Moonlighting pilots are nothing new but they don’t usually take a second job flying for other airlines like Danica Theuma did. The young first officer training on A330s serving long haul routes was fired by Virgin Atlantic last month after the carrier discovered she was spending her days off hopping around Europe for KM Malta Airlines. “During their training period, we were unaware that the individual was employed elsewhere,” Virgin said in a statement. In an unusual twist, Malta Airlines has opted to keep her on after finding out about her other career.
Theuma had apparently been doing double duty since last November before being found out in May. She regularly made the 3.5-hour commute from Malta to London to report for her Virgin pairings. It’s not clear how many hours she flew each month, but it was almost certainly more than the 100-hour maximum allowed under European regulations. The Daily Mail reported that Malta Airlines, which is government owned, is aware of Theuma’s double dipping as is its pilots union. Neither offered any comment.
If she exceeded hours restrictions set by European regulations she should have her license permanently revoked.
Permanently revoked?
That’s very harsh. Is there anything you can do in a motor vehicle that would earn you a lifetime ban? I think not.
While I agree it’s overly harsh, comparing it to a car with a very limited number of passengers in relation to a commercial plane is a bad comparison.
As there is no centralised European equivalent to the FAA (with EASA being more of a regulator than enforcement agency), this would most probably be up to the authority that issued her license. If that is the Maltese CAA I wouldn’t hold my breath for it. Malta has a lot of aircraft on their register as a kind of “flag of convenience” and at least according to hearsay their CAA doesn’t have commensurate personell resources. The fact that Air Malta continues to employ her despite such a breach of rules and trust doesn’t reflect favourably on that airline either.
If this had been at my US Major Airline she would have just been scolded and given another year of probation.
No, she wouldn’t. I have seen this’d she would have been fired.
At my airline she had to choose between the two companies and was given a second year of probation. Our company found out when she was badmouthing our company in the jumpseat of another carrier going back to the other job, and one of the pilots was close friends with one of our pilots. For some reason she was “bullet proof” though. But I will say that you would be correct if she had been a MAN.
So, with passengers sitting in the back she basically decides herself which rules are the ones she will follow.
“Hey, somebody wake up the FO – we’re about to start the approach…”
She chose slingin gear instead of slingin fries on the side and the armchair warriors want her grounded for life.
Yes, having to obey the law is just soooo unfair!
A young pilot eager to learn, work, and make some extra money during tough economic times,
and all people can do is condemn her. This is why no one wants to fly anymore. I commend her eagerness. A seasoned ol’ pilot or mentor should come along side her, do some loving scolding and correction, then send her back to work, flying straight and narrow again.
Let’s not eat our young, people!
^^^ This
Yes!!!
I agree, milleratad!
+1 milleratad!
If the only issue is flying for 2 carriers, then I would agree that it’s a minor transgression, but if she exceeded 100 hours in violation of the pertinent regulations, then our FAA would take a very dim view of what she apparently did. Most if not all US carries would terminate her for a willful violation of the regs. What the regs state in her jurisdiction, and how they choose to enforce them might be a different matter.
There is a reason for the 100 hour rule. Add to that, multiple 5 commutes(in reality much longer) and you have at a minimum, the first officer in the Buffalo crash. My first career was in law enforcement where my job was to get people to follow rules. After retiring I started my aviation career. It was refreshing to see an environment where people followed the rules and when someone didn’t, they called them out. She knew the rules and purposely ignored them. She should have been fired on both ends.
If pilots were making a salary commensurate with skill level and education they would not have to worry about moonlighting.
Ridiculous pap! Flying jobs are more numerous and more highly paid than any time in history! If you can’t make it on current pay scales, you are not very bright or have zero budgeting skills.
Err, once you reach a certain level and in certain sectors maybe. Definitely NOT true across the board.
She`ll write a book, it will become a movie and she will become rich and famous, for 15 minutes……We all know of greater infractions made in the aviation world, with lesser penalties.
If Virgin was only flying her 50 hours per month and the other 50 hours per month, no harm no foul. But if they were both flying here 100 per month, then why even have regulations at all. Just fly till you die and take all those paying minions with you. Then we will be on here “armchair piloting” about how every one knew but nobody did anything about it.
Does that 100 hours include personal flying of your own private plane or just the commercial job?
Is it 100 hours at the Airline where you have your job?
Maybe it’s 100 hours per airline? Ha ha.
The 100 hours would only include commercial flying in the FARs.
Good for her to keep the Air Malta seat. AM is a great airline. People earning the right amount of money, do not need second jobs. Others sling burger patties while trying to make a living in this industry. Nobody asks any questions then.
I’m surprised at the jerks who comment on here as if they are Jesus and they walk on water.
With all the murders rapes, gangland store robberies here is a female busting her butt to get ahead, games the system a bit and all these jerks want her certificate revoked. This was clearly Virgin’s loss! Virgin should’ve said pick a side and be done. I know so many damned lazy pilots who get a job then invent broken stuff on the aircraft just so they don’t fly. Then along comes this female who wants to work and everyone is up in arms.
Hmm…
After a twenty plus year career flying under Part 135, mostly cargo, I am somewhat sympathetic. In spite of what the ignorant earth people think they know (all pilots work about six or seven days a month and they have more money than they could possibly spend in a lifetime) in most cases the opposite is true. We are work a day guys and gals who pursue professional flying as a passion, it is part of us in an unexplainable way.
As long as this human adhered to duty time and flight requirements, I applaud her willingness to earn. Some employers are jealous and petty with skills they may have contributed to but don’t really own. There is a reason one of the two airlines retained her…
In an era where we see young people condemned for not having the work ethic of my generation, here we have an individual who is hustling to make a buck.
Aside from any violation of rules, I would have to come down on her side.
Can’t help but to be impressed by this pilot! NOT an easy thing to pull off. I certainly could not nor would I want to. That being said, maybe safe, probably not legal, and it’s in contradiction to airline policy. Which is really just a non compete agreement. Still though, shows incredible initiative and skill!
Seems she really wants to FLY. Virgin Atlantic should have given her a choice, fly for us OR just with Malta Airline.
David Steere, You obviously do not know what junior pilots and flight officers make. My nephew was working two other jobs just to pay his bills while he worked on his captaincy. He was literally making $7/hr. with a fairly big company and was only allowed to fly a specified number of hours. She simply flew for her second or third job. I don’t see the problem with her, I see a problem with the process.
All the major airlines have in their FOM or personnel policies that you MUST get permission from the company if you plan on flying commercial operations outside of the company. Precisely because both the pilot and the company must make sure the pilot doesn’t exceed duty time regulations. Those regulations are a basic safety foundation that everyone (regardless of gender) must follow.
If I had to decide between Virgin or Malta, really?
She may regret this decision in the future.
I guess I’m in the minority thinking this ought to be allowed; as long as the extra time is reported so that the pilot can stay legal.
Some airlines do allow sideline flying, but the hours flown have to minimal, such that the employer is able to use the contracted hours. Two full-time airline jobs would almost certainly exceed the legal limits by a considerable margin.
I’m a firm believer that “regulations are written in blood”. But also, as a former regulator (33 CFR 154 and 156 primarily) I almost never had to come down hard on anyone except the rare (very rare) few who that chose to break the rules with bad intentions. Usually it was purely by mistake, in which case I aided them back into compliance. Sometimes ignorance in which case it was a stern talking to, and aiding them into compliance.
This one really doesn’t feel like someone trying to cause harm to others.
All this talk about poor pay appears to be an excuse for breaking the rules. It appears that she knew exactly what she was doing and continued to do so. To hold a US ATP one must be of good moral character, among other things. Her actions would indicate she is not. Don Koorse, 737 Capt, ret.
Isn’t this another lesson for us, with a little gray in the beard, to help these kids Don? Surely, over the years you’ve had the opportunity to put your toe over the line, wanted to, it was easier to, and for whatever reason decided against it? We all have.
I’ll give you this, once it’s on my flight deck it’s not happening. I’d say this girl needs guidance. Surely not a pass, maybe a trip out to the tool shed or a time out, to drive the lesson home. Children of the phone need us more than ever.
Added this to say thank you for your Service and Valor. I’m sure we’d enjoy your accomplishments and be better airmen for it, if you’re published. I see that you don’t need any advice from the likes of me. Colonel? Koorse is a DFC recipient for those browsing and I stand in his shadow and would be honored to learn from him.
Why is the 100 hour limit so sacred?
I’d sure like to see how the 100 hours was arrived at. Why not 80 or 90 or 110 or 120 or 140?
And so you fly for a job for 100 hours and spend the rest of your time doing something else. Is that presumed to be paperwork or “resting” or reading FARs or flying sims or what? Suppose it’s flying as a flight instructor? Suppose it is digging ditches in the hot noon day sun in the desert? Or commuting 6 hours one way to your job. Or maybe you are out working midnight shift in a bad neighborhood where you have to haul arrestees to jail several times a night. Don’t say it can’t be done without being willing to bet me first.
If the 100 hours is so critical, why not regulate sleeping, eating, emotional exposure to microaggressions and being misgendered? In fact why not just keep them on a base where they are put to bed at night like kids in a summer camp?
I’d bet the limit is more about controlling the supply of labor than it is about anything else.
Part 135 code shares used to be 120 hours up until the early/mid 90’s. Part 135 was beating us up with 16 leg days and 120 revenue hours and piling part 91 repos on us. ALPA fought for and we welcomed the 100 hour “One level of safety” change. It was brutal and dangerous. I have several months logged with 119.5 hours from then. Ugh.
I would imagine that there are some liability and company benefits conflicts involved.