HIV and Commercial Flying
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Orpington
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HIV and Commercial Flying
Just a quick question which I was asked today, that got me thinking, would having HIV affect being able to apply for a Class 1 medical, and then therefore flying commercially?
From my understanding of it, there are a few situations that need to be taken into account,
1stly if the person was not taking any medication, then things would be ok, but how would they stand if the were taking therapy?
2ndly, what would potential employers views on this be, if they were able to fly, as many HIV+ people live totally normal lives and live to a ripe old age?
Any answers would be appreciated!
Thanks
From my understanding of it, there are a few situations that need to be taken into account,
1stly if the person was not taking any medication, then things would be ok, but how would they stand if the were taking therapy?
2ndly, what would potential employers views on this be, if they were able to fly, as many HIV+ people live totally normal lives and live to a ripe old age?
Any answers would be appreciated!
Thanks
PPRuNe Handmaiden
My understanding that in Australia if you are HIV+ then you would lose your medical. Reason is that before your status goes to "fully blown AIDS" you can have psychotic episodes. This is naturally not a good thing in flight. (This was discovered the hard way by a FA who was HIV+ flipping out inflight and acting most unnaturally. Not long after he went from being HIV+ to the disease advancing to the next stage).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Orpington
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Redsnail, totally understand the reasons behind that!
Gingernut - why wait for the flack - I thought it a perfectly reasonable question to be asked (especailly in this day and age) and just wondered wheather your responses would be a long similar lines to mine!
Gingernut - why wait for the flack - I thought it a perfectly reasonable question to be asked (especailly in this day and age) and just wondered wheather your responses would be a long similar lines to mine!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too have asked about this before. I am a HIV+ individual working in the aviation industry who refuses to tell my employer of my status at present. I am perfectly healthy and not on medication. Regular checks confrim this to be the case. My consultant says there is no reason why I should not carry on working and that the medical rules are out of date.
The big question I have is about the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 in the UK. At present, this makes it illegal for my employer to discriminate against me on the grounds of me being ill as a result of my HIV diagnosis. However, in Dec 2005, this will change so that my employer cannot discriminate against me if I have HIV even before I become ill.
Having just read the act, there is no provision in it as far as I can see for people required to pass a medical in order to do their job, unless there is a risk of HIV transmission in the course of doing their job. This would imply that my employer cannot remove me from licenced duties as this would subject me to being at an unfair advantage to my colleagues. Is this true?
And as I said in my previous thread on here a year ago, I would be interested to hear if anybody has any experience of dealing with employers regarding licenced duties and HIV. My email is [email protected] You can of course use an anonymous hotmail address and you dont have to tell me your name or any personal details. Many thanks.
The big question I have is about the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 in the UK. At present, this makes it illegal for my employer to discriminate against me on the grounds of me being ill as a result of my HIV diagnosis. However, in Dec 2005, this will change so that my employer cannot discriminate against me if I have HIV even before I become ill.
Having just read the act, there is no provision in it as far as I can see for people required to pass a medical in order to do their job, unless there is a risk of HIV transmission in the course of doing their job. This would imply that my employer cannot remove me from licenced duties as this would subject me to being at an unfair advantage to my colleagues. Is this true?
And as I said in my previous thread on here a year ago, I would be interested to hear if anybody has any experience of dealing with employers regarding licenced duties and HIV. My email is [email protected] You can of course use an anonymous hotmail address and you dont have to tell me your name or any personal details. Many thanks.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would imagine that of greater consideration would be entry rules to a number of countries whom attempt to limit entry of persons carrying infectious diseases, which could override any disability discrimination legislation.
I don't know however if many places still have such restrictions however I believe Russia did attempt to enforce such for a while. I cannot imagine however that it would be any different from entering with any other disease unless one had the intention to act recklessly, or more likely did not know that they carried a disease and acted recklessly.
BA for instance test for this in addition to a normal Class 1/relevant medical. I cannot imagine that - unless disclosure is required - that it would be a consideration as treatments enable such a high degree of control over the condition.
I could only guess that for cabin crew who are there for safety and indeed first aid duties, where adminstration of treatments may be required, that disclosure might be required in order to ensure training to prevent transmission takes place?
I don't know however if many places still have such restrictions however I believe Russia did attempt to enforce such for a while. I cannot imagine however that it would be any different from entering with any other disease unless one had the intention to act recklessly, or more likely did not know that they carried a disease and acted recklessly.
BA for instance test for this in addition to a normal Class 1/relevant medical. I cannot imagine that - unless disclosure is required - that it would be a consideration as treatments enable such a high degree of control over the condition.
I could only guess that for cabin crew who are there for safety and indeed first aid duties, where adminstration of treatments may be required, that disclosure might be required in order to ensure training to prevent transmission takes place?
cabin crew who are there for safety and indeed first aid duties
Take care, and be careful before you disclose anything.
