I wonder what policy AIX has to resolve crew conflict. I know one former carrier of mine, there was a 2 call policy. If the CA did not respond by the second deviation / concern call-out, the FO had the legal support of the company to take control and assume the CA as incapacitated.
Seems like United has had the two call policy since at least the early '80's. It was also part of an old gouge interview answer about what you did if the captain insisted on busting minimums. Newer interview questions seem to be more like what you do if the captain is wearing a dress to dinner (sadly, I'm not joking on this one
).
Until you have witnessed an illustrious "Cmdr" belittle and humiliate an FO at dispatch and continue the barrage in the cockpit then it is very difficult to appreciate the CRM culture at AI. This is and was not a one-off event, but regular: all be it at varying degrees and levels.
Some of this is indeed cultural in my view. As an American, I'll certainly talk back and I want the folks who fly with me to speak up if they think I am wrong about an operational matter. In other cultures this might be viewed as weak leadership or disrespect.
Forcing Captains to write a safety report after a Go-around is simply ridiculous and goes to the very heart of this easily preventable accident.
At a lot of U.S. companies, you don't have to write a report if you elect to go around, but if you land out of an unstable approach you'd better be doing ASAP's and NASA reports and hope the feds decide your disregard of the rules was not 'intentional'. Kinda the reverse of a couple of decades ago when it was considered heroic to salvage the approach and save the company the cost of a go around.