In the past many of the AAIB have focussed the majority of the time and effort on the bottom of the pyramid - ie the pilot and engineer and their SOP's. I really hope that this time we might see a more rounded investigation examining and pressing those who are actually owning and running these businesses. That is where the pressure begins and it multiplies and diversifies as it filters down.
There is no doubt for the most part our business is being run in a professional manner, but the question is - despite the improvement of technology and training, why are these accidents still happening?
Where in the chain from cleaner to CEO is it going wrong? The relatively recent phenomenon across all the major operators is the hiring of management from outside aviation, and with no aviation experience. Is this wise? It is someone relying entirely on advice from his minions to make a decision. They will more than likely often only tell him what he wants to hear anyway as they are in a career stepping stone. Nobody wants to tell the boss reality when it is negative, as that gets him the sack. You think that is overly cynical? I assure you it is not. I would never dream of going into a large fizzy drinks company or IT company and try expect to know what I was doing as the CEO - so why does it seem appropriate in aviation? Something that really struck me was the insistence of
PR statements to consistently refer to last friday as an “incident”. It was absolutely by clear definition in aviation terms an “accident”. Unfortunately this shows a clear lack of understanding at the very top of the basics of our industry. Yes we are still a business, but any business relies on its top man or lady to really understand their business. One of the large operators recently bought out by an investment company has undergone a large management and structure change, and its main, number one aim was to save 100 million dollars and increase productivity by 100 million dollars. This was all wrapped up with a large
PR company and management consultancy company complete with post-it notes on the wall. It was only later on someone maybe realised that safety had featured very low down and another sideline
PR publicity campaign and slogan was produced to with a reference to safety, but very little real substance. The really bitter irony was that on the campaign launch day one 225 did not come home safely, although fortunately that time no one lost their lives. The warnings have been there all the time, we are just looking the wrong way, distracted by complications we have created elsewhere. I do not blame that particular company. These are competitive times and the operators have to make money, but when your number one drive and priority is to save money and increase productivity - don’t be surprised when things begin to break. How much breakage is acceptable in pursuit of this financial nirvana?
If we take a sliding scale - left of scale - all the money and resources in the world. Accidents would not happen. We really can prevent all accidents in an ideal world. Right of scale - no money and no resources. Accidents would happen every week, and it would be down to luck whether or not you made it home safely. Where are we on that scale now? How far to the right are our authorities, customers, management prepared to let it go in order to undercut the next contract and save money and cover backsides? These are changing times, but it is not too late. Start looking at the top though and work down with a fine tooth comb and the answers will fall out all around us.