QFFA fairly sacked, drunk in NYC

[Hvr]

Sacked for getting drunk on peach martinis while off duty
Luke Urso's dismissal from his "dream job" as a Qantas flight attendant after he got drunk on peach martinis and gin and tonics after work was not unfair, the workplace relations tribunal has found.

The Fair Work Commission ruled Qantas was justified in sacking the flight attendant for getting drunk while he was off duty because its employees had a duty to be "ready and able" to work.

.......

At around 11.40pm, Mr Urso was found vomiting and collapsed on the floor of the toilets in the bar and taken to Greenwich hospital, which recorded his blood alcohol level at 0.205 per cent. The brief hospital stay cost Qantas $20,000 in fees.

Mr Urso called in sick the following day, when he was due to work on a 5.10pm flight to Los Angeles.

This occurred in July 2017 and the various processes to investigate, dismiss and appeal have now been completed.

 

[kpc]

...taken to Greenwich hospital, which recorded his blood alcohol level at 0.205 per cent. The brief hospital stay cost Qantas $20,000 in fees

Don't always agree with QF but I do with this case!

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

in one sense, whilst the Claimant lost his job ( which is completely justified) he was lucky that he was on duty - $20,000 worth of hospital fees would have been quite a hit to the wallet.

 

[Sdtravel]

Airlines dont have travel insurance for costs such as this?
Although i assume most insurers wont cover excessive drinking related incidents??

 

[andye]

$20k to diagnose and treat drunk is not a credit to the US medical model

 

[pauly7]

$20k to diagnose and treat drunk is not a credit to the US medical model

I was thinking quite cheap for Trumpland actually

 

[UP4014]

Airlines dont have travel insurance for costs such as this?
Although i assume most insurers wont cover excessive drinking related incidents??

They would have some cover but likely a high deductable/excess. They'd manage most things themselves.

 

[trooper]

Would have cost the same in Obamaland too of course....

 

[moa999]

But as above I suspect most policies would have an exclusion for being under the influence injuries particularly at 0.2

 

[UP4014]

But as above I suspect most policies would have an exclusion for being under the influence injuries particularly at 0.2

Normally corporate policies and workers comp are no fault. If they were smart they would have claimed under workers comp in the first instance and only go to another policy if this was rejected.

 

[andye]

He should have gone out for his evening with an American Airlines Y Flight Attendant. Sh'd have told him he'd had enough after one drink.

 

[dajop]

Would have cost the same in Obamaland too of course....

And in Wland, Clintonland, HWland and probably Reaganland as well (adjusted for inflation). It is what it is and will never change.

 

[UP4014]

Would have cost the same in Obamaland too of course....

Of course, but even poor people in Obamaland could get some limited health cover, Trumplanders are trying to change that.

Rule of thumb, US$10K per day for a hospital visit.

 

[Hvr]

Normally corporate policies and workers comp are no fault. If they were smart they would have claimed under workers comp in the first instance and only go to another policy if this was rejected.

Although if QF self insure for WC then it's just a matter of paying the bill.

 

[UP4014]

Although if QF self insure for WC then it's just a matter of paying the bill.

Indeed yes, depending on the jurisdiction as some like NSW are deregulated to some extent where as South Australia still has single Government insurer, Workcover SA. All the company travel polices I've seen cover personal time and leave if taken as part of the work trip.

 

[love_the_life]

Don't always agree with QF but I do with this case!

Yes, it seems he was in effect on standby so therefore his actions meant he was well outside what was required.

 

[Danger]

He should have gone out for his evening with an American Airlines Y Flight Attendant. Sh'd have told him he'd had enough after one drink.

Haha. Love it.

 

[jb747]

Yes, it seems he was in effect on standby so therefore his actions meant he was well outside what was required.

No, he was not on standby. There are no standby duties in overseas ports. The question is whether he would have been fit for duty at departure time...so enough sleep, not alcohol affected. Not hung over.

 

[love_the_life]

No, he was not on standby. There are no standby duties in overseas ports. The question is whether he would have been fit for duty at departure time...so enough sleep, not alcohol affected. Not hung over.

Thanks for the clarification. I misread the article.

 

[Scott K]

$20k to diagnose and treat drunk is not a credit to the US medical model

Land yourself in an ICU here in Australia as a medicare ineligible, uninsured patient and you'll find $20000 for two days is cheap. At 0.205 they haven't exactly gone easy on the booze. Depending on the person they could potentially have gone into MODS as a result of drinking. I doubt that's what happened here, but those costs aren't exactly exceptional, and the impact of alcohol on the FA can't be understated. Our drinking culture in AU too often over-looks the risks of alcohol.

Regardless of the hospital stay, they are still a corporate representative at a time when they are in another country on behalf of their job or as a result of their job. Couple this with a crippling of their ability to perform their job as a result of their own conduct, and I can't see Qantas having any other option but to sack the person. While I'm sure it was their dream job, it doesn't mean the employer has to suck up any indiscretion on that emotional basis.