Workplace Bullying On Sim Checks
Indeed Jack Ranger a great thread & read. Somewhat interesting though that within a space of a single day or so there has been near 40 replies & over 5000 views, that's the interesting part the attention that this subject is attracting.
True or false (work place bullying in the Sim) somethings amiss here.
Wmk2
True or false (work place bullying in the Sim) somethings amiss here.
Wmk2
The following story had legendary status when I went through training in 1967. Everyone at the time thought it was just that, a story. Not until a couple of years ago did I find it was indeed factual.
Except it was nothing to do wilh bullying as a subject.
One of the students on our course was Trainee Aircrew Ed Buckley. Ed was a delightful fellow and enormously popular because he was so naive and totally honest in every way. Except he couldn't fly very well which is a pity because he so wanted to be a RAAF pilot. He was a farmer before joining the RAAF and had big feet which is probably why he had troubles with the rudder bars in the Tiger Moth. It was probably also why he had little success at dancing with pretty girls at the Brisbane Cloudland Dance Hall on week-end leave because he wore his RAAF boots to the dance.
Ed passed all his ground subjects but was a bit clod-hoopy on the parade ground when marching. Nevertheless he was liked by everyone and even the drill sergeants who hated everyone - or so it seemed to us.
The purpose of No 1 IFTS was to sort out would be pilots from would be navigators. Each trainee would be given five hours in a Tiger Moth and assessed. He then changed instructors and given another five hours. On the completion of the ten hours dual he would be tested by the CFI or flight commander. There were around 60 of us on course. Marks were given for flying skill and a line drawn. Those above the line would continue training to be pilots. Below the line became trainee navigators.
Now poor Ed who was about 23, was unable to cope with the Tiger Moth and even before the final CFI assessment was regarded as hopeless. Following a conference between some of the instructors, Ed's instructor Pilot Officer Jim Flemming (later AVM Flemming), told Ed he was not even going to put him up for the final test and that was to save Ed the embarrassment of failure.
Instead Jim Flemming was going to pretend he was Ed Buckley and present himself for the test with the unsuspecting CFI Flight Lieutenant Rex Berriman.
On the day of the test in the Tiger Moth Rex had already flown with one trainee and after that trainee had climbed from the Tiger Moth. Rex gesticulated for the next muffled figure to climb into the rear seat of the Tiger while the engine was still running.
In those days RAAF pilots flying the open cockpit Tiger Moth wore a heavy two layered flying suit called a `Wooly Bull`and long leather flying gauntlets, fur-lined flying boots in winter, a cloth or leather flying helmet with wrap-around goggles. Some looked for all the world like King Kong in combat boots. And don't forget the parachute to sit on.
So when Jim Flemming finally levered himself into the back cockpit and helped to strap into his Sutton harness by two airman, he was unrecognisable to the CFI who could only see him via the rear facing mirror in the front (instructor position) cockpit. With so many trainees to be tested, the CFI would not have recognised the voice in the back over the rudimentary battery operated intercom system in the Tiger Moths.
Now I won't embellish the story from here on because I wasn't there to watch the actual flight. I had already done my flight and was now in the crew room. . But within an hour everyone knew what had happened. After cockpit checks were complete the CFI told the student to take off into wind on the all over grass aerodrome. . Therein for the next 15 minutes followed a wild flight with the CFI now thoroughly frightened as Jim Flemming aka Ed Buckley threw the Tiger around the sky and bounced all over the field on landing.
It was said that Rex Berriman screamed at the student saying he was scrubbed. When finally the Tiger Moth came to a stop on the airfield and the CFI cut the magneto switches, he hauled himself out of the front cockpit to tackle the flying fiend in the back who had tried to kill him.
Imagine his surprise when Jim Flemming the rear cockpit occupant, raised his goggles back over his forehead and laughing his head off said to the CFI - "Gooday Rex- enjoy the flight?"
The CFI's reply was not recorded...
Last edited by Centaurus; 20th Apr 2013 at 15:19.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been said for many years; do unto other as would have them do unto you.
Unfortunately some forget this, particularly that one day someone will do unto them in a way they themselves would not like.
And these days, not unheard of in ADF flying training either.
Unfortunately some forget this, particularly that one day someone will do unto them in a way they themselves would not like.
Then again, workplace bullying is a specialist field for lawyers and a refuge for some employees who are not up to the task or lack the personal attributes to cope with other people.
It's a growth industry in the public service.
It's a growth industry in the public service.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training & Checking - Fear and intimidation at NoStar
I hear that the punitive, subjective, toxic checking culture has become intolerable at OrangeStar.
Apparently the numerical scoring situation was raised with the CEO in a town hall-style pilot meeting recently but candid discussion was not possible with so many mid-level and senior flight ops managers in attendance.
There is a good reason that CAR 217 was changed ever so slightly back in the early 90s by the CAA. The legislation was nuanced to place the word "Training" before "Checking" as an emphasis to industry that while checking was obviously required, the core function of an in-house T&C organisation with this delegation is training.
Valid fear of checks (and Big 'C' SUPERCheckies) at this airline will likely remain until a non-blue shirt new broom is able to sweep out some of the nasty personalities involved. Aviators like this have no place in a modern Training and Checking Organisation...let alone on a flight deck.
PG
Apparently the numerical scoring situation was raised with the CEO in a town hall-style pilot meeting recently but candid discussion was not possible with so many mid-level and senior flight ops managers in attendance.
There is a good reason that CAR 217 was changed ever so slightly back in the early 90s by the CAA. The legislation was nuanced to place the word "Training" before "Checking" as an emphasis to industry that while checking was obviously required, the core function of an in-house T&C organisation with this delegation is training.
Valid fear of checks (and Big 'C' SUPERCheckies) at this airline will likely remain until a non-blue shirt new broom is able to sweep out some of the nasty personalities involved. Aviators like this have no place in a modern Training and Checking Organisation...let alone on a flight deck.
PG
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Europe
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Popgun & ratpoison
Keep the faith my friends. Be rest assured, there is going to be some serious brooming soon. These unpleasant people that Capt Dart alludes to have sacked, belittled, denigrated, sim failed and destroyed peoples career for a long time and are now seriously affecting the younger generations professional attributes and strengths.
Much is going on behind the scenes by a small dedicated group who have had enough of these inept little boys prouncing around in white shoes. These folk have had their careers and are not perturbed by the possible ramifications or fallout.
Change takes time, but there is going to be change.
Keep the faith my friends. Be rest assured, there is going to be some serious brooming soon. These unpleasant people that Capt Dart alludes to have sacked, belittled, denigrated, sim failed and destroyed peoples career for a long time and are now seriously affecting the younger generations professional attributes and strengths.
Much is going on behind the scenes by a small dedicated group who have had enough of these inept little boys prouncing around in white shoes. These folk have had their careers and are not perturbed by the possible ramifications or fallout.
Change takes time, but there is going to be change.
A very good mate of mine was badly screwed over by one of "those" heroes whilst doing training for QLink at their MB sim 5 years ago. Long story but my mate left the course and this was one of the main reasons....
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: dessert island
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe me when I say I've seen it all - I've had the best and worse sim checkers.
a good story - the best sim checker I've had was an old-school style bloke (started out flying moths, apparently). He'd use phrases such as "well done son" or "that's the way, boy".
I remember once when I wasn't grasping a concept, he asked me to get out of my seat (mid sim session) where he would sit himself down and DEMONSTRATE the co-ordination and manipulative techniques.... This is an example of a man that understands that different people have different ways of learning.
In my very humble opinion - Herein lies the one big problem, in our industry. Most check and trainers don't understand that everyone learns differently.
You can ask any school teacher - and they will tell you:
Some people learn by reading, some by doing, some by watching an example and replicating. I'm at a loss to understand why 99.99% of check and trainers in this country fail to realize this!
I went home from that aforementioned sim with a real sense of achievement- almost like I was already looking forward to the next one (crazy right?).
a good story - the best sim checker I've had was an old-school style bloke (started out flying moths, apparently). He'd use phrases such as "well done son" or "that's the way, boy".
I remember once when I wasn't grasping a concept, he asked me to get out of my seat (mid sim session) where he would sit himself down and DEMONSTRATE the co-ordination and manipulative techniques.... This is an example of a man that understands that different people have different ways of learning.
In my very humble opinion - Herein lies the one big problem, in our industry. Most check and trainers don't understand that everyone learns differently.
You can ask any school teacher - and they will tell you:
Some people learn by reading, some by doing, some by watching an example and replicating. I'm at a loss to understand why 99.99% of check and trainers in this country fail to realize this!
I went home from that aforementioned sim with a real sense of achievement- almost like I was already looking forward to the next one (crazy right?).
I hear that the punitive, subjective, toxic checking culture has become intolerable at OrangeStar.
I also remember being asked about my sim scores at an interview for the cultural icon airline. Should have seen the look on the interviewer's face when I produced copies of all check forms. Something I noted that wasn't provided in the airline that I was applying for.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWA,
That's a great example. There should be more of that in my company. Unfortunately many good practices (like demonstrating something ) are being regulated out. Checkers and Trainers are actually not allowed to demonstrate in Sim sessions and it is very very rare to see someone ignore this and demonstrate for someone who is experiencing difficulty.
That's a great example. There should be more of that in my company. Unfortunately many good practices (like demonstrating something ) are being regulated out. Checkers and Trainers are actually not allowed to demonstrate in Sim sessions and it is very very rare to see someone ignore this and demonstrate for someone who is experiencing difficulty.
Some checkers and trainers would be reluctant to attempt to demonstrate a manoeuvre for fear of making fools of themselves.
I was being endorsed (in aircraft, not sim) by a 'screamer'. It was a rough day and I was horsing it down final approach with this guy yelling "speed" at 5 second intervals - the ASI was bouncing around in the turbulence and was plus/minus about 10; sometimes momentarily a bit more. Any fool should have noted corrective action being taken without resorting to all this noise. In exasperation I called "your control' and forced a handover, then politely suggested that he demonstrate his special technique for controlling speed accurately under the prevailing conditions. As soon as it got out more than plus 10 minus five I started on the "speed" "speed" spiel and had the added satisfaction of getting in a few "slope" calls as well.
He handed it back quickly enough and stayed very quiet for the rest of the detail.
Check and training pilots should never expect a candidate to perform an exercise they can't demonstrate to the required standard if called upon to. Ditto, checkies should never ask a question unless they know the answer and can produce it without resorting to notes. Otherwise, candidates will not respect them.
As for the toxic environment which apparently is still alive in some Australian carriers, although I have never personally been victimised by the few pre-89-ers who could never put that sad time behind them, I did meet one germ who attempted to assassinate me (he failed) and seen it in action applied to others more vulnerable. One particularly nasty specimen was heard to announce in the crew room that he was going to fail a command upgrade that I had partly-trained and recommended before he had ever flown with the guy.
The check went ahead and failure was set up even as they taxied out, by the checkie engaging the poor candidate in an argument over something as trivial as setting the heading bug. Later the candidate was proved right, but it was too late; his confidence was shattered and it cost him another year in the RHS.
Fortunately, there are not many of these poison dwarfs left in the airlines, and attrition will see them gone soon. We can only hope that they don't seek a second career as simulator instructors, though if they did go to work for the likes of Flight Safety they would have to learn to be customer-oriented PDQ.
I was being endorsed (in aircraft, not sim) by a 'screamer'. It was a rough day and I was horsing it down final approach with this guy yelling "speed" at 5 second intervals - the ASI was bouncing around in the turbulence and was plus/minus about 10; sometimes momentarily a bit more. Any fool should have noted corrective action being taken without resorting to all this noise. In exasperation I called "your control' and forced a handover, then politely suggested that he demonstrate his special technique for controlling speed accurately under the prevailing conditions. As soon as it got out more than plus 10 minus five I started on the "speed" "speed" spiel and had the added satisfaction of getting in a few "slope" calls as well.
He handed it back quickly enough and stayed very quiet for the rest of the detail.
Check and training pilots should never expect a candidate to perform an exercise they can't demonstrate to the required standard if called upon to. Ditto, checkies should never ask a question unless they know the answer and can produce it without resorting to notes. Otherwise, candidates will not respect them.
As for the toxic environment which apparently is still alive in some Australian carriers, although I have never personally been victimised by the few pre-89-ers who could never put that sad time behind them, I did meet one germ who attempted to assassinate me (he failed) and seen it in action applied to others more vulnerable. One particularly nasty specimen was heard to announce in the crew room that he was going to fail a command upgrade that I had partly-trained and recommended before he had ever flown with the guy.
The check went ahead and failure was set up even as they taxied out, by the checkie engaging the poor candidate in an argument over something as trivial as setting the heading bug. Later the candidate was proved right, but it was too late; his confidence was shattered and it cost him another year in the RHS.
Fortunately, there are not many of these poison dwarfs left in the airlines, and attrition will see them gone soon. We can only hope that they don't seek a second career as simulator instructors, though if they did go to work for the likes of Flight Safety they would have to learn to be customer-oriented PDQ.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 22nd Apr 2013 at 00:39.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blue Shirt (Ansett) Mafia
What exactly is a "non-blue shirt new broom" ?
They form one of the powerful Jetstar cultural 'tribes' that is often at odds with the former-Impulse 'tribe'.
Industrial agendas, nepotism, cronyism, grudges and a lack of fair play is often involved. The behaviour runs from petty to shrewd and is what most Aussies would label "unAustralian".
PG
Interesting to read that demonstration is being regulated out. Here in the sandpit that is definately not the case-and we Instructors are encouraged to change seats for a demo if we think it will facilitate learning. Then I guess thats the crux of the matter isn't it-learning/training vs Checking. Unfortunately I did find the Big C Little T is prevelant (with a few notable exceptions) within the ex AN guys, but you don't really realise how much better it can be done until you experience real training yourself.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check and training pilots should never expect a candidate to perform an exercise they can't demonstrate to the required standard if called upon to
Some checkers and trainers would be reluctant to attempt to demonstrate a manoeuvre for fear of making fools of themselves
Originally Posted by Popgun
Blue Shirt = negative-toned colloquialism within Jetstar given to the Checkers, Trainers, mid-level and Senior Managers that are part of the former-Ansett clique.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is proving very popular indicating there are issues across the industry. If you haven't taken an interest in the senate thread yet it is worth a look.
It may even still be worth putting an eleventh hour submission in. But, the report is due on the 30th April.
It may even still be worth putting an eleventh hour submission in. But, the report is due on the 30th April.
Ditto, checkies should never ask a question unless they know the answer and can produce it without resorting to notes. Otherwise, candidates will not respect them.
I learnt a great deal from some outstanding trainers who had the incredible skill of holding a conversation that expanded my knowledge, offered practical advice and generally added to my confidence by not highlighting my lack of knowledge but allowing me to show what I could add to the discussion.
As a trainer myself, I always tried to use the same "discuss rather than question" technique and this would often produce situations where neither myself nor the trainee knew the answer to an aspect of the conversation. This would lead to me asking a question that neither of us knew the answer to and the trainee knew it. "Buggered if I know but I reckon I know where to find it" was often the response from me! It also levelled the gradient (yeah weasel words I know) between us both and also encouraged the trainee to question themselves (and me) without feeling they were demonstrating their lack of knowledge and jeopardising a successful outcome to their training.
......And any trainer that doesn't believe he can learn from a trainee is missing a significant opportunity to expand their knowledge.