddenly experts at what is/was going on and how to handle it. And yes, I guess I'll tag @Seggy on that since he gets all uppity if people are talking about him and don't tag him. There's a policy. Now, since you're all up in arms over said policy, please tell me exactly what the policy IS. I can tell you I have ZERO problems with it how it is currently written. It gives enough leeway for those of us that call in sick to be legit sick and not be punished, and it gives enough leeway for management to find and punish the abusers. Not having a policy, we actually had guys with 20+ sick calls in a YEAR. More than a few.

And if you're going to use this thread to justify your "99% of pilots want to do the right thing," let's do that. 35 different people have posted in this thread. Of those 35, 17 gave opinions on the subject. Of those 17 5 were either in the "I'll fly even if I'm not feeling that well" or "I use sick time for blown commutes, etc" camp. Maybe they were joking, who knows? But we're talking about doing the "right thing" here, which is calling in sick when you're sick. So, percentage wise, the people doing the "right thing" is roughly 70%, which is far short of the 99%. If you're gonna use some random thread on the internet to try to back up your made up statistic, at least make sure it does, in fact, back it up. Even if only ONE person in the thread disagrees, your 99% value is shot. I PERSONALLY know enough guys here at Blue that will call in sick to "modify" a schedule to their liking to kill it to about 90% of people doing the right thing. But, I'm just going on my experience here. I'm sure if you take it out using statistics/mindset/surveys/science it's probably in the 80% range. As @PhilosopherPilot said, since the policy was enacted, the sick abuses have dropped. Guess what else? People aren't complaining about witch hunts, either. So, to me, it sounds like the policy is working for BOTH sides. But forget what's working. Forget that guys are actually in a GOOD mood for once. We don't need the policy. Know what'll happen if they yank the policy and go back to the way it was? Guys will start "modifying their schedules" again. I just don't see how you CAN go after the minority without a HUGE amount of resources if there's no policy in place. How many times as pilots have we asked someone to show us a reg or procedure in a book to show where something is wrong or the proper way to do something? If there's nothing to point to, there's very little way of saying it's "wrong." If a guy claims "Sick time is my time" and there's no policy to say otherwise, well, he's got a leg to stand on. It's even firmer when our sick and vacation banks are a merged PTO bank.

How exactly is ProStands even going to call a pilot and say "Hey, you know you should't be abusing sick time" when there is no definition of what sick or abuse is? The pilot's idea of abuse might be radically different, and having a come to Jesus talk with ProStands when there's no policy in place won't do anything. Even if ProStands says "You do realize it's lying and can be potentially stealing from the company," the likelihood of the pilot "getting it" and shaping up is slim if there isn't a policy to point out where he's gone wrong. It's, again, nebulous and subject to interpretation, which is exactly the type of rules pilots don't agree with normally. But, since this would BENEFIT pilots, I guess we like it.

I can't pretend to know what goes on at Southwest or United. I don't now what their policies are or if they have one. Wish guys would stop assuming they know what's up over here when it's pretty obvious they don't have a clue.
 
Last edited:
You can accuse him of lying, but short of hiring a private investigator to follow everyone that calls in sick prior to a vacation day, how do you PROVE he's lying?

In fact, yes, companies do hire private investigators. Investigating sick leave and disability is a big source of work for private investigators. I've represented a pilot who was fired after the company hired a PI to video tape him while he was on leave. It's a lot more common than you think to hire PIs for this sort of thing.

But it rarely requires that. Someone who lies about being sick is usually caught because he uses CASS, posts something on Facebook, etc.

Again, I love how people that don't work here are suddenly experts at what is/was going on and how to handle it.

We don't need to know anything more than the fact that there is a sick leave policy beyond "if you lie you get disciplined." Anything more than that, any limits whatsoever, are unacceptable and dangerous.
 
I've represented a pilot who was fired after the company hired a PI to video tape him while he was on leave.

More waste of union dollars. I would never want my union dues to protect someone so arrogant and brazen to abuse sick time like that. He got caught in the act with videotaped evidence so his firing is justified. No need to protect someone like this.
 
More waste of union dollars. I would never want my union dues to protect someone so arrogant and brazen to abuse sick time like that. He got caught in the act with videotaped evidence so his firing is justified. No need to protect someone like this.

So someone accused of a crime shouldn't get a lawyer?
 
So someone accused of a crime shouldn't get a lawyer?

Serious question,

At what point does the union tell a member, "We'll defend you 100% because we have to, but you are a personal embarrassment to our organization and we would recommend you find another career"


Me and a few other guys from my squadron once got into a bar fight defending another Marine who was being a total jackass and deserved to get his ass kicked. The problem was that there were 5 other guys who were about to jump one of my brothers. We did what we had to do, but later told him that if he ever embarrassed us like that again we would be the ones who would hand out a beating.

At what point does a union take the same position (albeit in a slightly more civilized way)?
 
Never. That's a great way to get sued.

So a professional organization doesn't police it's own members?

I understand that publicly and legally they have to defend the pilot who got buzzed his house on several occasions with paying passengers on board but surely someone took him aside privately and told him that his case was hopeless and he would likely never work in this industry again.
 
So a professional organization doesn't police it's own members?

I understand that publicly and legally they have to defend the pilot who got buzzed his house on several occasions with paying passengers on board but surely someone took him aside privately and told him that his case was hopeless and he would likely never work in this industry again.

If his fellow rank and file pilots want to do that, then that's fine. But his representatives would just be asking for trouble. If everything doesn't turn out well for him, you've opened the Association up to a lawsuit, and he'll probably name you personally, too. Sure, the union will indemnify you and provide your defense, but it will be a massive pain in the ass for you. Your job is to provide for a fair defense and let the process sort it out. You aren't his mommy.
 
So someone accused of a crime shouldn't get a lawyer?

That's some way to put it. Video graphic evidence pretty much shows the crime committed. Having worked at a non-union shop for nearly 3 years, I must say them firing a pilot isn't just easy as cake. They've had to build a file to show a case and only then with clear, concrete evidence do they go ahead and terminate.

So, what about that regional pilot child molester from a couple weeks ago? Suppose his airline fires him right away, are you going to ahead and defend this child molester and get his job back until he's proven guilty?
 
More waste of union dollars. I would never want my union dues to protect someone so arrogant and brazen to abuse sick time like that. He got caught in the act with videotaped evidence so his firing is justified. No need to protect someone like this.

What about the guy who's TSH level is 1% out of "normal" range and has to go on a pill the FAA requires a waiver for? Waivers take a while. I was riding my bike on the beach daily while waiting on the Feds.

I am not required per contract, nor is it a good idea, to inform the company WHY I called in sick. I could easily be unable to hold a medical yet seem perfectly healthy to a private investigator spying on me and the management guy who reviews the tapes. Like I said, I spent my time waiting for the waiver riding my bike on the beach. Who's the arrogant one again? Maybe the one who condemns without all the facts...
 
That's some way to put it. Video graphic evidence pretty much shows the crime committed. Having worked at a non-union shop for nearly 3 years, I must say them firing a pilot isn't just easy as cake. They've had to build a file to show a case and only then with clear, concrete evidence do they go ahead and terminate.

Of course some cases are clear cut. That still doesn't mean that the pilot should NOT be represented. Everyone has that right.

So, what about that regional pilot child molester from a couple weeks ago? Suppose his airline fires him right away, are you going to ahead and defend this child molester and get his job back until he's proven guilty?

Are you saying he is guilty? Because if you followed that thread on APC folks are saying there may be more to that story.

Usually companies suspend with pay until the legal processes take place in that case which is usually within their right per the contract.

BTW, as you despise unions @Cherokee_Cruiser how about we have an expert explain to us how corporate America, a place without unions would handle that type of situation. @HRDiva, mind chiming in please?
 
Of course some cases are clear cut. That still doesn't mean that the pilot should NOT be represented. Everyone has that right.



Are you saying he is guilty? Because if you followed that thread on APC folks are saying there may be more to that story.

Usually companies suspend with pay until the legal processes take place in that case which is usually within their right per the contract.

BTW, as you despise unions @Cherokee_Cruiser how about we have an expert explain to us how corporate America, a place without unions would handle that type of situation. @HRDiva, mind chiming in please?

I honestly haven't followed up on that case. Of course I hope it's a misunderstanding of some sort and it wasn't actual kiddie porn.

You are correct about suspension with pay. I despise unions but for my current Co. I think it's a requirement. Merger language/protection, scope, and protection in general in case (hopefully never) a pilot bends some metal (eg, wing strike). Right now we have nothing. M&A scenario I could see playing out in the next 5-10 years especially with jetBlue. Anyway, in the rest of corporate America we don't have a seniority system. It's almost entirely merit based in the "real" world outside the airline jobs.
 
What about the guy who's TSH level is 1% out of "normal" range and has to go on a pill the FAA requires a waiver for? Waivers take a while. I was riding my bike on the beach daily while waiting on the Feds.

I am not required per contract, nor is it a good idea, to inform the company WHY I called in sick. I could easily be unable to hold a medical yet seem perfectly healthy to a private investigator spying on me and the management guy who reviews the tapes. Like I said, I spent my time waiting for the waiver riding my bike on the beach. Who's the arrogant one again? Maybe the one who condemns without all the facts...

Ok, come on now, a case like that one would obviously be taken care of in a different way. Your CP would in all likeliness already know you are waiting for a waiver and they would never have to send a PI. The case I was referring to are the blatant violations. I flew with one guy this month who already told me what trip he was going to call in sick for in December. I think it's amazing if one has a magical machine which tells them exactly when they'll be sick one month from now. :tinfoil:
 
I think word usage is to blame, here. Obviously, when a pilot loses a battle with the company, in retrospect, the union defended the guilty pilot. Of course that doesn't sound right, but it didn't start out that way!

I'm sure there are cases where the union reps found no avenue to defend a pilot, @Cherokee_Cruiser, in which your point would be represented.
 
Back
Top