Controllers' Individual Responsibilty
Scenario: Aerodrome Operator (Company X) instructs ATC at AAAA to introduce new procedures regarding provision of service. ATC at the unit does a hazard analysis and says risk is unacceptable unless our suggested mitigation is implemented. Company X says 'We've done our own hazard analysis thankyou, and consider we've done sufficient mitigation. All our other airfields are going ahead, now you have to as well'. Procedure makes it into AAAA's MATS 2 via SI.
Individual controllers at AAAA strongly suspect Company X does not have authority to introduce new procedures at their unit due peculiarities of local airspace, thus making them void and possibly illegal, and that Company's risk mitigation is a whitewash job for political convenience.
Individual controllers have a licence to protect. Question for PPRuNers:
1. Can they refuse to implement new procedures which their unit considers risky?
2. Does the MATS 2 protect them from repercussions, or can they be held personally responsible for an incident arising from new procedures?