High court finds air traffic controllers guilty over JAL near miss accident

[Slo Moe]

Back to track

P... et al.
High court finds air traffic controllers guilty over JAL near miss accident

I am sorry, but I think this was the topic. So, if you do not mind
I would steer back to this topic. We could think that there is some
importance in this matter. There was another article from the
States on another ruling. So is it a trend or a coincidence?
If it is an international trend, then should we do something about it?
Even small contributions might change the trend at this point.


So I'll print the rest of this posting using a different font.
The choice is yours, if you wish to proceed or contribute.
I chose to contribute and concentrate on this case on FCFF principle
(First Case First Free), and because freedom is important, I think.

This is a lengthy posting, I have done only a couple of courses
in law (aviation law, basic juridical course, and business and
contract laws). So in legal matters I am more or less a layman.
I know that there most likely is an ATCO somewhere with a lawyer
education also.

Somehow we could try to build some facts to help the colleague.

I had to make some speculations on earlier postings also, since
all the background information was not in the articles.

I apologize to defend only the colleague, not the other juridical
entities, had to make some choices. Actually it would be
the best for the company also to help the ATCO be free of charges.
The sentence would most likely make the rest of the ATCOs very very careful
to work very very safe (let's say add some extra to the separation minima,
we're humans for heaven's sake: This will lead to traffic congestion. And
that is not the thing what we want, is it? This kinds of trends we all want to
turn.
We all want to walk free. We all want that traffic flows nice and easy.)
It would be the best for all of us to see the ATCO and the trainee walk
and work free of any charges.

The managerial decisions are partly involved in almost all the incidents that
I know of. The managerial decisions are building the safety net for the
traffic and also behind the chairs on which the ATCOs sit. Those very
decisions are the sole responsibility of the juridical entity called
"the company", where usually this task has been delegated to the DG/CEO
or what ever the title is. He/she might have delegated some tasks to some
other persons.
Usually the laws dictate that the responsiblity can not be delegated, though.

How good is the net then? How wide are the holes on the net?

It is quite easy to pour the sole juridical responsibility on a person, if and
when there are deficiencies in the system. The point is that can this
happen again, if only a person is put away? It might be very wise to
understand that it does not help in building a better system, it does
not help in building or keeping the image of ATC as a profession
(The quality of the material that seeks to the ATC profession might change
to unwanted directions) it does not help in keeping the image of the ANSP
concerned in being a responsible employer.
Quite the contrary.

The ATCO is usually not responsible for designing the work environment.
(E.g. The noises in the background can be distracting, if not taken care of
by local rules and constructional design decisions, how about the lighting
conditions; glares reflecting from the lights on the tubes, when the
instructor is standing by the trainee)

The ATCO is usually not responsible for the rostering.
(How well has the management taken care of the rest periods, if the task
is delegated to someone, then how good training do they have on the
issues concerning fatigue, critical stress management etc...)

Since this incident happened in training, how about the tools and abilities of
the controller? The ATCO is usually not responsible for his/her personal training,
because of the nature of knowledge required in giving training is quite out
of bounds of the ATCO training. This can be clearly evidenced by the
training diaries, that are usually mandatory even on the basic ATC courses
and ACC courses. (Did she have enough training from the employer for the
demanding task of the OJT. E.g. Work psychology, critical stress
management, basic pedagogic training etc.?)

Was the equipment that was used good enough to the task in the ATC facility?
(Does the radar have MTCD or STCA, did the trainee get any training before
entering the OJT, did the trainee get any training about the equipment
before entering the OJT? It is a very demanding and distracting task to do
OJT and equipment training at the same time, in busy traffic it is next to
impossible.)

Let's help them be free. More ideas?