Originally Posted by
Ex FSO GRIFFO
"
And, Who can say that the 'Safety' HAS been improved..??.
No Cheers.....
And there-in lies the problem.
Every time you make a "safe" decision (delay, divert, cancel, carry more fuel, deny boarding etc), the only measurable outcome is actually negative! You've cost the company money, bad
PR, delayed flights with knock-on effects and so on. You can't prove that there would have been an accident, incident or negative outcome if you had persisted with Plan A, whatever it was. And, because of that , the company is naturally going to ask you why you chose your course of action, which is fair enough, but its the way they ask and how they manage the process that will determine what sort of organisation they are and will determine whether others will feel safe making safe decisions (irony).
So, again, its the Management that will directly affect whether you will have a reporting culture, and therefore, what type of safety culture you will have.
In my experience, such a culture in smaller companies is rare, but there are definitely some Corporate Flight Departments out there trying (they can afford to), as well as many of the major Flag carrier airlines. The other place you can see the theory in action is the company's that hold "special mission" contracts, where they're more likely to lose the contract by taking risks than if they were to down tools or or execute Plan B.