To Old Fella
To Old Fella
It is not my place to apologize for the treatment heaped on you in a previous post, but as I wouldn’t expect the individuals who owe you one to do so, i thought I might start a new thread comparing ‘back in your day’ to now. I hope it doesn’t degenerate to a pathetic mud slinging exercise, but on that matter also, i am not holding my breath.
“When you beat up someone physically, you get excercise and stress relief; when you assault him verbally on the Internet, you just harm yourself.”
― Nassim Nicholas Taleb, The Bed of Procrustes: Philosophical and Practical Aphorisms
To state the obvious, the industry that used to exist ‘back in your day’ has changed. It all starts at the top. The temporary revolving door at the top hardly instils a sense of stability. Ask 5 Cathay or Dragonair pilots who the CEO is of both companies, and what their stated goals for the future of the organization they lead are... Back in your day, bosses had an intrinsic understanding of the day to day operations of the airline, the staff had access to them, and even knew who they were, and what the corporate direction was.
Back in your day, “Safety First” was not only a corporate slogan, but was no doubt a priority of flight. Unfortunately it really is just lip service now. Rather than expensive safety, we instead divert our funds to ‘Risk Assessment’. It would be interesting to compare the budgets of the safety department and the corporate risk department wouldn’t it? Lets take a recent incident to highlight the difference. MH370. No doubt the corporate risk department could spit out figures as to how exactly two hull losses in a short period of time affected both the passenger numbers and the share price of Malaysian Airlines. There will be comprehensive reports on how a similar event would affect CX shares and day to day operations. On the ‘safety side’, the industry has ramped up to come up with an agreement to look at making aircraft ‘traceable’ starting in the year 2022. We are yet to agree to it, and it is not binding, all dependent on cost of course. Safety first, as long as no cost incurred.
Back in your day, engineering was an integral part of the airline. Engineers were experienced, respected, and by the time they got to work the flightline, they knew their stuff. Unfortunately for them and us, the amount of ‘return to gate’ events that they solved on the headset were never measured, therefore the true value of an experienced guy on the headset was never quantified. Now we have a ‘mechanic’ at best. English language optional, training minimal. The company now providing that reduced level of engineering is doing so because they submitted the lowest tender to offer the ‘service’. Ask ANY 320 pilot how our new “lower cost” engineering provider is working out, expect a colorful reply.
Back in your day, your home maintenance base was probably the place to get work done. We can now ‘transit’ our main engineering port without a signature, or an engineer even sighting the aircraft. Again, they never quantified the value of an experienced set of eyes on the ground picking up faults before they became failures, so we dispensed with them as they were expensive. It has taken the company years to convince the CAD that because reliable ‘new technology’ negates the need for so many expensive experienced engineers, and they should be replaced by cheaper mechanics at best, at worst, no manning at all at certain ports that we service regularly. The irony that appears to have been missed by both the accountants and the managers, but is fast becoming apparent to those of us operating this ‘new technology’, the lengthy time taken to convince the CAD was too long, and in that time, that same technology has become outdated and subsequently very maintenance intensive. ‘Safety first’.
Back in your day, you would have required aircrew to have a certain level of experience to take up a ‘window seat’. We now have the course refined down to 80 hours total time (the equivalent of a single months flying once they hit the line) before you get to operate from the RHS. We simply can’t get experienced pilots to show up for an interview with the current package on offer.
Back in your day, managers weren’t paid a bonus if they are able to reduce your terms and conditions. No points for guessing what this does to manager aircrew relations.
Every industry has perks, (butchers don’t eat ‘chump chops’), one of ours is staff travel. Back in your day, it was probably part of your COS, now it is a ‘corporate policy’ that can be removed at the companies whim. if it is not in the contract, beware at contract compliance times, “they can take it away” is the typical threat.
Back in your day, bonus time was potentially rewarding, a thank you for a job well done. We now have the situation where bonuses are only available to ‘eligible’ staff. No points for guessing which staff category ‘aircrew’ fall in to.
To put it bluntly, we are reducing maintenance levels and experience levels at an unregulated rate. There is no precedence in our industry for this combination of factors, and I take little comfort in the fact that a corporate risk specialist from the safety of his office, has calculated the risks of a hull loss or two on the companies bottom line for the quarter.
Old Fella, please enjoy your retirement, needless to say, you have earned it.
With genuine respect, and a healthy dose of envy.
Lowkoon.