On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:36:39 GMT, "Neil Gould"
wrote:

Recently, Capt.Doug posted:

"Morgans" wrote in message So is a
screw up
like that a career ender for both the pilots? Opinions? Doug?
Others?

The usual way it works is for the airline to terminate the pilots and
let the union try to get them reinstated. Every case is different
from that point. I've seen cases that involved remedial training and
I've seen cases that involved certificate revocation.

If the termination is upheld, the pilot likely won't be working at
another airline for quite some time. The Pilot Records Improvement
Act of 1996 was enacted for this reason. The Act covers a pilot's
previous 5 years of commercial flying.

Additionally, commercial aviation is a small community. I don't hire
charter pilots if I can't call a contact in the business and get a
good recommendation on them.

So... are you saying that a go-around is considered a "screw-up" in the
business? Or, is the pilot "to blame" if there isn't some other obvious
(and documentable) reason for a go-around, such as a runway incursion? It
seems to me that such practices would encourage poor judgement, if
judgement is considered a blame-able offense.

I believe Capt.Doug's message was answering the question posed in
Morgan's post enquiring about the aftermath of (in Morgan's example
the Southwest accident where they overran the runway and ended up
almost in a gas station) incidents caused by not going around, what
happens to the crews after those kinds of accident.