Profit vs Safety

[Skaz]

I hope somebody out there with experience in a situation like this can help...
i know of a company that seems to put profit ahead of safety and the lifes of the pilots flying for them.In the past few months there has been at least 4 incidents of overloading on freight runs, in the past tyres have burst, a/c have had stall warnings come on 40 kias above Vso, and when the pilots request a re-weigh, they are 400kg plus overweight....

the guys are unhappy, we can lose our jobs or our lives, any advice will be greatly appreciated

[I Fly]

As you said "we can lose our jobs or our lives". It's time to ACT not talk. You CAN get another job. It's a bit more difficult to get another life. These operators make it difficult to compete against by the good operators. Don't risk your life in assisting them to put a good operator out of business.

[BlueEagle]

SKAZ - You don't say which part of the world you are operating in but the kind of incidents that you mention are the kind that will normally get an operators licence to operate pulled.

Do you have a confidential reporting system to that authority?

If you can get the information to the authority they can start doing spot checks that will soon uncover any unsafe practices.

I appreciate that there are parts of the world where the civil aviation authority is either useless or non-existant.

[LAF]

BE has given you the answer.Even the GA outfits in the UK would find what you describe unacceptable.Pilots with both safety and confidentiallity concerns in the UK would use CHIRP to get some action from the CAA.Whatever you do do not just accept it.

[Skaz]

Thanks guys, we are talking amongst ourselves as to what to do, advice appreciated

[FWA NATCA]

Skaz,

Your safety should always come first, if it isn't safe then don't fly it. If this is happening in the US you can easily make a call FSDO and talk with one of the inspection agents, or call the aviation safety hot line. Either one will keep your name out of the reports and they will hopefully put a stop to a serious problem before it becomes an accident.

Consider this scenario, you take an overloaded aircraft, it doesn't get airborne and runs off the end of the runway, luckily no one gets killed but the airplane is destroyed. Or it gets airborne but an engine quits and you crash and pilots are killed and maybe some inocent people on the ground are killed.

Now who do you think is going to get blamed for the crash, the company who overloaded the aircraft, or the pilots who accepted the overloaded aircraft.

Mike R
Safety Should Never Be Comprimised!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Here in the UK we have a guaranteed anonymous reporting system called "CHIRP", Confidential Human-Factors Incident Reporting Programme. I filed a report with them once, which actually because of the nature of it got quite wide publicity, but it never impacted on me personally - they guaranteed my anonymity and stuck by that. So far as I am aware, safety messages were firmly imposed and practices sorted out.

Wherever you are on the planet, there should be something similar, I strongly recommend using it. That's the preferred industry way of handling such things, and it does, in my experience, work.

But if all else fails, you're not paid enough to lose your life, walk out and make it clear why - but it shouldn't have to come to that. (Easier said than done, I know.)

G

[planett]

Action, not words. There are many greedy, paranoid, and suspicious owners/managers out there. They own and run businesses, their purpose is to make money, and if your safety is compromised in the process, that is of no concern to them. If their company culture promotes savings in the short term through lax maintenance, or overloading, they will tell pilots all kinds of BS like "the last guy always took this much" or "bleed air smoke is normal" or "don't worry about the gyros, you've got a GPS".

One pilot refusing to fly an aircraft makes him a black sheep, believe me, I know. The real trick is to get all the crews informed, and thinking like a team. When three crews in a row refuse an aircraft, it gets thier attention immediately. That is the quickest way to get an engine changed. This is what I mean by action. If you give in and "fly for today" or "just till the end of the busy season" you have lost the battle. (eg. "it was good enough yesterday, just one more day")

If we ever want to change this industry for the better pilots must take these kinds of stands, it is much easier when you are not alone in the fight and you have knowledge and conviction. Those who have lost friends along the way will know how important this is.

[BlueEagle]

Planett, unfortunately we do not know which country Skaz is based in. I have have worked in several third world countries where, had I adopted your approach, I would have been lucky to have been bundled out on the next aircraft and more likely found face down in the river!

Your approach will work well in a civilised environment with other levels of support available, I would urge caution on using it anywhere else.

For Skaz the best option may still be to try and get the authorities on his side, either in the base country or the countries his operator flys to. I would not fancy his chances in West Africa, for example.

Skaz, keep us informed and a bit more information if you can.

[planett]

Touche Blue Eagle.
However, the consequences for inaction may be as dire as the consequences for standing up to criminal management. The point is, do something, or it's hard to sleep at night, trying to justify inaction. The course of action may not be the same everywhere, but rest assured there will be consequences. Anything worthwhile requires sacrifice.