New Boss of CAA's SRG

[beerdrinker]

CAA Press Release:

"The Secretary of State for Transport has appointed Gretchen Burrett as a member of the Board of the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). She will take over as Group Director, Safety Regulation on 1 April 2010.
Ms Burrett is an internationally recognised expert in human factors in safety-critical systems. She is respected throughout the aviation industry for her knowledge and leadership of safety performance improvement. She trained with the US Air Force and developed expertise in human factors and safety management in the defence industry before joining NATS in 2000, where she is currently Group Director of Safety, a position she has held since April 2006.

As Group Director Safety Regulation at the CAA, Ms Burrett’s key tasks will include contributing to the continuous improvement of international safety standards in aviation and ensuring that CAA standards are achieved in a co-operative and cost-effective manner. The appointment is for four years and will initially be at a salary of £180,000 per year."

Any controllers out there care to comment on what she was like in NATS.

Intresting that we now have in charge of Flight Ops in the CAA what the Military would call a Blunty. I wonder how much experiance she has of actually AVIATING

[BDiONU]

See the thread (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/401181-gretchen-burrett-leave-nats.html) in the ATC forum.

BD

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

£180K? How will she ever manage?

[Gonzo]

Good value, as you'd know if you'd ever worked with her.:ugh:

[Dream Buster]

Well, so long as she can understand spoken English, her appointment has got to be good news for aircrew who suffer from aerotoxic syndrome.

YouTube - Pilot Union Boss Blows Whistle (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxwxzHMekb4&feature=player_embedded)

DB :ok:

[stormin norman]

'CAA standards are achieved in a co-operative and cost-effective manner'

She could start with issuing licences for life !

[anotherthing]

Intresting that we now have in charge of Flight Ops in the CAA what the Military would call a Blunty. I wonder how much experiance she has of actually AVIATING When you get to senior posts, even within aviation, the ability to fly or control is irrelevant. You have experts below you for that.

I'd go as far to say that it is probably better not to have someone who has experience aviating because then the do not bring deeply ingrained pre conceived ideas to the table. Similarly there is less chance of interfering or micro management as she will leave her minions to get on with the nuts and bolts.

Senior management positions in most large organisations are more about process, less about the technicalities.

I never had any dealings with Gretchen when she was with NATS, but she is one of the only senior managers within that company that I have not heard people moan about. In a company of intelligent but fairly vocal employees, that speaks volumes in itself.

HD

£180k isn't that much when you consider we have middle level managers on salarys of circa £100k+ (plus 15/20%) performance related bonus at Sanwick... It's a nice wage, but no more than the going rate methinks

[Genghis the Engineer]

A quick search shows her as a very accomplished aviation safety researcher; she's also flown reasonably extensively as a pilot, and seems to have a good reputation as a manager at NATS.

Plus she'll be very familiar with the American way of doing business in aviation, which often has advantages over our often over-regulated British approach.

Hard to think of a much better appointment as head of SRG really. I hope that I get to meet her at some point, notwithstanding that it's a shame they couldn't find a Brit with those credentials.

G

N.B. It's worth searching for her on Google Scholar - there's some fairly impressive material she seems to have written - co-author on a couple of books and NASA reports which look fairly useful.

N.B.B. Yes, I wouldn't mind £180k.pa either, but on the other hand I'd rather not have to spend as much of my life in interminable meetings as doubtless she'll have to.