https://thepointsguy.com/2018/03/aa-pil ... ew-member/


Sounds like an AA pilot has been charged with assault in GRU... arguing over the placement of the jet bridge.

32 and already flying the senior Brazil route? How long has he been at AA I wonder? Perhaps the rest he had was not enough. After all, they do refer to these tripe as the ‘bullet”.

Unfortunately, I’ve seen this attitude on many occasions from pilots. They can be rude, self-entitled and demanding. The stories I could tell you!

It is sad, as those of us who work in the industry are a family. And whether I have my brothers or sisters in this industry flying stand-by/non-rev or I am simply departing or greeting their flights - I strive to have a connection with them as well as do anything for them that they may require. I’ve been told on a couple of occasions that I treat some crews as if they are customers! Lol

I read it as he has been with AA for 32years. Wow..what a stupid reason to get charges thrown at u.

When they refer to the placement of the air bridge, was it going to damage the aircraft or injure a passenger?.

Years ago I was dispatching a LH A320. There was a hold-up due to the paperwork of a passenger on an onward connection to the US, and there were doubts as to the validity of his passport. This pee'd the captain off to no end, and at one point he tried to 'order' us to remove the jetbridge. We politely pointed out we were trying to sort out some issues, and would be ready to remove the bridge in a matter of minutes. As I returned to the gate, I felt the airbridge move - the captain was driving it a meter back from the aircraft, then jumped onboard and closed the cabin door behind him. To say we were flabbergasted would be to put it mildy.

However, since the only result of a peeing contest is that everyone goes home wet and smelly, we didn't take any further action and ok'd the ground staff to push the aircraft back.

Literally seconds later we got approval from the US embassy to let the passenger fly, sadly for him too late as the aircraft was taxing to the runway and he was still in the departure lounge. The subsequent correspondance to and fro with LH in Frankfurt was, how shall I put it, ... 'interesting'.

Some aircrew and, indeed, some ground staff really are 'out there'. Luckily they are few and far between. On the plus side of things are KL crew and ZRH ground staff. On the minus side are ground staff in TLV and - in a league of their own - crew from IB and AZ.

Everybody might have a bad day once in a while. Being rude is still better than closing the door and killing 149 People with you.

the story i read was that the female gate agent accidently stepped on the pilots foot after a disagreement with the placement of the jetbridge. The Pilot took serious offense to this and grabbed the female by the neck and threw her to the ground. I believe the pilot said he felt threatened. Supposedly there are witnesses that back up the gate agents version. Sucks for the passengers who subsequently has their flight cancelled. Not many options to get back home at 1:00 in the morning.

Some pilots I tell you, SMH! Some are real nice but some can be real jerks!

chepos wrote:

Some pilots I tell you, SMH! Some are real nice but some can be real jerks!

Very true, in my whole career as a Pilot I only met with one jerk, sadly I was scheduled for 4 or 5 flights with him, even after him being a junior to me, he had a lot of attitude problems and thought whatever he said was correct and the world revolved around him. There were 2 more but they were less jerks than him.

Otherwise whoever I flew with, my senior or junior they have been friendly and very nice.

Sadly Pilots (and FA's) are just like other people, some are great, some are fine, some are giant dbags. I've experienced many Pilots and FA's who were condescending and acted like they were my boss or something. I'm sure some CSA's can act the same in return sadly. People just need to learn how to be more respectful to each-other, passenger to worker, vice versa, and even airline workers to each-other.

I worked at an oustation, and we had a gate w/o a jet bridge. Well one day a pilot pulled up to the one with it, we kept waiving him over to our gate that we needed him at due to another inbound A/C that needed the jetbridge. He kept sitting there. He then called over the radio and refused to come over to the gate we were marshalling him to. Finally, after a good 5 minutes he came speeding over, once parked he came off the plane yelling a cussing. We frankly just told him, "Listen, that is your plane, but this is our airport, when we say this is where you're parking, that's where you're parking, you don't tell us where you are going, we have several other planes to work as well, you just only worry about yours."

Ironically though, I've been spoken to and condescended to more by FAs than Pilots.

Hi guess that, having an attitude is one thing. Assaulting a fellow company employee is something totally different. Read the following translation from https://goo.gl/KjdPqT

"An American American captain has been charged with assaulting an employee of the same company at Cumbica Airport in Guarulhos on Wednesday night,
The flight would leave from São Paulo to Miami and was canceled. American Airlines, through its press office, said it was making the facts clear and that all passengers on the flight were rearranged and given assistance.
According to the Federal Police and American Airlines, the copilot was at the door of the aircraft to adjust the finger step, which the captain said was in an incorrect position and the employee, who is a ground operations agent, stated that it was right (see note at the end of the text).
Still according to the PF, the captain, exalted, went to speak with the ground agent, who inadvertently stepped on his foot, according to witnesses. He would have replied, "Do not touch me" and she replied that she had not touched him.
According to the victim and witnesses, the pilot pushed her and grabbed her by the neck. The airport staff saw the fight and intervened. In his defense, the pilot claims that she tried to punch, but the copilot does not confirm that version.
A term by aggression was elaborated, the pilot had the passport withheld and will attend the special state criminal court of Guarulhos."

Let's see:
- Flight AA930 canceled and delayed for 27 hours until another captain arrives.
- Same aircraft was scheduled to fly from MIA to JFK - another massive delay
- Same aircraft was scheduled to fly from JFK to GRU - another massive delay

So, a stupid and knee-jerk reaction by this captain (he is named in the video in the link above) starts a chain reaction where the company looses thousands, bad PR reputation and possibly a lawsuit later on by this airport agent. Nice way to scrap a 32 year career, captain, nice way!

BR,
744lover

So who would ultimately be responsible if the bridge appendage was in the wrong position and a pax or staff member was hurt?
If it is the Captain it starts to explain why they usually have such a sense of authority, in addition to being responsible for everything on the a/c, whether it is late or early, they are always responsible for crashes and other incidents, so....
Is it an excuse for being rude, no, but if they say something is wrong and they are held responsible if something goes wrong, methinks they expect to have more folks follow their request versus question their judgement.

In the example B777LRF gave above, when the bean counters look at a delayed departure on an a/c that was at the gate on time, crew ontime, pax and bags loaded on time, fuel and catering onltime, but left late because of waiting for a pax in the lounge, who do they hold responsible?
It bring up the old saying, "There is no I in team and there is no We either".
We create a lot of issues due to our administrative efforts.

744lover wrote:

So, a stupid and knee-jerk reaction by this captain (he is named in the video in the link above) starts a chain reaction where the company looses thousands, bad PR reputation and possibly a lawsuit later on by this airport agent. Nice way to scrap a 32 year career, captain, nice way!

BR,
744lover

Well in airline parlance, we have drunk and disorderly pax who do the same on an almost monthly basis and most are never even charged in a court of law or held responsible for the financial loss or the inconvenience of the other pax on that flight or the others downstream waiting for the delay a/c.
Perhaps issues like this will force a complete re-look at how much personal accountability we are willing to accept.

par13del wrote:

So who would ultimately be responsible if the bridge appendage was in the wrong position and a pax or staff member was hurt?
If it is the Captain it starts to explain why they usually have such a sense of authority, in addition to being responsible for everything on the a/c, whether it is late or early, they are always responsible for crashes and other incidents, so....
Is it an excuse for being rude, no, but if they say something is wrong and they are held responsible if something goes wrong, methinks they expect to have more folks follow their request versus question their judgement.

In the example B777LRF gave above, when the bean counters look at a delayed departure on an a/c that was at the gate on time, crew ontime, pax and bags loaded on time, fuel and catering onltime, but left late because of waiting for a pax in the lounge, who do they hold responsible?
It bring up the old saying, "There is no I in team and there is no We either".
We create a lot of issues due to our administrative efforts.

Probably the airport workers. I mean it would be bad for both the pilot and the ground personnel because an investigation would be involved for both, but the ground crew is more responsible for knowing the correct leveling, position etc of the jet bridge on the a/c. A lot of pilots have a sense of authority bc they think they are more than they are. In actuality, the pilot owns responsibility of the airplane, but the ground workers own the airport (in relative to responsibility). Sadly, some pilots treat ground personnel like they are lesser than them. Sounds like this CA might have been one of those, but who knows.

There’s also the bad judgement of picking a fight in a foreign country, worse, Brazil. Bail? Probably, no. Speedy trial, nope. Prisons in Brazil, not good. I’ve spent a week waiting to export a plane from their clutches.

GF

par13del wrote:

Well in airline parlance, we have drunk and disorderly pax who do the same on an almost monthly basis and most are never even charged in a court of law or held responsible for the financial loss or the inconvenience of the other pax on that flight or the others downstream waiting for the delay a/c.
Perhaps issues like this will force a complete re-look at how much personal accountability we are willing to accept.

Emphasis mine. That is the recurring a.net wet dream - liability for secondary effects.

How many different ways do U.S. carriers say they aren't liable: for schedule delays; change of aircraft; fragile items; revised routings; strikes, shortages of labor, fuel or facilities; consequential damages.

Carriers could pursue passengers in court. I don't think they would get very far and each attempt would be a PR nightmare.

Back to the OP's argument: Employee disagreement is certainly a fine whitewashing of assault.

I didn’t mean to white wash it, I just tried to be as politically correct as possible and use the vaguest description in the headline.

par13del wrote:

744lover wrote:

So, a stupid and knee-jerk reaction by this captain (he is named in the video in the link above) starts a chain reaction where the company looses thousands, bad PR reputation and possibly a lawsuit later on by this airport agent. Nice way to scrap a 32 year career, captain, nice way!

BR,
744lover

Well in airline parlance, we have drunk and disorderly pax who do the same on an almost monthly basis and most are never even charged in a court of law or held responsible for the financial loss or the inconvenience of the other pax on that flight or the others downstream waiting for the delay a/c.
Perhaps issues like this will force a complete re-look at how much personal accountability we are willing to accept.

Pa13del: i understand how you feel like the burden is always on the pilot/captain. I think the onus is on the service provider (crew) to remain professional at all times. This case is actually between two service providers so you would think there should be more restraint.
Thankfully working for AA affords the pilot lots of protection given the business relationship. But I think his biggest issue his the potential disciplinary measures he would be facing coming home at AA, and less his detention/investigation by BR authorities. In his position I would choose waterboarding in BR over any AA disciplinary measures.

“American Airlines policy is to expand the definition of flight time to include the
time from when the entry door is closed for the purpose of flight or
aircraft movement and ends when the door is opened at the
conclusion of the flight or movement, and at any time the engine is
running and the Captain is on the flightdeck at the controls.”

The captain is in charge of the flight when the front door is closed, not before. Clearly, the captain over-reached his perceived authority by demanding the jetway be relocated to his desired position. Unfortunately, giving a pilot four stripes oftentimes becomes a license to abuse authority. If this happened in the US, the union would go into full protection mode and the captain might get a few weeks off. Dealing with a Brazilian court is a whole different ballgame. God luck, pal.

I'm pretty sure he just ended his 32 year career with AA after this incident...

MIflyer12 wrote:

par13del wrote:

Well in airline parlance, we have drunk and disorderly pax who do the same on an almost monthly basis and most are never even charged in a court of law or held responsible for the financial loss or the inconvenience of the other pax on that flight or the others downstream waiting for the delay a/c.
Perhaps issues like this will force a complete re-look at how much personal accountability we are willing to accept.

Emphasis mine. That is the recurring a.net wet dream - liability for secondary effects.

How many different ways do U.S. carriers say they aren't liable: for schedule delays; change of aircraft; fragile items; revised routings; strikes, shortages of labor, fuel or facilities; consequential damages.

Carriers could pursue passengers in court. I don't think they would get very far and each attempt would be a PR nightmare.

Back to the OP's argument: Employee disagreement is certainly a fine whitewashing of assault.

Just to add on to the "secondary effects" comments...

I would hope that American is a little bit more, shall I say, operationally robust. Any global airline worth its salt would not allow an issue such as this to cascade through a line of flying for days on end until it sorted itself out. A ship swap downline would recover the schedule with minimal delay, or none at all. The downline crews would already be in position, since no US airline will "turn" a crew after a flight of that stage length. At least that's how it works where I am.

Looks like instead of canceling AA930, they took the crew from AA951 GRU-JFK and delayed that flight about 14 hours. Would it be possible for a flight crew to deadhead in to turn around and fly out a few hours later?