FFDO Drunk At Security Check-In

Nick

Nick

Well-Known Member
http://kstp.com/article/stories/S262046.shtml?cat=1

In summary: a armed Midwest captain had a 0.16 BAC at the airport when reporting for duty.

Does this change anyone's mind about the FFDO program? I do not really have an opinion of th program as I have not been through it, but I can imagine this would turn people who are on the fence about it into opposition of pilots being allowed to carry guns on board.

Anyone can get drunk.
Anyone can show up to fly drunk.
Anyone can get a gun (in time).

So, I suppose the true problem here is still the "captain shows up smelling of alcohol," gun or no gun. :( I wonder if there were other flight crew members there or if he was checking in alone having come from the hotel alone. I hope that is the case.
 
I don't get it. With all of the publicity about drunk crew members, why not just call in sick if you went on a bender?

I have a question for you airline folks. Are the airlines punitive if a pilot (or FA) admits they have a drinking problem? By law, don't they have to offer employee assistance, and give the pilot/FA a chance to redeem him or herself? Or is that all just smoke and mirrors? If a pilot walked in to CP's office and said, "CP, I'm afraid I've developed a drinking problem" would he have his flying privileges immediately revoked?

I used to work with a guy who was constantly out late in the bars of San Francisco. He'd come in late (reeking of booze), or not at all, until management eventually confronted him. They flat out asked him if he had a drinking problem, and offered him rehab through the employee assistance program, instead of firing him. The guy didn't take them up on their offer and continued to come in late reeking of booze, so they fired him. But at least he had a chance (even if he blew it) Do flight crews get help if they need it without losing their jobs?
 
Obviously what this guy did is wrong, or sounds, from your story, that is wrong. But remember, there are people all over the world who are trained to do some pretty wild stuff, shoot guns, fly planes, control nuclear power, operate on people, etc. The fact that a guy shows up drunk for work, who is an FFDO, does not make pilots, law enforcement officials, or the combination thereof a bad idea. Nor does it make it a bad idea that people are in control of many deadly things daily. It means this guy made a bad choice and/or has a problem. Just because he may of screwed up doesn't mean the system is screwed up.
 
Wow, that dude looks like a psycho in his mug shot. I could tell just by looking at his picture that he's a gun-toting.... nevermind....


SkyCougar said:
I have a question for you airline folks. Are the airlines punitive if a pilot (or FA) admits they have a drinking problem? By law, don't they have to offer employee assistance, and give the pilot/FA a chance to redeem him or herself? Or is that all just smoke and mirrors? If a pilot walked in to CP's office and said, "CP, I'm afraid I've developed a drinking problem" would he have his flying privileges immediately revoked?
Click to expand...

Dunno about everyone, but my company has a great Employee Assistance Program... if you spill the truth, they'll do whatever they can to help you get through it....
 
SkyCougar said:
.......
I have a question for you airline folks. Are the airlines punitive if a pilot (or FA) admits they have a drinking problem?......If a pilot walked in to CP's office and said, "CP, I'm afraid I've developed a drinking problem" would he have his flying privileges immediately revoked?.....
Click to expand...

I think if you admit it, they almost have to help you and will do what they can. I know Doug has mentioned many times, that the minute you cross the threshold of the plane door and enter the cockpit, all bets are off.
 
JEP said:
I think if you admit it, they almost have to help you and will do what they can. I know Doug has mentioned many times, that the minute you cross the threshold of the plane door and enter the cockpit, all bets are off.
Click to expand...

Though there is a pilot out there who purportedly did drugs in flight, in the lav, two times, the second time after having gone through rehab.

That pilot went from the regional where the problems occurred to a legacy carrier. Drug test at the start of each pairing.
 
lol

<-- patiently waiting for BobDDuck to come in and talk about the cowboy FFDO's who can't say no to any alcoholic beverage. :)

But go figure. . .the system is broke.
 
Despite the common sense explanation that he is only one man in a very big program, this incident will have a disproportionate negative impact on the FFDO program with the help of the media and the program's critics.
 
I think, personally, that the risk of having someone who may not be thinking right on all cylinders with a weapon in the cockpit is greater than not having that weapon in the cockpit.

But hey - what do I know.
 
surreal1221 said:
I think, personally, that the risk of having someone who may not me thinking right on all cylinders with a weapon in the cockpit is greater than not having that weapon in the cockpit.

But hey - what do I know.
Click to expand...

Couldn't the same rationale be used for airport police? Postal inspectors? Federal Air Marshals?

BTW, if they ever issue guns to TSA personnel, I am retiring on the spot. Can you imagine?
 
calcapt said:
Couldn't the same rationale be used for airport police? Postal inspectors? Federal Air Marshals?

BTW, if they ever issue guns to TSA personnel, I am retiring on the spot. Can you imagine?
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

Settle down there Surreal.....we all know you don't like the FFDO program but this incident is in no way a reflection of how the FFDO program is broke. Should we get rid of all the police now since they carry firearms and could possibly show up to work drunk? :rolleyes:
 
The FFDO bit has nothing to do with it. It just so happened that he was carrying.

Drunk pilots will always be a problem. Yes, there are programs (ALPA's HIMS program is very effective) but at the end of the day, it is illegal to fly when you are drunk or on drugs and it is NOT illegal (although it may be against company policy) to be drunk or on drugs while doing many other jobs. That's why this will always be news.

I don't drink so I can't say for sure, but there are days where I am so tired from back to back 15 hour days with only 9 hours of rest between that I might as well be drunk. So obviously it's not the safety issue they (being the law makers and general public who eat this stuff up) care about.
 
SkyCougar said:
I have a question for you airline folks. Are the airlines punitive if a pilot (or FA) admits they have a drinking problem? By law, don't they have to offer employee assistance, and give the pilot/FA a chance to redeem him or herself? Or is that all just smoke and mirrors? If a pilot walked in to CP's office and said, "CP, I'm afraid I've developed a drinking problem" would he have his flying privileges immediately revoked?
Click to expand...

Going into the CP's office and saying "I have an alcohol problem" is not a good thing to do. Most companies have an EAP (Employee Assistance Program) that any employee can use in such a situation. I'm not sure how the confidentiality would work with a crew member, but the EAP would be the place to start.

One must do the EAP thing of their own choice, one can't be ordered to participate. If, as a crew member, you actually show up to work drunk, and this is proven through an actual test, (not just some yahoo saying "hey this pilot smells of alcohol"!), your career is pretty much over.
 
Just to clarify, the pilot in the article blew a .016, not .16

This is not legally drunk and as long as he stopped drinking 8 hours ago, FAA and stopped drinking within whatever Midwest's limit is, he would've been legal had he not been stopped. I'm not saying I think he was fit to fly, because I wasn't there and it seems he failed 2 out of 3 sobriety tests. There could be much more to this story.

This is not an example of a silly, gun totin' cowboy getting busted by the TSA, plastered. This is an example of why it's silly to not do everything in your power to avoid drinking too much on your overnights and stay fit to fly. I can't personally have more than 1 without worrying too much. Sure, I would be legal if within 8 and 10 for my company, but if I was involved in an incident with any alcohol in my blood, my company reserves the right to terminate me. All in all a very sad situation for this guy.
 
MQAAord said:
Going into the CP's office and saying "I have an alcohol problem" is not a good thing to do. Most companies have an EAP (Employee Assistance Program) that any employee can use in such a situation. I'm not sure how the confidentiality would work with a crew member, but the EAP would be the place to start.

One must do the EAP thing of their own choice, one can't be ordered to participate. If, as a crew member, you actually show up to work drunk, and this is proven through an actual test, (not just some yahoo saying "hey this pilot smells of alcohol"!), your career is pretty much over.
Click to expand...

Do Unions make this type of assistance part of the contract, and do they negotiate job protections for the pilots who need help? In other words, should a pilot who needs help contact his union rep?
 
MQAAord said:
Going into the CP's office and saying "I have an alcohol problem" is not a good thing to do. Most companies have an EAP (Employee Assistance Program) that any employee can use in such a situation. I'm not sure how the confidentiality would work with a crew member, but the EAP would be the place to start.

One must do the EAP thing of their own choice, one can't be ordered to participate. If, as a crew member, you actually show up to work drunk, and this is proven through an actual test, (not just some yahoo saying "hey this pilot smells of alcohol"!), your career is pretty much over.
Click to expand...

But if some yahoo says "Hey this pilot smells like alcohol!" you'd better believe you're getting pulled off the trip and tested whether you're drunk or not.
 
WindyCityPilot said:
:yeahthat:

Settle down there Surreal.....we all know you don't like the FFDO program but this incident is in no way a reflection of how the FFDO program is broke. Should we get rid of all the police now since they carry firearms and could possibly show up to work drunk? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

lol

Nice try at an analogy.

Police officer's JOBS are to serve and protect. A Pilot's job is to fly a plane around.

You can :rolleyes:, so can I. . . :rolleyes:

calcapt said:
Couldn't the same rationale be used for airport police? Postal inspectors? Federal Air Marshals?

BTW, if they ever issue guns to TSA personnel, I am retiring on the spot. Can you imagine?
Click to expand...

Airport police - no, they serve and protect. Postal Inspectors, no, it's part of their job description. Federal Air Marshals, no, once again, THAT'S THEIR JOB.

So no, the same rational could not be used. Those individuals do not sit behind the controls of a XXX,XXXlb flying tube with humans inside. Notice I said in "...in the cockpit." Not in the ATL/IAH/LAX/DFW/JFK/ORD Main attrium.

Pilots, flying a tube around with humans inside should not a) show up to work drunk in the first place, and b) show up to work drunk AND with a weapon.

The end.

And yes, if they ever do issue TSA pawns weapons we will have much larger issues than this FFDO debate.
 
I fully support the FFDO and it does not change my opinion.

It's like seeing a inebriated cop doing shots with a fireman. Should be get rid of law enforcement and fire protection? Nope.

Waiiiit. 0.016? Oh shoot, I think the minimum traceable amount is 0.04 isn't it?
 
Doug Taylor said:
I fully support the FFDO and it does not change my opinion.

It's like seeing a inebriated cop doing shots with a fireman. Should be get rid of law enforcement and fire protection? Nope.

Waiiiit. 0.016? Oh shoot, I think the minimum traceable amount is 0.04 isn't it?
Click to expand...

taken from an article in the paper here. the kstp article has been taken down....Ooops,


KSTP this morning removed from its website its story citing a 0.16 reading. Its online video report said the reading was 0.016 and that the pilot was accused of "being drunk" and failed two of three field sobriety tests.

Federal rules set the legal limit for pilots to fly at 0.04, half of what it is for driving a vehicle.

However, Hogan said, airlines also have rules on how long a pilot must abstain from drinking before getting in the cockpit. Hogan did not know Midwest's policy, and officials for the airline were not immediately available.

The pilot's attorney, Arthur Martinez, of Minneapolis, said his client's alcohol leave was 0.01, "if anything." Martinez added that the pilot did not violate any airline rules or laws about time refraining from drinking before flying.
Click to expand...
 
Blood test said 0.016? Case closed as far as I'm concerned. Give the man his hat back and send him on his way.
 
Hmm, how to be nice about this... Seems like every holiday season they like to get a kill or two for the warm, fuzzy "TSA saves the day" newspaper articles.

"They're really here for our safety," Martha from Lake Wobegon states, "it's very much worth the inconvenience and I'm glad they're on the look out."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top