Originally Posted by
blow.n.gasket
Rated , don’t ask Qantas why they allowed all of their pilot’s audiometric data from recruiting days to be destroyed !
Makes it hard to establish a base line , doesn’t it !
It’s also an interesting story as to the lengths to which the Company management have gone to , fighting the HSR’s , in order to not have to install noise attenuating headsets on the 737 , even though they assented to noise cancelling headsets on other less noisy flight decks !
At least they now allow pilots to purchase their own headsets .
Bonus’ before safety !
Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.
Very interestingly, as QF choose not to include crew in their 'study' of passenger sleep patterns and the like is in fact,
prima facie a very interesting omission.
Recent court decisions, even in the antipodes, of higher courts led to changes in the way
occupational disease was compensated.
There is, in many jurisdictions no longer the plaintiff's burden to satisfy the court of the link.
That Qantas choose to have no data on crew is interesting, perhaps Patty realises the muck he or she has stepped in. That Qantas consider data on the
passengers important, implies they know there are impacts that they wish to quantify and therefore minimise..
Despite the dubious nature of the study and its likely 'funding' a well trained lawyer would effortlessly suggest that without credible long term data, QF could not infer that there is no increased risk to their crew. Those crew to which they have a duty of care.
Excluding crew, particularly when stepping beyond existing TOD limits without physiological data studies, inferring there is no long term health impacts is a dangerous path. Perhaps they hoped nobody would notice?