Ray Red

I wonder what the contents of her phone call to ALPA at 2:46 in the morning were? That detail was left out of the filing. And how, if you were roofied to an unconscious state, could you be in the mental state to remember exactly what they CA said about being F'd and the details of the voice mail from the FODO and make a phone call to ALPA?

What time was she awoken? how long did she stay in the CA's room after she woke up? Did she make the call to ALPA from the CA's room? I would think these details would be important to include in the court filing, yet they are absent. However her lawyers deemed in important to include things like: "There was not real food in the concierge's lounge, there were peanuts and vegetables. The flight attendants were eating peanuts and vegetables", "They were on barstools, and her feet were on the round edge"

I hope this thing goes to trial and the truth comes out.

galaxy flyer

Somewhere in this thread is the comment to her from the chief pilot saying, “why didn’t you take this to the police” or words to that effect. I’d bet AK, without admissible evidence, figured giving her time off and some leeway with the captain, it’d all go away in six months. AK probably believed much of her story but was not willing to go thru the termination route due to possible publicity. She even played along, not going public until she returned and faced the possibility of flying with him again.

GF

Slayer1234

This case is fascinating and tragic. I have never heard anything like it in our industry. I hope it goes to trial too, but it probably won’t.

This next paragraph is for Mesabah: notice how I used the word probably in a generic term. Just because the majority of lawsuits are settled out of court does not mean one will not go to trial. You should have used this instead of statistically unlikely. It would keep you’re satistics professor from doing a face palm if he read your post. In fact your first post should have been something along the lines of, “my gut tells me” or “my intuition tells me”

CBreezy

What character? The one where, best case scenario, he is married with kids and forcing himself unwanted onto a younger subordinate. Good luck with that lawsuit.

FlyingKat

Going2Baja

If the news were to attack every single pilot (Male or Female) that made a bad decision and hooked up with another crew member this industry would be on fire. I'm not condoning this behavior, but lets be realistic. I've flown with this person many times and there is no way I could say that there would even be a remote chance that he drugged her. Did they have one glass of wine to many and make some bad decisions? Maybe. But accusing someone of drugging and raping you 8 months after the fact just seems insane. But cases like these are played out in the Court of Public Opinion and he's already lost to the #Metoo movement. I hope AK stands up to these accounts as they should and this goes away. I would expect a new Policy to be created though. Ugh. Good luck Eskimo's.

Baja.

Excargodog

I find the revulsion expressed by senior pilots that they might someday face a company policy forbidding them to hit on their subordinates pretty revolting in its own right. Carnal knowledge of junior troops should not be a company-provided fringe benefit.

Mesabah

The timeline of events is interesting

~6:00pm they were drinking with the flight attendants
7:00pm the Concierge's lounge closed
~10:30pm the flight attendant sees the two in the hall heavily intoxicated, and calls the company.
10:47pm the FODO calls the captain inquiring about the flight attendants concerns
2:46am the FO is on the phone with ALPA


They were in the captain's room from 10:30ish till 2:46am. However, where were they between 7:00pm and 10:30pm? It's simply labeled *** in the court docket.

rickair7777

It's not part of the job, but it is part of the culture and lifestyle. But not mandatory by any means. I only do it if it's compatible with being rested, exercised, healthy, and taking care of whatever admin I need to knock out on the trip.

Did it more often 20 years ago.

rickair7777

My guess is they would have preferred to get rid of him from the outset, but didn't have enough hard evidence. That would have created a problem with the union, and possibly a lawsuit and publicity about him claiming unjust termination. Unless the discovery process turns up new evidence, that may not change. They could of course buy off one or the other, or both.