Aviator Fired For Refusing Immediate Flight Into Hurricane Activity

A former corporate aviator was awarded $1.9 million in damages in a court case that saw his termination for a desire to postpone flight into hurricane activity. His employer said that his failure to fly when ordered constituted unjust abandonment of his duties, while he believes his actions were made in the interest of safety. The jury found his evidence convincing, believing he acted in accordance with his duties as the pilot in command. 

The event occurred in September of 2017, when Justinic was tasked to fly an insurance adjuster out of Ohio to survey recent hurricane damage to Columbia Sussex hotel properties in Puerto Rico by the aircraft operator, Airtech LLC. The flight was to include relief supplies and exfiltrate employees trapped on the island during hurricane Irma. Pilot Raymond Justinic found weather conditions unsuitable along the assigned route, with storm activity leaving little room for alternates or emergency landings. While hurricane Irma had largely subsided, another was developing in quick succession, with hurricane Jose's winds picking up along the route. By the time the aircraft was ready, Justinic’s attorney noted, the 69-year old had spent the better part of the day helping to loading supplies. His decades of experience told him that a demanding 4-hour flight into developing hurricane activity without a copilot was not sufficiently safe, and his passengers would be better served waiting for better weather. 

He notified his passengers that he would watch the weather and plan the flight for the following day. Jose’s winds were expected to head north, allowing their passage to the south. That flight plan was not accepted, and he was left awaiting confirmation for a week. When he finally made contact with the company, he was told they had contracted a temp to make the flight, and a few days later he was given notice of termination.

Not long after, a letter was sent informing him that he was fired for unjustified abandonment of his duty to fly, followed by a demand for reimbursement. The prorated share of his type rating expenses, the company said, came to $20,000. According to the stipulations he signed off upon his hiring, he was liable for paying back the cost of training if he left for another job within 2 years of hire. He felt his dismissal was unjust, and after they filed suit, he countered. He filed against three of the companies involved, all involved in a local hotel property giant, Columbia Sussex. The aircraft management company, the property management business, and more, all had a hand in his termination, he said. 

The jury in his case spent 2 hours in deliberation, ultimately awarding the pilot $1.9 million in damages. They felt that the texts presented in court showed that the pilot and his company contact showed good faith on his part, that he had every intention to complete the flight in a safe and responsible manner befitting a quality, professional aviator. 

FMI: https://www.columbiasussex.com, www.airtechmx.com