Qantas pilot who was 'drunk and stoned' when he groped a colleague's breast on overseas stopover loses appeal to fly again

• e-mail

A Qantas pilot who was sacked after groping the breast of a female colleague while high on cannabis has lost an appeal to fly again.

Steven Gregory claimed he was wrongfully terminated by the airline after losing his job following the incident in Santiago, Chile, in 2014.

The 54-year-old claimed that his drink had been spiked when he groped the breast of a female colleague in the back of a taxi, denying responsibility for sexually harassing her. 

His claim was dismissed at a tribunal last year but he appealed the decision, alleging there was a lack of evidence.  

A Qantas pilot has lost his bid to fly again after groping a female colleague during a stop-over in 2014 while under the influence of cannabis and alcohol (file image) 

It was quashed again on Tuesday by the Fair Work Commission which maintained he was not the victim of spiking. 

In 2014 Gregory and the rest of his crew were staying in Santiago for a two-night stopover when he ventured out one evening with some co-workers.

Among them was the plane's captain, his superior, the woman and another male colleague. 

The group enjoyed a bottle of rum at his hotel before venturing out to an Irish pub where Gregory separated himself from the others for around 30 minutes.

On their way back to the hotel, Gregory groped the woman's breast while they were travelling in a taxi. 

The airline refused the pilot's claim that he had been spiked after finding traces of cannabis in his urine (file image)

Upon questioning by the airline over the incident, he said he could not recall portions of the evening and suggested that his drink had been spiked.  

On Tuesday his claim was thrown out as the Fair Work Commission upheld Commissioner Ian Cambridge's 2015 ruling that 'he was not the victim of drink spiking.'

'We refuse permission to appeal. The appellant has not identified an error in the decision within or other grounds for granting permission to appeal. 

'The Commissioner did not act on a wrong principle, allow extraneous or irrelevant matters to guide him, and did not mistake the facts let alone make a significant error of fact.'