Pilot sues for alleged traumatic QantasLink/Cobham event

[Melburnian1]

Slater and Gordon aren't exactly my favourite law firm, so anything it says one treats with caution.

Here's a brief excerpt. Buy 'The Australian' of 15 March 2021 to read the full story:

'A pilot who suffered post-traumatic stress disorder after a midflight engine failure is seeking $780,000 from Qantas for allegedly not maintaining its planes properly.
Jacinda Cottee, 43, was a first officer employed by Cobham Aviation (National Jet Systems), when she was operating the QantasLink flight from Alice Springs to Brisbane on March 10, 2018.

About 550km from Brisbane, one of the Boeing 717’s Rolls-Royce engines failed...'

The lady was retired by Cobham Aviation on medical grounds as she'd apparently developed 'post-traumatic stress disorder'.

There's a brief mention of Qantas' defence, which appears to mainly be that it may not have been responsible for maintenance. That's arguable and if true may mean the former pilot's contention fails. Its other ground is that this was the only B717 to have an engine shut down during five years. While I've not seen the detailed legal argument, that looks on the face of it to be a weak point.

When Cobham ran the B717s between Melbourne and Tasmania, there was frequent unpunctuality, noted in the applicable AFF 'delays/cancellations' thread.

 

[milehighclub]

which appears to mainly be that it may not have been responsible for maintenance.

While I don't know what the agreement is for Cobham, it is not usual for airlines to pay for power by the hour, in which the engine maker is responsible for this. But the article also says "A Qantas spokesman said on Sunday that the cause of the engine issue in March 18 was a manufacturing fault and not related to maintenance."

RR had to pay the crew of QF32 for the engine issue all those years back.

 

[Must...Fly!]

I feel sad for the F/O who clearly is no longer fit to fly. It feels like a pretty big leap though to accuse the operator of failing to maintain it's aircraft/engines properly. I mean, an engine failure is not an unknown event to occur. The F/O presumably would have been trained to deal with such an incident, so it was reasonable to assume such an event may occur during her career.

However in a similar way to train drivers experiencing a fatality, everyone recovers differently despite knowing the reality of the risk quite well.

 

[Melburnian1]

I feel sad for the F/O who clearly is no longer fit to fly. It feels like a pretty big leap though to accuse the operator of failing to maintain it's aircraft/engines properly. I mean, an engine failure is not an unknown event to occur. The F/O presumably would have been trained to deal with such an incident, so it was reasonable to assume such an event may occur during her career.

However in a similar way to train drivers experiencing a fatality, everyone recovers differently despite knowing the reality of the risk quite well.

I know of Australian train drivers who've experienced either four or five fatalities, although thankfully those numbers for one driver is (as one would hope) are rare. Sadly, the majority are suicides. Amazingly, some of these drivers - all men - continue in that occupation.

We haven't seen the legal argument for the extant case above so it's difficult to prejudge. Perhaps she lacks a case. That will be settled one way or another in time.

If it was a 'manufacturing fault' as QF apparently suggests, one question raised by the applicant may be 'why wasn't it detected earlier?'

 

[Must...Fly!]

Some drivers come back the next day (more or less), and others are never the same again after hitting a trespasser. I don't know nearly enough to comment if gender has anything to do with it. I very much doubt it.

PTSD can be pretty damn scary - sometimes hard to grasp until you experience even a tiny bit of it yourself.

 

[Melburnian1]

Some drivers come back the next day (more or less), and others are never the same again after hitting a trespasser. I don't know nearly enough to comment if gender has anything to do with it. I very much doubt it.

PTSD can be pretty damn scary - sometimes hard to grasp until you experience even a tiny bit of it yourself.

You misunderstood my comment. Those who have regrettably experienced that occurrence that many times are all male due to one factor - in Victoria (and all other states IIRC), there have only been female train drivers for a few years.

Of course, it's possible (though thank God extremely unlikely) that a new driver, or one with just five or six year's service, may experience a spate of these.

 

[jb747]

RR had to pay the crew of QF32 for the engine issue all those years back.

Did they? Not something I ever heard of...

I'm not sure I'm full of sympathy here. As a pilot, engine failures are something that you will experience. Not just in the sim, but for real. Generally they are reasonably benign (as was this one), and very, very, rarely somewhat less so. You are expected to just deal with it, and move on. If you don't have that temperament, then you are in the wrong job.

 

[Melburnian1]

The applicant (Ms Cottee) says she had 9.5 years as a FO with 'Qantas' (was subcontractor Cobham Aviation considered 'Qantas?') but this publicly shows as continuing until March 2021 (i.e. today) when 'The Australian' article above maintains she was terminated on medical grounds.

Ms Cottee suggests she had previous time, including (some?) as a captain, with AirNorth for 21 months and prior to that with Macair.

A court may determine the facts (and the law).

 

[milehighclub]

Did they? Not something I ever heard of...

I believe RR paid about $100 million to QF and the crew got an amount as well. Not sure if it is included in that amount or part of a separate lawsuit but they did receive money, if they decided to be part of it.

 

[jb747]

I believe RR paid about $100 million to QF and the crew got an amount as well. Not sure if it is included in that amount or part of a separate lawsuit but they did receive money, if they decided to be part of it.

I’ll follow that up with some of the crew.

To be honest, I have problems with this mentality. QF32 was not a cabin event. It was proof, for those that needed it, that they don’t go to work in a building that shakes. Pilots of my generation know that aeroplanes will try to kill them, periodically, and somewhere along the way, that seems to have been forgotten.

 

[Melburnian1]

I’ll follow that up with some of the crew.

To be honest, I have problems with this mentality. QF32 was not a cabin event. It was proof, for those that needed it, that they don’t go to work in a building that shakes. Pilots of my generation know that aeroplanes will try to kill them, periodically, and somewhere along the way, that seems to have been forgotten.

While we have gone OT, for completeness I found this from an insurance industry publication of 22 June 2011, the day QF announced its settlement with RR:

'Rolls-Royce and Qantas have reached a settlement over an Airbus A380 engine explosion last year that forced a jet with 469 people on board to make an emergency landing and grounded much of the airline’s fleet.

Qantas said the out-of-court commercial settlement would add A$95 million (US$100.6 million) to its 2011 pre-tax profit and called off legal action against Rolls-Royce.

However, Rolls-Royce provided a lower figure and said the final deal did not change its guidance on the cost of the incident, which forced several airlines to ground their A380s, the world’s biggest passenger aircraft, and replace some Trent 900 engines.

“The agreement is entirely consistent with the financial guidance given with our full-year results; that total costs to Rolls-Royce as a result of the incident were £56 million pounds (US$90.6 million) in the 2010 financial year, with some small additional costs in 2011,” it said in a statement.

Sources close to the deal said the main difference between the figures is that Rolls-Royce likely accounted for some parts and services at cost while Qantas accounted them at market or list prices.

Analysts had previously estimated the airline’s loss from the incident would reach about A$60 million while the plane’s insurer estimated repair costs at an additional $70 million....'

There is no mention of flight (or other) QF staff receiving compensation, but I will see if there's anything on the public record to confirm it.

UPDATE: I searched two legal databases. There were two Federal Court confidentiality rulings in Qantas Airways Ltd v Rolls-Royce, around 2010, but no public mention of the aircraft crew/compensation. However many court cases are not 'publicly reported', so milehighclub may be on the ball.

 

[jb747]

The applicant (Ms Cottee) says she had 9.5 years as a FO with 'Qantas' (was subcontractor Cobham Aviation considered 'Qantas?') but this publicly shows as continuing until March 2021 (i.e. today) when 'The Australian' article above maintains she was terminated on medical grounds.

She was an employee of Cobram, never of Qantas, or QLink. Whilst I have no idea of the ramifications of that from the legal perspective, it does mean that her future was extremely unlikely to include QF mainline.

Ms Cottee suggests she had previous time, including (some?) as a captain, with AirNorth for 21 months and prior to that with Macair.

All pilots will have some level of command time. That does not mean she's any more likely to have been able to progress, but it does bother me that she's had this reaction to an engine failure, when she was only the FO.

 

[chelzmalee]

Not a lawyer or knowledgeable in any way in regard to injury but....

Does workers comp not land in here somewhere? If she was an employee of Cobram, they are responsible for ensuring she has a safe workplace. Whether or not she is subcontracted to Qantas... So, shouldn't any PTSD issues be running through that line? Or would this be an extended 'grab for cash'? - I don't want to reduce the effect that PTSD may have had on her, but it seems strange to be suing QF.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Did they? Not something I ever heard of...

I'm not sure I'm full of sympathy here. As a pilot, engine failures are something that you will experience. Not just in the sim, but for real. Generally they are reasonably benign (as was this one), and very, very, rarely somewhat less so. You are expected to just deal with it, and move on. If you don't have that temperament, then you are in the wrong job.

I guess *something* extraordinary must have come in to play here - or at least alleged to have come into play.

My understanding is the PTSD is a mental health issue, not something people ‘choose’ to have, or that can simply be ignored or overcome if you’re ‘strong enough’.

Maybe flying is not for her in the future, but regardless, the medical outcome is probably real. All of us are entitled to a safe workplace.

 

[DC3]

Issues relating to managing aircraft emergency/unforeseen issues would be part of a pilot’s job I would hope.

That job is not for everyone.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Issues relating to managing aircraft emergency/unforeseen issues would be part of a pilot’s job I would hope.

That job is not for everyone.

Sure. That’s what the training is for. And hopefully the pilot did manage the situation at the time.

The PTSD is potentially a separate issue. Lots of professions are trained, and would be expected to deal with some quite horrendous events... for example soldiers, police, paramedics, RSPCA officers, social workers... but but that doesn’t rule out PTSD.

 

[Melburnian1]

Sure. That’s what the training is for. And hopefully the pilot did manage the situation at the time.

The PTSD is potentially a separate issue. Lots of professions are trained, and would be expected to deal with some quite horrendous events... for example soldiers, police, paramedics, RSPCA officers, social workers... but but that doesn’t rule out PTSD.

It also doesn't rule out individuals "claiming" that they have a particular condition, as they believe it will see them receive more moolah with the assistance of barristers and solicitors who specialise in workers' compensation or allied areas.

But we don't know all the circumstances (yet).

Post automatically merged: Mar 17, 2021

Sure. That’s what the training is for. And hopefully the pilot did manage the situation at the time.

The PTSD is potentially a separate issue. Lots of professions are trained, and would be expected to deal with some quite horrendous events... for example soldiers, police, paramedics, RSPCA officers, social workers... but but that doesn’t rule out PTSD.

Training won't help if an individual is psychologically unsuitable for a particular occupation or position.

 

[jb747]

Maybe flying is not for her in the future, but regardless, the medical outcome is probably real. All of us are entitled to a safe workplace.

There is nothing inherently safe about sitting in an aluminium tube doing 1,000' per second. Stuff will happen. It is not a building that shakes. In general (with the notable exception of the 737 Max), most decisions within aviation do have safety as a prime factor. But, nothing is totally safe, and if you need your aircraft to be 100%, then you will never fly.

Issues relating to managing aircraft emergency/unforeseen issues would be part of a pilot’s job I would hope.

It is. Your job is to make them go away, with as little fuss as possible. The exact opposite of the media.

Sure. That’s what the training is for. And hopefully the pilot did manage the situation at the time.

In the dim dark past, I trained new pilots. We dealt with many hard working, intelligent people, who simply could not learn to fly the way the RAAF wanted. QF has seen the same, especially in promotion training. Temperament is a huge part of the job. A while back, when I was talking to someone here about QF30, they commented "you must have panicked for a while". No, not even for a second. My temperament did not allow that...and so the training then got a chance to do its job.

The PTSD is potentially a separate issue. Lots of professions are trained, and would be expected to deal with some quite horrendous events... for example soldiers, police, paramedics, RSPCA officers, social workers... but but that doesn’t rule out PTSD.

True, and I could understand some trauma for a person involved in an accident that caused loss of life, or even substantial injury. But, for a pilot of a multi engined aircraft, this is something that should be little more traumatic than putting fuel in the car's tank at a service station. You will see engine failures. Most likely more than one. It should be water off the duck's back. If it isn't, you really are not suitable.

Training won't help if an individual is psychologically unsuitable for a particular occupation or position.

Exactly.

 

[Melburnian1]

Exactly.

I and one daresays many others would be useless as pilots. It's great that we all have different skillsets.

However, in the instant case, one question for the court - a legal expression that in judge-only matters means 'the judge/justice/magistrate' - is if the lady concerned had more than a decade's experience, had she 'proved' herself suitable for the occupation that jb747 also held?

That will be a task for experts - perhaps including 'check' pilots. Out of my league!

 

[jb747]

I and one daresays many others would be useless as pilots. It's great that we all have different skillsets.

However, in the instant case, one question for the court - a legal expression that in judge-only matters means 'the judge/justice/magistrate' - is if the lady concerned had more than a decade's experience, had she 'proved' herself suitable for the occupation that jb747 also held?

That will be a task for experts - perhaps including 'check' pilots. Out of my league!

It would be interesting to see her complete training records. They will be likely to tell an interesting story.

Not everyone has to be a Chuck Yeager, but nobody should ever get through with even the hint of panic about them.