FDM within CHC
Gentlemen
The goal of Flight Data Monitoring is to improve quality of operations and ultimately improve safety levels for passengers and crews. It is meant to be a statistical tool. It is not meant to be an investigative tool. It is definetely intended to be non-punitive.
Keep in mind that the system works from "...battery on till battery off...." For all practical purposes the system monitors your every move.
Even without FDM available, CVR and FDR is available to dig into all the minute details of a particual accident and even incidents, if of a serious nature. In many instances, the crew, passengers, ATC or customer representatives will also submit incident reports leading to investigation and clarification.
CHC EO & CHC-PA
CHC-PA established a working group back in 2005. We spent conciderable time and effort to draft a standardized FDM agreement.
In the end, BALPA signed an agreement separate to the operations of Scotia, more than 90% based on this draft.
The same happened in Norway, but in June 2008.
In the Netherlands, a limited agreement was in place from 2007, if I remember correctly.
I do not believe Ireland and Denmark has active agreements in place, for various reasons.
TRUST IN BUSINESS MATTERS
Trust is always important, but should never be the only factor when doing business between parties. A legally binding and complete agreement should be established to protect from management personell changes, changes to management policies, demands from customers etc.
There is always a risk that the man you trust is replaced with someone who has not earned an equal level of trust and confidence.
The agreement should aim to make the system independent of a "good guy" being in charge of managing the system and having access to the names of the pilots.
For HSF in Norway, we did and still do not feel comfortable with transferring FDM-data to entities outside the legal boundaries of the company with which we have a legally binding Collective Labour Agreement.
We feel comfortable working within the framework of Norwegian legislation and the Labour Court system of Norway. This is due to having the necessary degree of trust in the integrity and national understanding of the rights of employees.
In the end, we did sign an agreement which allows data in a de-identified format to be transferred to a server located in egpd.
CHC Global
Taxying raises pertinent and relevant questions relating to the introduction of FDM into CHC GO.
Global Helicopter Pilots Association (GHPA) organizes many of the pilots employed by CHC in Vancouver to operate outside Europe. GHPA has not been recognized by CHC, even though several rulings in Canada has confirmed that GHPA is a legitimate labour union. As I write this, CHC is still appealing several rulings in favour of the pilots, including the initial ruling by the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB).
In a system managed from Vancouver through different operations in 25-30 countries control mechanisms can easily get warped.
Reading some comments above it seems like Scotia is managing the FDM system of GO? GO is a separate legal business from Scotia, with a UK AOC, whilst GO operate on various national AOC's on 5(?) continents.
Keeping in mind all the good intentions of FDM, the system would lend itself to keeping a close eye on union reps., "bad guys", "marginal pilots" etc. if management acted in a disloyal manner to the good intentions.
Joint agreements signed and sealed in a legal and binding format keeps all stake holders from loosing sleep. I hope that GO management gets in touch with representatives for the pilots sooner rather than later to make the best of the experience gathered by the operators in Europe.
In closing, all pilot unions within CHC-PA are committed to continously improving quality and safety of operations. We see FDM as one of several useful tools to get closer to achieving the safety Goals set by the Oil and Gas Producers Association (OGP) by 2012.
Regards,
Olav Bastiansen
Executive Chairman
CHC-PA