First up, I don't have a dog in this fight. I've been following this thread with interest, particularly the Romulus / Fed Sec debate.
This post by aveng screams out for an outsiders view (no slight on aveneg intended)
Originally Posted by aveng
It would be helpful if the "new breed" of aviation management realised that when a Lame puts his/her signature and licence number to a job, that the "ownership" of responsibility lasts for the life of the aircraft. Maybe if they placed themself in our position - they would understand why undercutting and taking short cuts make LAME's nervous.
The "new breed" of [generic] managers understand
exactly the point you have made, in fact, it is the cornerstone of the modern business model. It is the LAME and pilots who give them plausible deniability - in short you and I are their "bunnies". Its even worse for pilots, because, they are usually unable to defend their actions at the subsequent inquiry, and hence speculation about their performance can always be used to cast doubt.
By virtue of being licensed, we give managers cover to cut corners, take the bonuses whilst we bear the risk if it all goes wrong. How many times have you actually heard a senior manager or CEO stand up and say "actually, we the senior management made a mistake". It is always about finding a low level functionary to carry the can (QF Freight Cartel US prosecution is the classic case in point)