Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who has the right to order/halt an evacuation?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who has the right to order/halt an evacuation?

    A pilot who ordered an emergency evacuation after smoke was detected coming from one of the jet's engines is suing Allegiant Air for firing him.

    The 43-year-old pilot says Allegiant is putting profits above safety. Allegiant says the evacuation was unnecessary and put passengers at risk — several were injured sliding down inflatable escape chutes. http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2015/1...vacuating-jet/
    So, who has the authority? Who was right (or, more right...) here?
    Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

  • #2
    u misunderstand. the pilot was fired for being too cautious. the pilot sued the airline for firing him.

    as far as i'm concerned, the suit should stand and i hope he wins.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hindsight is a wonderful thing. However...the pilot has the responsibility for the safety of the aircraft and its occupants. The engine was smoking to a level that it should not have been indicating a potential for fire. He was therefore correct in evacuating the aircraft. What would Allegiant management have said or done if it had caught fire and killed people ?
      Allegiant have a history of putting costs before safety and they have a history of engine based issues.
      This customer service site shows what the users think of them.. http://www.airlinequality.com/airlin...allegiant-air/
      If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
        u misunderstand. the pilot was fired for being too cautious. the pilot sued the airline for firing him.

        as far as i'm concerned, the suit should stand and i hope he wins.
        Agreed, concur, , thumbsup, +1 and "like".

        I hope he wins and he kicks the shit out of the airline. This must be a lesson for all airlines.

        If the chief instructor of the airline considers that the evacuation was unwarranted, there can be a debriefing, and aftermath, a lessons learned, or even a re-training. But NOT punishment, let alone firing him, for considering that evacuation was the safest course of action and deciding accordingly. The Captain IS the ultimate responsible foe the safety of the flight, the passengers and the crew. And for safety concerns, it is HIS judgement what prevails over anything else. Even over the airline policies, the flight manual and the federal regulations.

        --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
        --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

        Comment


        • #5
          Ok, I get it now. Why isn't the FAA dealing with Allegiant? Why does the pilot have to do this himself? Why aren't there r e g u l a t i o n s ?

          Comment


          • #6
            As in so many other cases, there *are* regulations.

            14 CFR section 91.3 paragraph "a" states "The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft." (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.3?qt-cfr_tabs=1#qt-cfr_tabs)

            So clearly per the regulation, the PIC has authority and responsibility for what takes place on the aircraft - that covers the "aviation" side of things. But employment law is a muddier subject...
            Be alert! America needs more lerts.

            Eric Law

            Comment


            • #7
              there are regulations. doesn't mean allegiant followed them, or, more likely, this rat-trap carrier is more interested in money (which kinzer cost them) than the law.

              i looked up the case and no documents are available for reading online anyway.

              my guess, although i'm not a labor-employment lawyer, is that kinzer filed for wrongful/retaliatory termination and will claim a form of whistle blower protection. i;m also going to predict that allegiant will try to move the case to federal court.

              Comment


              • #8
                Well all I can say is I hope they (the airline) get their... um... "tailcones" kicked.
                Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                Eric Law

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by elaw View Post
                  ...So clearly per the regulation, the PIC has authority and responsibility for what takes place on the aircraft - that covers the "aviation" side of things. But employment law is a muddier subject...
                  In accordance with your comment, the FAA isn't taking any action against the pilot.
                  Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
                    ............
                    Allegiant have a history of putting costs before safety and they have a history of engine based issues.
                    This customer service site shows what the users think of them.. http://www.airlinequality.com/airlin...allegiant-air/
                    I put little trust in many review sites since, in general, only pissed off customer post their experiences. For example Frontier airlines on that site is less favored than Allegiant in reviews (2/10 vs. 3/10).

                    Frontier is based in my area and I know a many people who fly them including myself and my wife. Read the rules when booking and you will rarely have problems with their service. I also fly the more traditional airlines and find some that are always great and some that are very spotty in their service. I have never flown Allegiant since they do not serve my local airport but probably would if they did, and their fares and schedule were acceptable to me.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by elaw View Post
                      As in so many other cases, there *are* regulations.

                      14 CFR section 91.3 paragraph "a" states "The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft." (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.3?qt-cfr_tabs=1#qt-cfr_tabs)

                      So clearly per the regulation, the PIC has authority and responsibility for what takes place on the aircraft - that covers the "aviation" side of things. But employment law is a muddier subject...
                      It bears keeping in mind that 14 CFR Part 91.3 does NOT give the PIC immunity from any and all harm (it seems to me it's often misunderstood that way). Therefore, a PIC may well be called to task for his/her decisions depending on the circumstances, that's why the word "responsibility" is there.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                        there are regulations. doesn't mean allegiant followed them, or, more likely, this rat-trap carrier is more interested in money (which kinzer cost them) than the law.

                        i looked up the case and no documents are available for reading online anyway.

                        my guess, although i'm not a labor-employment lawyer, is that kinzer filed for wrongful/retaliatory termination and will claim a form of whistle blower protection. i;m also going to predict that allegiant will try to move the case to federal court.
                        I highly doubt it will get that far. Allegiant is a union carrier, the Teamsters will get him his job back, probably with back pay.

                        Keep in mind they're currently in contract negotiations...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post
                          It bears keeping in mind that 14 CFR Part 91.3 does NOT give the PIC immunity from any and all harm (it seems to me it's often misunderstood that way). Therefore, a PIC may well be called to task for his/her decisions depending on the circumstances, that's why the word "responsibility" is there.
                          Indeed.

                          The authority to tell ATC to stick it when you have sound reason seems to generally grant pilots a lot of immunity, and that thinking is kind of pervasive even though paperwork, and violation proceedings, or Tee Veer lawsuits (for slide-induced wedgies) can follow.
                          Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post
                            I highly doubt it will get that far. Allegiant is a union carrier, the Teamsters will get him his job back, probably with back pay.

                            Keep in mind they're currently in contract negotiations...
                            Hmm... that being the case, a conspiracy theorist might wonder if this could be a deliberate strategic act, so they could give the guy his job back as a "concession"...
                            Be alert! America needs more lerts.

                            Eric Law

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              for your reading pleasure.

                              https://consumermediallc.files.wordp...-complaint.pdf

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X