More on human factors for regulators
I was asked to explain my final paragraph about the regulators and their relationship with human factors. What I am saying is that if you design a system to be used by intelligent human beings and then ignore their propensity to abuse the system where ever possible then you are succumbing to the tendency to laziness and a willingness to accept that the vagaries of human performance will mean that there will be occasional and maybe frequent failure to deliver consistent performance at the minimum level.
The regulators in my opinion, should be saying "if this is the minimum acceptable standard then the regulations must be set higher to ensure that the population does not routinely descend below that minimum level.
To issue a life-long certificate of competence as an instructor despite never having had an instructional job for a minimum amount of time is the worst kind of regulation that places 'hope' above 'expectation'. To allow multiple on line re-takes of licence examinations is the same. We know that if we have the ability to abuse the system then it will happen. In my time I have had to work with two instructors who were dismissed from previous employers for fraudulently gaining licence qualifications - the worst is they are both still working as instructors despite this transgression. Please, someone, tell me we are heading in the right direction.
G.