Justice Be Damned!
Years ago a young attorney defended a pilot at an arbitration. The case was so-so, but he won. Then this attorney came up against the same arbitrator on the next case, and that case was not that strong either, but he still won. Then, he finally had case with a pilot so strong there was no way he could lose. This pilot had all the facts in his favor. As it turned out, the attorney was up against the same arbitrator as the previous two times.They greeted each other, and then the arbitrator said, "You do know, you're going to lose today."
1. The Company compromised the Section 15 process by selecting Dr. David B. Altman to participate in the pre-Section 15 determination process and, thereafter, allowing Dr. Altman to participate in the post-Section 15 process notwithstanding the clear conflict of interest;2. The Company and Delta DHS Dr. Thomas Faulkner selected the CME prior to the DHS and the ALPA Aeromedical advisor, currently identified as AMAS (Dr. Riccitello), conferring to the choice of the CME in violation of Section 15 B. 4.; (We later learned Puckett Selected Altman, and advised Falkner.)3. The Company [Puckett], and/or DHS Dr. Faulkner, selected the CME six weeks prior to the DHS’s required initial assessment to determine if there was a reason to believe I may not meet the physical standards in violation of Section 15 B. 1. c.;4. The Company provided the CME my safety report and a link to my blog one week prior to my being placed into a medical evaluation; the aforementioned documents were not medically relevant and, therefore, the furnishing of this information constituted a violation of Section 15 B. 6.;5. The Company provided the CME a 4 lb. notebook of documents that were not medically relevant in violation of Section 15 B. 6., prior to Company Labor Relations attorney Puckett and Captain Phil Davis spending 10.5 hours discussing this non-medically relevant information with the CME;6. The Company invited the CME to multiple meetings as a participant in the decision to place me under a Section 15 in violation of Section 15 B. 3., and subsequently paid him $74,000 for his review, when the average mental health evaluation is $3500.7. The Company authorized the DHS to provide the FAA the CME’s diagnosis and full report prior to the Neutral Medical Examiner (NME) evaluation, contrary to the PWA instruction that the CME will not report his determination until the completion of the NME evaluation, in violation of Section 15 B. 7. b.8. After the Company authorized the violation of Section 15. B. 7. b., where the DHS provided the CMEs medical report to the FAA, the subsequent FAA medical appeals evaluation overruled the CME’s report, yet the Company denied the return to duty, despite the FAA appeal procedures in violation of Section 15. B. 8. g.9. The Company offered Dr. Gitlow—a forensic psychiatrist retained as the Pilot Medical Examiner (PME)—a more lucrative contract with the conditions that Dr. Gitlow would not participate in my evaluation if he were to work with Delta. This interference is in violation of the selection of the PME Section 15. B. 8. b.;10. The Company advised the CME, “I would emphasize is that ultimately picking an NME is your call” in violation of the PWA requirements of a mutual agreement between the CME and PME, Section 15. B. 8. d.;11. The Company allowed for and encouraged an extensive delay through its overt participation and proffering an enormous amount of non-medically related information to the CME, that delayed the CME diagnosis for nine months; the Company also delayed the acceptance of NME’s confirmation on September 2, 2017 until September 26, 2017, both violating the PWA requirement that the review be conducted as “expeditiously as possible” Section 15. B. 10.; and12. The Company was required to convey to the CME that the pilot be provided with a written notice of the CME’s determination in addition to an expedient process. However, the Company was notified of the false bipolar diagnosis in October, 2016, yet the CME did not provide written notice until December 24, 2016, in violation of Section 15. B. 7. a., and Section 15. B. 10.
"This proceeding here, in the view of Delta Air Lines, is not a proceeding in which the Association and Delta are necessarily opposing parties.
First Officer Petitt has repeatedly criticized, and I would suggest even defamed representatives of the Association, including representatives of the national organization for ALPA, local counsel for ALPA, and other ALPA representatives, including what’s known as AMAS, of ALPA Aeromedical."