Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

[chief wiggum]

Was just having a browse thru another thread, and started reflecting on some stories that I have been told which got me wondering .

If a pilot is working for a "dodgy" company, and speaks out to the boss about safety issues, then gets sacked... what is the difference between speaking to CASA about this, and having the company closed down ? ..... whichever way you do it, you are out of a job!

Is there too much pressure on pilots to speak out ?
What about some of the dodgy a/c flying in GA that probably shouldn't be ?

It's all very well for those of you in airlines to say " Ground it!" ... but the reality is that if you DO ground it, then there is no pay for you ... and if you DO go around grounding a/c, then you get a reputation that follows you everywhere and you will never be employed again!

Now I know that you are going to come back and say ' duty of care' , 'not much good being paid if you are dead' etc etc ... but could we have some REAL solutions please ?

[s/e cessna]

Your right on the money my friend, damed if you do, damed if you don't. Having had previous experience in exactly what you on about I can say that the end result ultimately and obviously depends on an individuals approach.

Firstly I suggest giving whatever it is (defect/problem) some careful and calculated pre-thought/reasoning in your own mind (not with another pilot) as to how it will effect the safety and/or normal ops of the aircraft involved.

Having formulated an opinion with regards to the matter you can logically approach and discuss the issue with your chief. If your Chief is dumb enough not to listen, speak to a director who will more than likely go kick some arse, and as a last resort I would then suggest picking up the phone and getting CASA invloved.

Having said all of that, the way in which you approach the chief or whoever it may be, is absolutely crucial; don't go in with your head on fire as though you're on a search and destroy mission, remain calm and if what you say isn't heard then go away no fuss have a further think about things and then if satisfied you're in the right then take it to the next level.

Finally no job is worth your life, at the end of the day a prospective employer (if worth working for) will respect you for you decission; resignantion is far better than being given the sack.

;)

[currawong]

Well said Chief Wiggum.

Too often the response is -

"you haven't been working around aeroplanes very long, have you?"

or

"do it, or I will pi55 you off and get someone who will"

or

"junior pilots are not to write on maintenance releases"

or

"super is just as good as avgas"

etc etc

Can not see it changing in a hurry, hard to imagine the feds doing much about it. They seem to be more interested in...well, hard to tell really.

Good luck with it if you are still in that position.

[High Altitude]

Good points made...

Unfortunatley there is that mentalisty that all of GA is dodgy (not the case). A true fact is that most of GA are having to deal with issues involving aircraft that are 25+ years old. Aircraft that were designed 60 years ago, aircraft that were not designed for the rugged climate of our beautiful land called Oz.

As a result the aircraft require significant work be done and money be spent, fact of life. As a result you need to put aside more money for maintenance. You may laugh but a budget of $100 for a B58 for regular maintenance is not excessive these days. Then you hear stories of people on the East Coast putting Chieftains out at $600 per hour? How? A good Chieftain will cost you a minimum of $400 per hour dry to maintain & insure.

You say get a turbine, great idea would love to. Gaunty/ Torres this is where the 208 debate comes back. With the rising Oz dollar the Van is certainly more affordable however competition in your area sort of limits what you can and can do at times. Saying that throwing a van out the front would work... just need the $.

The problem is that there is a general conseption in the industry that if you write something on the MR then you are bad. Incorrect, it is there for a reason! To get problems rectified. Thats why you have MEL's so that you can still operate in a limited capacity. What people have to remember is that aircraft are not cheap to keep flying, writing things on the m/r is not the issue its more to the point of whats written on the m/r. Problem solving by pilots can save owners alot of money.
i.e. Auto pilot u/s - an entry like that on the m/r tells the engineer what? NOTHING. How about :- Auto pilot fails to capture altitude hold - tells the engineers exactly what is wrong. If you fill one m/r get another one.

I honestly cannot remember that last clean skin m/r. More often than not our m/r's extend to 2 or 3 pages... Now thats not saying that the aircraft we operate are sh*t, it is saying that they work hard and get maintained to a high standard.

[prospector]

This was the reply to my barrister from a senior CAA manager relating to the subject of this thread, names have been left out for no good reason.

As requested, I have canvassed our experts as to the presence in the Civil Aviation Act 1990 or Rules of any duty, explicit or implicit, for a person to report safety concerns to CAA, ie, whistleblow??

Rule part 12.57 requires anyone who is involved to report an incident. An incident as defined in the Act means "an occurrence other than an accident that is associated with the operation of an aircraft and affects or could affect the safety of the operation".

I THINK a whistle blower who is involved in the operation would be covered by this.

I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER REQUIREMENT IN THE CA ACT OR RULES. There is , however, the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 which enables whistle blowing but does not impose a duty to blow the whistle.
Regards.

There is no requirement for any confidentiality on the part of CAA. They can, and do, feed to the operator details of who is complaining. this from a letter I received from company solicitor
"Most seriously, however, you being aware of that position and have ignored the directions given and have continued to raise complaints with CAA."

Happy days,

Prospector

[currawong]

Not talking about writing up snags, High Altitude, talking about writing in general, if you catch my drift.:yuk:

"tell that engineer to have a look at the tacho, the hundreds column seems to be skipping numbers..."


etc etc etc

[Northern Chique]

Chief.....

Been there, reported, changed careers (others stayed after reporting and are all flying for major airlines), so the scare campaign set about by operators is trifle. In fact most of these pilots went straight on to prime seats after their relevant incidents, and freeing themselves from their "dodgy companies" was the best thing they could have done for their careers...

I have always had a personal rule, if I screw up, I own up- straight up... if I have the power to have it fixed, I will... If my company puts a life at risk or asks me to put someone at risk, I wont.

I would rather walk away, than explain to someones family why their loved one is deceased, or hurt, or too frightened to fly again....

My own personal values, I know, but I have worked for some brilliant companies who really look after their crews and in turn the crews look after the clients... and then I worked for a company that almost killed me twice.

I tried to take my problem through the chain of command, there were some pretty major regs that werent being followed, safety was severely compromised and as a result, I went to CASA and sought advice. They went out of their way to protect my identity.

If there are concerns, the whistle blowers act covers in most cases. Unfair dismissals under the relevant job positions are also persued through state relevant Industrial Law. There are some things to think about though. First is why are the hackles up... is it vindictive, is there a genuine reason? If the reason is genuine, collect facts, the more relevant, the better.

Nothing is going to happen without them, except that the accusing party looks like a vindictive fool. Thats where so many cases fall over. There is not a shred of applicable evidence. Keep diaries, records, accurate logbooks and time sheets etc. The other is be familar with the regs that apply to your operation, be open to learning. Just because change may sweep across the company you work for, doesnt mean its worng or unsafe.

Follow the channels, and if in the end you are still looking down that tunnel of no return....

The best advice you can give your self, is to ask "if that were my son or daughter as a passenger in that aircraft, with a pilot I didnt know, would I still be comfortable in letting them go."

If the answer is no... then there is soul searching to be done, but get the relevant advice from the relevant folks on the way, after all you dont get advice about heart surgery from a truckdriver....

Oh yeah :p .... Im anything but Dammed!!! :D

[compressor stall]

I agree HA - everything should be written on the MR. Not everything written on the MR will ground an aircraft. Pilots and engineers should know that, but not all seem to.

I am lucky enough to fly an aircraft that is about 3 years old. Last time I flew it, its MR had 14 entries over 4 pages. How else will the nut stranglers know what to fix I am 300 miles away?

CS