Excuse my ignorance, but is CHIRP not intended to be a vehicle of measured confidentiality?
As with all fundemental issues requiring redress the solutions are normally painful, unpopular and need time to take effect as it usually becomes a culture change.
There are only two parties who are ultimately responsible for deciding whether or not ANY aircraft is safe to depart, namely the Captain and respective certifying engineer. in this regard, all the other peripheral blusterers, fast track bean counters and stalk climbers, are irrelevant.
Until our industry fully adopts the culture of Flight crews and Engineering standing shoulder to shoulder on all related issue, but particuarly safety integrity, the wedge will always be driven in!
Can anyone name any other individuals within an operation, other than crews and engineers, that require the same depth of training and respective licence cover???
This system of communication works and works well, it does require effort I know but it is worthwhile. Tough call admittedly, the worst that can happen is that a job can be lost. The potential alternatives are deadly. It takes character and commitment to say NO. We all know that most of us posses these qualities, a prerequisite for crews and engineers, so lets use them to effect.
No job is worth compromising safety for. I fear that if we don't address the growth of the symptons described previously above the only tool that engineering will need in the future to perform defect diagnosis will be a Ouija board!!