[ Q&A Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: g woodall
Password: orange
Date: 06 Nov 2006
Time: 20:42:23 -0800
Remote Name: 68.52.204.228
With the caveat that neither I nor this website is a substitute for a lawyer - -
Two separate legal issues are being mixed in this question.
1) DOT "regulations" hold an employer ultimately responsible for administration of DOT regulations and would be unlikely to cite a company for the actions of an MRO unless the company was shown to have knowingly selected an unqualified MRO or ignored ongoing knowledge that the MRO was not acting in accordance with the regulations. The DOT remedy involving the company and/or MRO would be warning, citation (?fines), or exclusion from DOT activities.
2) "Civil liability," which is much more complex and involves consent, expectation, due process, confidentially, public duty, good faith, collusion and a host of other issues (including who has the deepest pockets).
The "Miranda" statement (corrected from the question) that the interview IS CONFIDENTIAL EXCEPT AS IT AFFECTS SAFETY given by an MRO is a two edged sword and only another piece of the consideration. The court's remedy involving the company and/or the MRO could be dismissal of the complaint or awarding actual and punitive damages. My sideline experience is that actions that prompt either regulatory or civil liability consequence are usually pretty brazen, egregious, or an unusual alignment of circumstances.