Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Merged: Tiger Tales

Old 12th Aug 2014, 09:21
  #1581 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
More Troo dat; and, a fairy story.

As it's an indecently early start and you have all been so kind, with apologies for the mangled metaphors:-
"Some -Kaizen-style analysis of the organisational pressure-build-up might be highly enlightening
.
Kaizen will only work when and where 'it's wanted'. Like all curses if the 'malady' is not identified a cure cannot be found. Once identified, both malady and cure: the patient must be willing to undergo the treatment; if the cure is to be effective. Our sick tiger presents with two main symptoms, which manifest through several other symbiotic ailments.

Endemic these days is the 'arse covering' comfort blanket of all care and no responsibility. They're all at it, learnt from government agencies at the tit and later spoon fed by Nanny. You can notice it with small children; no matter what young Johnny has done – it's never his fault, there's always an excuse and backdoor to slip out of provided. Then, during adulthood, the 'reflex' is so deeply ingrained, so Pavlov dog like, the subconscious response is inescapable. Every one loves the kudos, the money the power – until it's time to pay the fiddler; suddenly everyone is pointing at someone else. I wonder, do these parents realise the damage they are inflicting on their offspring? Confidence, the real McCoy variety – does not stem from knowing that no matter what comes, there is always an out; but from knowing the consequences of a bad decision or action; learned early so that responsibility for ones decisions and actions is clearly understood, later in life, when it matters.

Rice bowl protection: the cause of wars and misery, since the cave days People will go to extraordinary lengths to protect 'their' bowl and that what's in it. Drawback is the infamous, ultimately destructive "Yes" syndrome which cunningly only fills the bowl enough to ensure continued compliance, the sacrifice is insidious and painless until self respect is needed; then the magnitude of it all becomes apparent.

The reflex of self delusion and rice bowl protection in moderation is acceptable; but when ego, a denial of personal responsibility, an ability to find a donkey to pin a tale on, and work place deception are combined with an underlying basic insecurity; promoting braggadocio, team up with a slightly narcissistic temperament, all combined in the aircraft world, spell trouble. Real trouble, with a capital T.

Once upon a time, (back in the day), a King was having serious trouble as his money hoard was diminishing at a great rate. Perplexed, he called in the expert Sleuth to discover where all the wealth was disappearing to. Well of course, it was no ones fault; one alibi supported the next and so on until the sleuth was dizzy with excuses and rational and innuendo. There were of course small groups which were quite happy to 'deflect' the blame, with a well timed hint or two, onto other groups. But Sleuth had played this game before and before long had identified the ring leaders from clues gathered in stables, barns, kitchens, workshops and Pubs, where the almost honest folk (only because they were kept out of the treasury) worked and played. Anyway, later he met the King in his very private garden and told him what was what, collected his fee and melted away. Many years later on the road he met the King again, who looked much the worse for wear; "what happened?" he asked; "well" began the impoverished King, "some of those you named were relatives, others I counted as friends, some knew my secrets others my guilt and when I asked them to stop; they laughed, joined together and threw me out, I am now as you see me; a poorer but wiser man". "But I told how to cure the problem systematically" said Sleuth; "I know" mourned the King; "but I was persuaded that it was much easier to just remove a symptom, not cure the disease". Sleuth later wrote a book entitled "Setting your feet to flame, to keep your hands warm".

Tigers little problems are sort-able, with a little expense, a little pain and an understanding of how not to worry about saving five bob on a dunny roll (and pay a ten bob bonus); but how to efficiently streamline the operation into the little money making machine it should be.

Aye - the arcane, mystical art of trouble shooting is not forgotten, just temporarily 'out of fashion', while the cat's away... Call 1300 – FIXIT – for a quote (shoulders and clean handkerchiefs at discount rates)..

Too toot~

Last edited by Kharon; 12th Aug 2014 at 22:07.
Kharon is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2014, 10:49
  #1582 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: On my V Strom
Posts: 244
OEB - just curious as to what you are aiming to achieve by thrashing this out on PPRuNe. Would be the last place I think that one should be spilling guts about a serious legal dogfight. Reckon you're just setting yourself up to have damaging quotes thrown back at you in a legal forum.
Trevor the lover is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2014, 12:18
  #1583 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Posts: 1,648
What's your personal gripe with Tiger OEB?
morno is online now  
Old 12th Aug 2014, 12:55
  #1584 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,311
one of oeb's posts which now seems to be missing was written in 1st person seemingly by the capt involved.

i may have been cognitively impaired at the time tho
waren9 is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2014, 22:52
  #1585 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: On my V Strom
Posts: 244
Belly full of love juice or not Waren9, you are correct. There was more than one post in the first person.


So Cactus- if on is on a mission to defend a pilot, ie yourself, I personally feel that posting the whole affair on PPRuNe is not the place to do it.
Trevor the lover is offline  
Old 12th Aug 2014, 23:20
  #1586 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a box
Posts: 206
The post is still there. If OEB wants to post on PPRuNe in regards to their (or another persons) treatment at the hands of an employer, so be it.

Freedom of expression. Or do the companies own that now

Maybe if we all stood up to such people and practices, the industry would not be in a position that it is now.

You will always get your selfish, sniveling greasy pole climbers or others that do not give a $hit about anyone else. When it happens to them though, they are the first to cry out for help/assistance

You must look at the underlying actions of both companies recently to understand their way of treating professional flight crew.

Fear and intimidation is not a good way to run a business. Lead by example..............
Servo is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 00:07
  #1587 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 248
.....I personally feel that posting the whole affair on PPRuNe is not the place to do it.
Thing is though, none of it effects you personally....does it?
Square Bear is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 05:07
  #1588 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Quote Kharon:
"Some -Kaizen-style analysis of the organisational pressure-build-up might be highly enlightening.
Kaizen will only work when and where 'it's wanted'. Like all curses if the 'malady' is not identified a cure cannot be found. Once identified, both malady and cure: the patient must be willing to undergo the treatment; if the cure is to be effective. Our sick tiger presents with two main symptoms, which manifest through several other symbiotic ailments.
I think it's true to say ANY process to identify root cause and propose a workable solution will be welcome only when it is wanted. As far as Kaizen goes (which is quite a long way) there needs to be that all-important root cause identification. Accomplishable through the "5 Whys" process. The process isn't just to inform the diagnostician, it's carried out to get the patient to accept the reality of the problem, too.

Two ways to do this: Tiger calls in someone independent (like the Sleuth in Kharon's post, above?) who tells them what's wrong and how to fix it, or they ignore the problem until it manifests itself through an event that require an ATSB investigation and THEN they face the music - in a public forum.

One of these paths is the strategy of least regret. I wonder which they will choose?
VH-Cheer Up is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 07:18
  #1589 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Perth
Posts: 22
Hey Cactus that CP you refer to is he the same one that now works in PNG and is lovingly referred to as TCAS. Now no longer able to be MFO in Australia as deemed a not fit and proper person? Just wondering, BTW I like your thinking. Socks first then shoes school for the gifted class of 58.
socksfirst thenshoes is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 08:10
  #1590 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: On my V Strom
Posts: 244
hey Cactus - chill out ya zipper.


Let me rephrase. How about my sentence reads like this -


So Cactus- if on is on a mission to defend a pilot, ie ONE'S SELF, I personally feel that posting the whole affair on PPRuNe is not the place to do it.


Does that make it clearer to you. I understand how on reading my post you could have taken it as though I was indeed referring to YOU. But I was not referring to you. So your vigorous rant was all for nought. So please don't refer to me as a blunt tool when in fact it was YOU who made the misinterpretation. Please seek clarification before chucking spears. ie "hey Trev, do you mean to say you think that I'm OEB?"


And also - yes pilot was royally screwed. I agree. And yes, everyone IS entitled to free speech on here. I agree. But that also includes me. If I feel that someone wanting to progress an issue through legal grounds thinks that splashing the case all over PPRuNe is not wise - well, in the name of free speech that I seem to be accused of trying to stifle, may I also be afforded the right to say so. Note I did not sledge the pilot in any way. Just wishing to express my thoughts on the methods.
Trevor the lover is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 22:50
  #1591 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
# 1603 the devils phone number?.

Been chewing this whole thing over for while now; blame Trevor for this ramble, but it was a good question and worthy of some consideration.

OEB #1603 "This was my CP trying to force me to fly to Sydney to see a Virgin Australia doctor. I don't work for Virgin. He passed on my name and all details without even having the decency to contact me. This is a violation of Australian Privacy Law."
Is the opening sentence above is a classic 'last straw'?, clearly by the time it was written, the third mile stone – blind fury - had been reached. The length of time taken to reach the BF marker varies between individuals; but soon or late, under the right circumstances, it is reached. To work out how 'Guy' got there we need to know how Guy intuitively (cognitively) perceived the end result. There are two options (a) he believes that the company will do the right thing and all will be well, eventually, so he patiently plods through the whole dreary routine; or (b) he believes the fix is in and eventually, no matter what, he's gone. From the remaining text above, I think option (b) has crept into the lead. You can see the holes – ("without even having the decency to contact me") is contestable. The alleged breach of the Privacy act is disputable, stand alone, but without the agreed 'terms and conditions' of employment being examined, it's a reactive rather than considered claim...

OEB #1603 "[I] know any investigation can be stressful and different people react differently." Whoever wrote this is a master of stating the bleeding obvious, de-humanising the situation while appearing to 'care'. It could be construed as either cynically patronising or, that no thought was given to the 'duty of care' a CP has for his troops; or, the CP needs to learn how to draft a letter. The spirit and intent of the CP missive, to someone in Guy's situation could easily be misconstrued, by a man already angry.

Is this line - "We have access to a doctor experienced in dealing with the aviation environment, so I have arranged an appointment for you to discuss your situation and see what support you need"; presumptuous or helpful? The addition of one small word would have eliminated the perception problem "I can arrange for etc.". It would help Guy determine whether he was being offered 'hoops' or hurdles'; choice or a 'drop dead option' Fuel to the insecurity fire...

Then, this whole 'dobbing' thing gets deuced tricky, but it gives an indication as to why Guy reacted so strongly to the CP email and started bellowing about the 'privacy act'.

# 1578 (Rumour 9) "Flight planning officer reported the crew to the ATSB and that is why they were both stood down." This is intriguing; why directly to the ATSB? – seriously. The FPO must have a 'manager' or some form of command chain. So, scenario time; here we have Guy and the FPO both 'cranky'; Guy buggers off to Perth; FPO gets on the blower - "Boss, that bloody Guy has just finished blasting me for a screwed flight plan; he's gone off in breach of SOP without a flight plan". Boss - "OK, write it all down in a report and send it to me". This, apart from 'feed-back' should have ended the FPO 's role in our little drama. His boss kicks it up the ladder and game on through the established system. But the FPO contacting ATSB directly is a 'passing strange' thing; given the timing. Who's idea and by whom and when was the ATSB contact initiated? It leaves a strange, oddly shaped loose end and a peculiar after taste.

Then there's this "Dr. Drane advised that the report had come via a Tigerair Manager and then forwarded via Virgin Safety. This has been further confirmed by other sources at CASA. Virgin have categorically denied in writing, any knowledge implication or involvement in such an illegal, despicable act. Tigerair have stated that it was Virgin Safety who made the report to CASA and they had nothing to do with it." Here is the real breach of privacy and perhaps the real reason for Guy's anger. Just a quick, rough count of the number of people who now 'know' that Guy has been 'using', is enough to cause real fury and lasting damage.

Lets see; the originator (1) his immediate co-workers (4) the next step on the management ladder (7) flight ops (10) scheduling (12) ATSB (15) CASA admin (16) Avmed (20) Tiger management (30) Virgin management (33) Virgin safety (36). Possibly 40 separate individuals are now aware that Guy has been accused of 'using'. That's before the word leaks out to the ramp, flight crew, the Townsville re-fueller and they have told their 4 best mates and they've told their wives; so it goes on. This thread has had over 10,000 reads since Friday 08/08/14: 2200 Z (old school time)

So, I reckon Guy can be allowed a little cranky time; a little latitude and, if a wee blast or two on PPRuNe helps soothe the jangled nerves and some cohesive support is garnered, then why not? It's as I told John Quadrio (over several ales); if someone told you your story over a beer in a pub, you'd shake your head, say it was sad and maybe, in a couple of days you'd say – in passing "Oh, I feel sorry for the guy, but...." Unless it's you – in the gun – it's hard to understand what Guy is going through. Don't worry and feel insensitive; it's just human nature hard at work. Say a silent prayer to your pagan gods of choice it never happens to you. Take a little test; next time you see someone on crutches out on the street, with a broken leg; watch carefully. Those who have had similar will carefully avoid any contact and perhaps smile in understanding and empathy; those with NFI will almost bowl the silly bugger in the path over, seeing it as just an annoying, slow moving obstacle in their way.

IF Guy is a drug fiend, he needs our support, if the he is not, he still needs support; every bit we can manage.

Anyway - Ramble over. Curse this curiosity bump.

Selah...

Last edited by Kharon; 13th Aug 2014 at 23:11.
Kharon is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 07:48
  #1592 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,311
oeb are you the pic in question?
waren9 is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 09:56
  #1593 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: In a box
Posts: 206
Safety, 'nuff said.

Sounds in line to a very similar incident I heard about. Captain with a personal grudge going after an FO........

Safety mixed in there "somehow" as well......... Very interesting.
Servo is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 12:21
  #1594 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 468
Cactus, I read what you are saying about this. I have found in a number of organisations that, Compliance is mandatory for staff, optional for management!

It is an especially prevalent trait in those management wannabees with an MBA.
tipsy2 is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2014, 21:57
  #1595 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Styx Houseboat Park.
Posts: 2,053
Oil and water.

If you can find one, have a read of a USA based part 121 carrier COM. Notice the CP role is refined to typically dovetail with a Vice President Airline Operations/ a Director Flight Operations and a Chief Executive Officer. The controls and responsibilities are divided so that the CP can perform 'essential design function', tight focus on maintaining flight operations in the green band. Very few, if any CP selected from the 'ranks' really and truly understand pure 'management functions'. They can and do run flight departments very well (mostly) indeed, but the corporate 'fluff' is as alien to a 'pilot mind' as 'operating' is to a corporate wizard. That's where a good DFO is invaluable – the bridge over troubled waters – flight line to board room essential translation.

For example "[to] ensure that the Company has appropriate systems to enable it to conduct its activities both lawfully and ethically; etc...
To a driver – that means the Navigation Act, CAR, CAO, AFM, SOP etc. and possibly the 'union' rules of engagement. A 'management' type would, by natural reflex, translate the statement into a whole different paradigm. By loading the CP description list with many other, open ended, subjective responsibilities distraction is a highly probable result. It's a fair bet that 'by knowing' how flight crew usually operate, it would be an easy matter to take an eye off the 'flying side' ball and focus on the mysteries of the 'corporate' side. Especially where the 'crews' are trusted, experienced, competent folk. But it's the flying operation, generating the revenue, which demands protection. Loose that, game over. Someone has to be minding the shop.

The way I read the 'signs' is that CP's are being lured ever deeper into the mire of 'corporate' responsibility and enmeshed within the regulator paranoia around 'liability' and abrogation of responsibility. In short, the 'modern' CP is becoming a Piñata and the requirements of CAO 82, which are legally binding, are bundled onto the back burner in line behind the corporate 'add ons'.

Without knowing 'all' the story it's tough to make a call on the Tiger ethos; but as a general observation I have noted that these days 'management' involvement in flight crew matters is greater than in the past. Back in the day, a healthy respect for the 'power' of a CP was drummed in, conversely 'management' had to get by the CP before they could lay a glove on 'aircrew'. It seems these days everyone is looking over their shoulder, uncertain where the bullet may come from and uncertain of where their protection my be found. The CASA induced fear of loosing the AOC is another unneeded element, cunningly it is unquantifiable, but it creates a 'backdrop' setting the mood and prompting knee jerk reaction, rather than considered, balanced action.

I'll go with CJ here, subliminal distractions, the elements of uncertainty, fear and clandestine 'dislike' and distrust of 'the company' don't make for a healthy work environment. The undermining of moral on a flight line translates into one hole in the cheese which a CP should plug up.

There is a world of difference between the normal healthy, everyday 'bitching and grumbling' of flight crew (be worried if they weren't) to something slightly more 'sinister' in the form of layered passive resistance. This is not good, not in a business which occasionally requires the crew to go the extra mile, for the good of the company and the brakes are firmly applied, in self defence.

There - Sunday ramble – complete....

Last edited by Kharon; 16th Aug 2014 at 22:08.
Kharon is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2014, 23:30
  #1596 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by Kharon
regulator paranoia around 'liability' and abrogation of responsibility
Kharon, this whole situation reminds me of the second of Celine's Laws, first articulated by Robert Anton Wilson.
Celine's Second Law:
Accurate communication is possible only in a non-punishing situation.


Wilson uses the eye in the pyramid as a symbol of the dysfunction of hierarchies. Every level except the top is blind, but the eye can see only one way.

Wilson rephrases this himself many times as "communication occurs only between equals." Celine calls this law "a simple statement of the obvious" and refers to the fact that everyone who labors under an authority figure tends to lie to and flatter that authority figure in order to protect themselves either from violence or from deprivation of security (such as losing one's job). In essence, it is usually more in the interests of any worker to tell his boss what he wants to hear, not what is true.
FYSTI is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2014, 00:22
  #1597 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: passing a cloud
Posts: 319
If you can find one, have a read of a USA based part 121 carrier COM. Notice the CP role is refined to typically dovetail with a Vice President Airline Operations/ a Director Flight Operations and a Chief Executive Officer. The controls and responsibilities are divided so that the CP can perform 'essential design function', tight focus on maintaining flight operations in the green band. Very few, if any CP selected from the 'ranks' really and truly understand pure 'management functions'. They can and do run flight departments very well (mostly) indeed, but the corporate 'fluff' is as alien to a 'pilot mind' as 'operating' is to a corporate wizard. That's where a good DFO is invaluable – the bridge over troubled waters – flight line to board room essential translation.
Nail on the head Kharon.

There is one jet operator in Australia that had done exactly this on the premiss that Part 121 was coming..... (yeah dont get started). The set up works, and very well, what was the view of the illustrious regulator we have.

Even though the role and responsibility was clearly defined in the OM & corporate tree, a particular CMT would not correspond to the DFO position because in their view it was not a recognized position by CASA (you cant make this up). Only the CP who had been approved & the CEO who also had the rug dance as the ultimately accountable manager were responsible to the regulator......

To further confirm this the company had the instrument of approval for the CP but if the CEO role is also of such relevance where is the instrument for the CEO? You think John or Alan have an instrument (dont be rude you lot)

So much for safety.

I feel sorry for the Tiger crews at the moment, having had dinner with a mate who is a skipper there just last night, the serious disconnect between reality and utopia is getting ever bigger. IF it truly is a witch hunt against an individual then if heads dont roll the disconnect between crew and ops will get to a point of no return.

How safe is that?

Where a realism of a flight plan is somewhere between the tooth fairy and easter bunny, when the music stops some one carries the can and you know who it will be.
TWOTBAGS is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2014, 03:05
  #1598 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Down under land
Posts: 303
Cactus,

I work for a LCC now and have NEVER been 'bollocked'/reprimanded or the like for any of the items you mentioned.
All carriers that I've worked for discourage unjustified extra fuel carriage ("for mum and the kids") but never criticise legitimate reasons.

What LCC engages in such practices?
Watchdog is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2014, 06:58
  #1599 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 855
Well, I would tell the CP to f$&k off and tell him to put it in writing so I could have CASA and my union review the incident. Simple answer to the tech log issue is 'sorry it is already entered, which hotel shall we go to then?'. Honestly, some people need to grow a pair, if you get sacked for it then so be it.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2014, 08:21
  #1600 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,311
be interesting the stats on write ups not occurring en route to non engineering ports. for each carrier and compare.

of course it'll never happen. and casa will never ask the question
waren9 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.