Well gentlemen this little tread starter has certainly caused some vitriol.
From the tone of some of the contributors one would think that professional organisations have no place in the ongoing debate about the "rationalisation" of the Australian workplace.
I suppose these same gentlemen also believe that the AMA have no place in commenting or input into the standards pertaining to foreign doctors practicing in Australia .
Well Professor you are quite correct, all airlines have insurance. Do all airlines pay the same premiums though? What exactly do the actaries look at when calculating those premiums.
As to if Dixon will get his way, who knows ,there is a lot of water to flow under the bridge yet!
One thing is for sure if the present incarnation of AIPA acted like the JPC or the old AIPA then your taunt would certainly have more credence.
To a number of other contributors and the whole indignation about standards. A simple question really, if JetStar can get away with less Initial Training Sims ,cyclics and training than the rest of the Qantas Group (as the Regulations and the Regulator allow them to) ,why can't or won't Qantas demand the same and save themselves a lot of money?
As to that perennial hairy chestnut, Bangkok and the golf course.
Have any of the wise arses who use this as an example of trying to bring the so called "sky gods " down to earth actually taken the time to read and analyse the ATSB report?
If you had one would soon realise that this is what happens when management go down the path of unfettered cost cutting.
Here are some of the ATSB's conclusions, see if what I'm saying holds any water as to if this accident should be a warning about the perils of affordable safety !
-The flight crew didn't use an adequate risk management stategy for the approach and landing, the error was primarily due to the absence of appropriate company procedures and training.
-Company-published information, Deficient.
-Procedures and training of crew ,Deficient in numberous areas.
-processes to manage development,introduction and evaluation of changes to operations, Deficient.
-Management culture over-reliant on personal experience and did not place adequate emphisis on structured processes
These observations were only the tip of the iceberg.
Further changes were recommended in the following areas.
- operational training and procedures.
- Hazard identification.
- Risk assessment
- Change management
- Design of proceedures and training programs.
- Management decision making processes.
Have the Sky God management taken any of this to heart?
Will training to the bare minimum legal requirements prevent a similar accident from occuring?
Profitability before Safety before Schedule.
Modern day affordable Safety!
This might also explain why some JetStar Training Captains have been asking questions regarding the amounts of training set by JetStar management, the average standards resulting from this minimalist training, the pressures exerted to pass pilots, and the legal implications ,to them as the training captain, if any thing goes wrong in the future.
Can anyone now see why there is a need for pilots to band together and demand that the accountants now running airlines need to listen just a bit more to operationally experienced people and realise that there is a certain undeniable cost associated with running a business and that just because minimum requirements are met does not necessarily make for a good business decision.
Is AIPA's Professional standards Campaign such an abhorrence when seen in such light?
Last edited by max autobrakes; 17th Aug 2007 at 02:17.