In very simple terms, SMS is a method of pro-active safety - a company comes up with a plan as to how they will deal with safety issues as they arise, in order to pro-actively implement safety-related system changes before they increase in severity to incidents/accidents.
It's an excellent idea and being mandated by ICAO. However, IMHO, for SMS to work (besides being tailored to different sectors/operator sizes) it depends on two things.
1) Continuing traditional oversight methods during implementation and until fully adopted and proven results are seen.
2) Guaranteed (legislated) whistleblower protections for both public and private sector workers.
Transport Canada is doing neither of these things, and that is why many people are outraged.
I can agree with most of that. I would like to add that SMS is not a TC invention and is an attempt at being pro-active, rather than learning from an accident after the fact.
Chuck:
I know getting you to agree on anything positive about TC is talking to the wall. However TC will contnue to audit all operators at regulary scheduled intervals. The only thing different is what is being audited. Inspectors still oversee training programs, SMS, quality assurance... even rides along on a regular basis. This where I work, and SMS in 100% implemented. Is it flawless? Probably not but no system is. I do think the idea of rectifying problems before they become an accident/incident is a great way of thinking. I know it has changed the way I see safety and approach it has changed. But I do agree continued oversight is critical.