Convicted pilot fights to get Air NZ job back

Grant Craigie

A former Air New Zealand captain with assault and aviation convictions is fighting for his job, claiming he was unfairly dismissed because he was not a "yes man".

Grant Craigie was sacked in September after an Air New Zealand disciplinary investigation.

Mr Craigie, 46, who captained 737 aircraft and was a co-pilot on 747s which fly internationally, has told the Employment Relations Authority that airline managers were biased against him and unreasonably used incidents in his private life as an excuse to get rid of him when the Civil Aviation Authority had cleared him as "a fit and proper person" to hold a pilot's licence.

Air New Zealand told the Authority that convictions for two assaults* on men his estranged wife had been seeing and a wilful breach of aviation regulations called into question Mr Craigie's ability to consistently make sound judgements under pressure, which was essential in his duties as an Air New Zealand pilot.

The airline also said Mr Craigie had not been "open and honest" about his convictions, and showed a pattern of not accepting responsibility for his actions.

In 1996 police laid five charges against Mr Craigie, including assault, assault on a female and possessing a weapon. He pleaded guilty as a result of a plea bargain which allowed him to avoid conviction, and was bonded to keep the peace for a year.

The charges arose from an incident in which Mr Craigie allegedly assaulted his estranged wife and her boyfriend.

In December 2002, Mr Craigie was found guilty of assaulting - while dressed in his Air New Zealand pilot's uniform - his estranged wife's new partner at her house. He was fined $650 and ordered to pay costs.

In the same year he was found guilty on five charges relating to repeatedly flying a home-built aircraft knowing it did not have an airworthiness certificate.

Mr Craigie's lawyer, Ray Parmenter, said other pilots who had got into trouble had not been dismissed but his client was being punished for not being a "yes man".

He cited a case in which a company pilot who had since been promoted had been charged in Singapore with "outrage of modesty", spent a day in custody and a further 10 on home detention at his hotel.

Air New Zealand's head of standards and operations, Captain David Morgan, said the cases did not compare.

Singapore police had told the airline the pilot was the victim of a sting.

He was in a bar when invited to touch a woman who had then yelled out "outrage of modesty".

The pilot had avoided conviction and a possible six strokes of the cane by paying $5000 and apologising.

In contrast, Mr Craigie had in 1996 "gone to a house, let himself in, assaulted a male, assaulted a female, damaged property, and was in possession of a restricted weapon".

Mr Parmenter accused Air New Zealand of unfairly changing its mind and sacking Mr Craigie after having agreed on a programme which would have brought him back to pilot duties.

Witnesses for the airline said it was not aware at that time of the full details of the assaults or aviation case.

Air New Zealand 737 fleet manager Mike Dorrian told the authority there was "baggage' on Mr Craigie's employment file, including a ban by a Honolulu hotel in 1998, but he was nonetheless promoted to the rank of captain.

His dismissal resulted from the company discovering information about the court case incidents which contradicted Mr Craigie's portrayal of them as minor, including sentencing notes by two judges which questioned Mr Craigie's credibility.

Mr Dorrian said that in one case, Mr Craigie had said he was trying to protect his children, "but on our reading of it ... what took place was an unprovoked attack".

Mr Craigie had brushed off the 1996 incident as a minor scuffle but the airline, on looking into it, considered it to be far more serious.

Mr Dorrian said the company then got the sentencing notes in the CAA case.

"It looks to us as though he has lied in court. That was really quite a set-back," he said.

This was exacerbated by Mr Craigie's inability to accept fault.

But solicitor Andrew Hooker, a friend who had earlier represented him, said in his view Mr Craigie had shown remorse "but it was never going to be enough". .

Mr Parmenter suggested inappropriate collusion between a CAA official who was conducting a "fit and proper person" investigation into Mr Craigie and Air New Zealand.

He noted that Douglas White, QC, in his report into the CAA last year, found the CAA investigator had inappropriately disclosed to Air New Zealand he was going to recommend that Mr Craigie not be given a clearance as fit to hold a pilot's licence.

The investigator's recommendation was not accepted and Mr Craigie was granted a CAA pilot's clearance.

Air New Zealand said a CAA clearance was only a starting point in determining if someone was suitable to fly for the company.

The hearing is continuing.


* Clarification: There was only one conviction. In another case he pleaded guilty but was not convicted.