Lesser Of Two Evils

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I am not a commercial pilot so I don’t really care about employment drug testing, but I still believe in civil rights and human liberty. If you can show up to work and nobody can tell the difference then what is the difference? Can you fly the damn plane or not?

For sheer stupidity this one should be a sticky.

[Doc]

I'm beginning to really hate this industry. I put up, what I think, is a pretty valiant defence of rights and freedoms, and some creaton comes along and puts up an example of the very reason we're loosing them. Thank YOU very FUC$&ing much!

[Mr. North]

I couldn't agree with you more Doc.

This is where I think an organization like the College of Pilots could make improvements to our profession. I know you and others don't like the idea but it's been my experience that most smoking pilots are completely ignorant to the possible repercussions. I think a little education and an official professional stance would go a long way. TC is impotent and the regulations as they stand now are too convoluted. People need hard and fast rules on important issues. And that goes for a lot of regulations we have to deal with. No more grey areas or lawyer speak! Simple, easy to read regulations so people know what exactly is expected of them. "If you test positive for dope, you will lose licence, your job, and are subject to lawsuits and criminal prosecution." Do you think a sentence like that exists anywhere in the AIM or CARS?

This is where a College of Pilots can set some standards for our profession, so people aren't dumb about things like this anymore.

[Dh8Classic]

What appropriate timing. Doc goes on another endless rant about the immorality of a simple drug test and we find out about an accident where the pilot was super high on dope. Why can't the companies just trust anyone and everyone. Well....because you can't, that's why.

Hey Doc, why don't you phone Air Tindi or the pax on board and explain your concerns to them.

[xsbank]

The level of discourse on this site is, considering we've been bleating on about wanting to be called "professional," slightly lower than a Cheech and Chong movie. Doc's argument was a good one, it just went down in smoke. Pun intended.

I think we should get out the pitchforks and the tar and root out drugs from our industry, from the rampie and his spliff to the ceo and his coke. If you want to work as a gardener or in a warehouse or an office, go crazy, but as soon as you accept responsibility you have to make a choice.

If any of you on this site think its ok to smoke up and go flying, that what you do on your own time is your business, that this guy got unlucky because the weather was bad, take a look at the insurance issue and the possible end of Tindi and all those people soon to be out of work; the sad condition of this pilot's family, then think again.

And Doc, for the record, its "cretin." We seem to be blessed with our share in this industry so it should be in more common use.

[Doc]

And Doc, for the record, its "cretin." We seem to be blessed with our share in this industry so it should be in more common use.

That's what I get for dropping out of grade 10. My auto correct kept giving me "crouton", but I'm pretty sure I find them in Caesar salads? So, I just picked the wrong one of the "machines" suggestions. Perhaps "crouton" would have been a better choice?

[Doc]

This is where a College of Pilots can set some standards for our profession, so people aren't dumb about things like this anymore.

Read the CARS mate. We already have "standards". Some people will always choose not to follow them.

[xsbank]

Crouton, in this case, is probably as correct as cretin...

[Doc]

What appropriate timing. Doc goes on another endless rant about the immorality of a simple drug test and we find out about an accident where the pilot was super high on dope. Why can't the companies just trust anyone and everyone. Well....because you can't, that's why.

I didn't quote your last tasteless comment, but you obviously feel, that if your neighbour three doors down runs a kitty porn ring, it's Okay if the COPS kick down your door as well, just to have a "look see" without "just cause"? Do your feel that way? I don't. I'll continue to fight for MY rights and freedoms. If you're happy to see YOURS go down the toilet, the results are on you. Not me.
Can we "trust" you? We can "trust" me.

[trey kule]

Doc, I have to tell you, I am 100% behind civil rights...and I know this is hypocritical after saying that, and starts the slide down a slippery slope, but dopers dont belong in aviation..And my definition of doper is anyone who uses pot.
And all you have to do is read some of the threads here to see how many think it is just fine to smoke up..I expect they smoke becuase of the effect it has on them..Then they turn around and claim they can fly the next day because it does not effect them
THC, unlike alcohol, in general terms( emphasis.generally), has longer term effects. Until we get the message accross that it is not OK to smoke dope and fly , there is little else we can do, except try to identify them, get them treatement, or get them out of the industry.

It is a problem , particularily with the younger generation (though not exclusive to them), and it is getting worse from what I can see.
Twenty years ago you would not find any of the young'ins stating it was OK to smoke up and then go flying..Now we hear what I do on my days off is my business...It just ainst so when you are a pilot.

Suggest a solution to the problem. I have repeated asked for this very seriously.

[The Other Kind]

Judging from some of the posts here, it would seem that anyone opposed to random screening is a pot smoking hippie. Random drug screening is an infringement on my rights and freedoms, period. Same could be said for alcohol screening (in my opinion) but I supposed there's wiggle room on that one given the 'safety sensitive' nature of our jobs. I don't touch illicit drugs...ever. I strictly adhere to my company's alcohol policy which is far more stringent than what is written in the CAR's. I take my job, my reputation and my professionalism very seriously. I would never operate an aircraft in anything other than a 100% clean and sober state, and would never share a cockpit with someone that felt it was ok to bend the rules in that regard. Show up for work and you're not clean and sober? We're not flying together today, and it's up to you how this is handled with the Chief Pilot...by you, or by me. My position on random screening does not mean I'm a reckless drunk/pothead trying to skirt the rules, or that I support people that are.

Far more stupid pilots kill people than impaired pilots. Perhaps we should start screening for that...random IQ tests for all. It would certainly thin the herd.

[Mr. North]

This is where a College of Pilots can set some standards for our profession, so people aren't dumb about things like this anymore.

Read the CARS mate. We already have "standards". Some people will always choose not to follow them.

I don't think it's as simple as that. Judging from the posts on here most people aren't following them. And lets be honest, they're really quite vague with what one does on their own time. I've been in aviation for 12 years and in that time the opinions I hear on this subject vary considerably. There needs to be more direction because people just aren't getting it! Whether it comes from TC, the TSB, or a College of Pilots, the information has to get out there that this behavior is not acceptable.

I say this because we as a profession need to be more proactive about this otherwise we will see our rights infringed upon. I'd hate to do a piss test as much as the next guy but the government and public at large are reactionary to incidents like this so they will be clamoring for random tests and blood-work, rightfully so. Substance abuse has been taboo in aviation for too long, which is tragic because like so many other things in our industry, it takes an accident to cause change. ...how frustrating!

[Dh8Classic]

you obviously feel, that if your neighbour three doors down runs a kitty porn ring,

I think maybe Doc needs a random test before every flight

[trey kule]

Far more stupid pilots kill people than impaired pilots. Perhaps we should start screening for that...random IQ tests for all. It would certainly thin the herd.

Well, if they do, the pilot herd will miss you

[The Other Kind]

Well, if they do, the pilot herd will miss you

That's your rebuttal? I thought you were one of the better ones on here, I guess it is indeed possible that my judgement is questionable.

[Colonel Sanders]

Far more stupid pilots kill people than impaired pilots

Truer words were never spoken. If you looked at aircraft
accidents for the last 10 years, I'm sure the ratio of stupid
pilots to impaired pilots would probably be around 100:1

So, optimizing impaired pilots really doesn't give you much
bang for the buck, from a safety standpoint.

I might suggest an IQ test for pilot licences. One standard
deviation above the mean for PPL, two standard deviations
above the mean for CPL, and three standard deviations for
ATPL.

That's 115 for PPL, 130 for CPL and 145 for ATPL.

I suspect we would see a drastic reduction in accidents. No
one on the left hand side of the curve in the cockpit.

[Mr. North]

...but then how would flight school's make their money?!

[Rowdy]

Judging from some of the posts here, it would seem that anyone opposed to random screening is a pot smoking hippie. Random drug screening is an infringement on my rights and freedoms, period. Same could be said for alcohol screening (in my opinion) but I supposed there's wiggle room on that one given the 'safety sensitive' nature of our jobs. I don't touch illicit drugs...ever. I strictly adhere to my company's alcohol policy which is far more stringent than what is written in the CAR's. I take my job, my reputation and my professionalism very seriously. I would never operate an aircraft in anything other than a 100% clean and sober state, and would never share a cockpit with someone that felt it was ok to bend the rules in that regard. Show up for work and you're not clean and sober? We're not flying together today, and it's up to you how this is handled with the Chief Pilot...by you, or by me. My position on random screening does not mean I'm a reckless drunk/pothead trying to skirt the rules, or that I support people that are.

I disagree with your opening statement. I dont paint anyone with that. I too also believe that random screening is simply a bandaid to an underlying issue and of course, like many have said it can be used inappropriately by employers and enforcers.
Sadly not all take this profession or career choice the way you do. Many seem to think it is a paid form of play time with an aircraft. THATS why there should be a standard set in terms of testing. Random testing is BS and unacceptable.. make it bi-monthly by an independent authority or annually with the Cat 1 medical. This is not a civil rights issue. This is 100% a safety issue and enforcing LAWS and legislation that are already in place.

[Doc]

you obviously feel, that if your neighbour three doors down runs a kitty porn ring,

I think maybe Doc needs a random test before every flight

Just so you know (you obviously missed it) I exercised a little artistic licence with the spelling of a term I find too offensive to discuss.

[Dh8Classic]

I think you just failed the IQ test.

[pelmet]

Far more stupid pilots kill people than impaired pilots

Truer words were never spoken. If you looked at aircraft
accidents for the last 10 years, I'm sure the ratio of stupid
pilots to impaired pilots would probably be around 100:1

So, optimizing impaired pilots really doesn't give you much
bang for the buck, from a safety standpoint.

I might suggest an IQ test for pilot licences. One standard
deviation above the mean for PPL, two standard deviations
above the mean for CPL, and three standard deviations for
ATPL.

That's 115 for PPL, 130 for CPL and 145 for ATPL.

I suspect we would see a drastic reduction in accidents. No
one on the left hand side of the curve in the cockpit.

Suspect not. All kinds of lawyers and doctors as we well know have killed themselves by having poor judgement and getting themselves in over their heads either in weather conditions or aircraft they could not handle. These people are highly intelligent(regardless of what you might think about a lawyers morals at work).

Judgement is the biggest factor in my opinion. Someone who has a lower intelligence level but has the common sense to know their limitations is much safer than those brainwaves who think they are so smart that no one can tell them very much. There is a reason why they call some planes doctor killers. Because these guys were smart enough to get high income jobs(and you do have to be smart to be a doctor) but too "stupid" to know their own limitations. In other words...poor judgement.

Just because you have a high IQ on a test does not mean that you are knowledgeable about a particular subject. I have seen someone who is a straight A student in engineering that could name only a few states and had very little knowledge about everyday events, history etc due to the simple fact of not taking the time to do something as simple as reading or watching the news which actually gives a lot of general knowledge.