Pilots and Alcohol testing?

Bandit_Driver

Bandit_Driver

Gold Member
We've all seen the pilots on the jetway doing a field sobriety tests. My questions must a pilot agree to doing a field sobriety test? Is there FAA ramifications for not agreeing to it.

Is a sloped jetway even the proper place for one?

Can a pilot just request a breathalyzer or blood draw?

lastly what happens if a Portable Breathalyzer unit is positive but the table top machine later says no?
 
Disclaimer: I'm an attorney, but I do NOT practice criminal law. That said, this is the first attorney I have EVER heard that recommends that pilots agree to and take a FST. As far as I know, this is NOT a "DOT approved" testing method and serves only the prosecution. I might be out in left field but I would dig deeper into this if I was a pro pilot.
 
HeyEng said:
Disclaimer: I'm an attorney, but I do NOT practice criminal law. That said, this is the first attorney I have EVER heard that recommends that pilots agree to and take a FST. As far as I know, this is NOT a "DOT approved" testing method and serves only the prosecution. I might be out in left field but I would dig deeper into this if I was a pro pilot.
Click to expand...
The reason this is the only lawyer who you've ever heard say this is because this is the only lawyer that is looking at it from a pilot perspective. All the other lawyers who talk about this in YouTube videos and podcasts are looking for a way to beat the DUI. Beating the DUI in court does not solve the FAA problem and can actually make the FAA medical issue worse, as the FAA takes the arrest report, the pilot's refusals, and assumes the worst case scenario.

Non-DUI example of the difference. Years ago, a pilot friend called me. The pilot had just been hired by an airline and had been charged with a reckless driving offense. The pilot was offered a reduction of the charge to speeding with attendance at a defensive driving school. Like most any other lawyer would, this pilot's lawyer recommended taking that great deal. The pilot wanted me to speak to their lawyer to explain why it was not a good deal. When the pilot's lawyer went back to the prosecutor, rejected the deal, and asked for something more serious, the prosecutor was absolutely shocked, but of course, agreed.
 
Would like to see the outcome on this case. I wonder if he wised up at the station and agreed to Breathalizer or Blood Draw. I would imagine the PD would ask for a warrant for a blood draw.

I wonder if his strategy was to delay in hopes of getting under .02 before they can draw the blood. Despite the FAA just doing math to calculate the number he was at on the jet.

SWA did ask for him to be released to the airline so they could test him right at the airport.
 
MidlifeFlyer said:
The reason this is the only lawyer who you've ever heard say this is because this is the only lawyer that is looking at it from a pilot perspective. All the other lawyers who talk about this in YouTube videos and podcasts are looking for a way to beat the DUI. Beating the DUI in court does not solve the FAA problem and can actually make the FAA medical issue worse, as the FAA takes the arrest report, the pilot's refusals, and assumes the worst case scenario.

Non-DUI example of the difference. Years ago, a pilot friend called me. The pilot had just been hired by an airline and had been charged with a reckless driving offense. The pilot was offered a reduction of the charge to speeding with attendance at a defensive driving school. Like most any other lawyer would, this pilot's lawyer recommended taking that great deal. The pilot wanted me to speak to their lawyer to explain why it was not a good deal. When the pilot's lawyer went back to the prosecutor, rejected the deal, and asked for something more serious, the prosecutor was absolutely shocked, but of course, agreed.
Click to expand...
Since my original post, I dug a little deeper. As to the pilot side of things (FAA/DOT rules/consequences) I would still stick to the NO FST. Sure a blood draw isn't up for discussion; that does have serious implications with the FAA/DOT. The FST does nothing more than build a case and a foundation for probable cause. While the refusal to take the FST may hinder actions by the FAA, I see that as a rebuttable presumption. Don't help the LEO *or* the FAA with this. Get. The. Draw. That is factual, whereas the FST is ALWAYS going to be subjective. --not legal advice-- :)

I watched the video again and noticed that the attorney seemed to conflate the FST with the blood draw/breathalyzer about half way through. So I am not sure he was even clear on his OWN advice. I assume most union shops have attorneys available, so I would damn sure get this figured out and would NOT take advice from a YouTube attorney or some rando attorney on the internet (yep, I'm talking about me).
 
HeyEng said:
Get. The. Draw.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone would disagree with that. There is nothing about refusing the FST that will avoid an arrest and nothing about the FST that prevents getting the draw.

I think what Chris is saying is, based on his experience with these kinds of cases (my last DIU case was 31 years ago, so it's not particularly pertinent), the FST is irrelevant except as a measure of cooperation. The blood test is going to be the determining factor regarding BAC. If the blood test negates whatever the cop thinks he saw with visual observation or an FST, the FST is irrelevant (and yes, I've had one of those cases). And if it confirms it, well, you got the blood draw that's hanging you and not the FST, although your cooperative attitude may ultimately help. with the FAA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top