The Nuremberg defence and taking the Queen’s shilling
It is not the first time and probably not the last that we see the Nuremberg defence being trotted out by managers and subordinates that they were only “following orders” from the CEO/MD. But did they all not accept the Queen’s shilling?
Thanks OTG, Tutaewera, and BP et al for your inside info. I gather that I maybe indeed preaching to the converted on this form, but here is my further 2 bob’s worth.
As nominated persons (accountable and responsible), the CEO/MD and other senior managers particularly have an easy and direct line of comms to Airline Ops and Airworthiness at CASA and vice versa. Many other avenues exist to increase the focus and awareness on the cowboys and girls at managerial or at any level, or on the gaps and weaknesses in the systems and processes. Granted, you may not always have the easier option to resign due to family, financial and limited career choices. But it could be the safer option. Short of the preferable earlier severe regulatory intervention, or a too late accident or serious incident, perhaps the CEO/MD etc. will only take notice when managerial turnover and the driver turnover and fluctuation level impacts production and actually grounds flights, increases training costs, or reduces the collective expertise, corporate knowledge, experience and proficiency to an unacceptable level The damage to the brand and the patience of the investors and shareholders will be sorely tested from the suspension/grounding and the resulting free flights give-away to get bums back on the seats.
LEADERSHIP EXAMPLE & ANARCHY
The CEO, the local plethora of MDs and other nominated persons over time and until more recently thought that it was a risk worth taking. Hey, **** happens, TGW took a wrong punt, made a bad call, call it what you like. They decided that compliance and safety was too difficult and/or too expensive and did not fit the TGW business model. There was a simple choice: to comply or not to. When the regulator says “jump”, and your response is not immediately “how far”, and you instead go down the anarchical path thumbing your nose at CASA, then it maybe stating the frigging obvious to watch out and be bloody careful. As a nascent and relatively embryonic entrant, it is no surprise that TGW is without an ingrained and established compliance and safety culture permeating all levels. If such anarchy is exhibited at the top, if senior management actively and openly demonstrate such contempt for the regulator and compliance, then what example does this show to the troops at the bottom of the food chain? “My CEO and management team deliberately do not comply with CASA safety and compliance requirements, so why should I follow company SOPs?” The “don’t do as I do, but do as I say” model of airline management and leadership who are unable or unwilling to “walk the talk”. I am reminded occasionally, and fortunately not too frequently, in the sim and on the line (with the QAR operating) of a few guys who have slipped through the net, unsuited and not fit for purpose in a safety critical industry. Nice chaps, but who would let them anywhere near an aircraft or an airline HQ, who use the same “a little bit pregnant” argument or excuse: “she’ll be right mate”, “oh, its ok” or “don’t worry, I’ve done it before”, who argue with the “checky” or examiner, when the minima is busted, the flying is outside of tolerance, sunny side is not up, it wasn’t kept in the green, the SOPs contravened etc. This is all notwithstanding the avowed high experience levels at TGW: ex-Ansett, ex-overseas experience, high GA time etc.
The suspension late last week after the earlier show-cause notice and the CEO’s subsequent public state of denial confirms that the option to not comply was, for whatever reason, considered more prudent. Was TGW’s situation so dire, such a great emergency, requiring and allowing TGW to deviate from “SOPs to continue flying? Well, no! TGW could have stopped ops themselves until compliance and safety issues were rectified and CASA were satisfied. TGW chose not to, or were incapable of doing so, … and CASA thankfully made the decision for them. Being cruel to be kind … CASA giving TGW some breathing space and a chance to demonstrate their new found safety and compliance bona fides seems like a very good idea and course of action. Harsh, yes, but TGW have a wonderful opportunity to now show us how it can be done. The TGW risk assessment previously said that CASA would not dare act to suspend, or perhaps worst case that TGW can trade their way to break even or profitability if such a suspension/grounding was enforced. If not suicidal, and the business does indeed recover and goes onto flourish and prosper, then you really do have to admire the panache, verve and ultimate brinkmanship!
Do safety and compliance cost money, or do they save money?
Does your airline or parent at Board level have any independent non-exec. directors, does it have a safety committee? Sometimes you can find a director actually interested in regulatory compliance, risk and safety management, and in exercising his/her fiduciary and other duties in maintaining shareholder value and the brand, being proactive in avoiding the impact on the business of a grounding, and the small mess of a hull loss (or two if you can convince the paying punters to fly again with you) and associated splattered and fried cadavers, and any possible subsequent business closure or collapse?
If you are at your wits end and have exhausted all avenues intra-company, then by all means go external. As a so-called profession, do our pilot responsibilities extend beyond the cockpit, the aluminium/composite fibre tube and the weekly pay cheque? OK, not all airlines have the luxury of screening for, recruiting and employing “astronauts”, not all are IOSA, or have a LOSA program, and some airlines are still really struggling with implementation of QA, SMS, FRMS, FDM, Just culture, reporting culture, learning lessons culture etc. etc. Confidential aviation reporting systems are not there for window dressing. Flight, sim, base and hangar etc. visits, checks and audits provide ample opportunity for those staff with genuine concerns to share these with the regulator. Even as a lowly driver, from experience, I would be surprised if you have ever been refused a meeting with an aviation authority or accident investigation bureau if you so request. You may also have access to a tech. rep./committee at your pilot association. If your management remain incredibly obstinate in the extreme, then you may be fortunate to have access to a polite and welcoming MHR and/or Senator, Shadow Minister, Parliamentary Secretary or Minister without ulterior motive, and with a common and genuine interest in voter and pax preservation and keeping the “body count” to an absolute minimum. And yes, if you are particularly brave and courageous enough by all means make a submission to a parliamentary select committee. The Whistleblower path is now so well trodden via media, web fora and the blogosphere.
Yes it takes some courage and intestinal fortitude. Yes it needs a little honesty and integrity. Yes you can do it without taking down the company with you especially if there is a real niche in the market, the competition is not too fierce, you have investors with deep pockets and the business model is sound. Yes it takes time, but does it take 4 years? Maybe. We should all be thankful that there was no accident. It has been suggested that a number of altruistic TGW managers have already paid the penalty for popping their heads up above the parapet. If true, then well done those brave souls! It can take a little time, effort and money to find the right nominated persons and the means of compliance acceptable to CASA. It may be a “one off” or CASA and new supremo McCormick may have finally seen the light. As long as they continue to act without fear or favour across the whole industry according to their statutory obligations, then I am not really concerned with many of the conspiracy theories as to why it has happened now. Better late than never, and certainly better before a Bus, or a Boeing, Fokker, Embraer, Bombardier, ATR, Saab, Metro etc. ploughs into the turf.
If you take the Queen’s shilling, saddle up and put the gold/silver stripes on, then is safety and compliance your responsibility or someone else’s “problem”?
Safety is always far too important to be left to management!