PPRuNe Forums - Safety Culture?

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)

- - Safety Culture? (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/644079-safety-culture.html)

P377 that is an eye opener, what an appalling situation. I've witnessed operational standards being diminished and was primarily at the behest of one individual who had the authority to do so. All appropriately accounted for in the manuals of course but a still diminishment on the previous standards and the regulator will never pick up that nor would be there be any challenge as to how it came to about. It would be a good education for the public to know the real calibre of the aviation industry.

Two words to describe our industry: Morton Thiokol. Everything is fine until the tragedy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay (Post 11153482)

Two words to describe our industry: Morton Thiokol. Everything is fine until the tragedy.

That is a short, but very accurate description. 10/10. For the unsuspecting shuttle crew the holes in the cheeses lined up on that fateful day. Our industry has plenty of holes in its cheese also.

I’ve always liked this video! It’s insight regarding not just ‘group think’ but organisational culture is as relevant today as it was nearly 36 years ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Noeyedear (Post 11152463)

And there-in lies the problem.

Every time you make a "safe" decision (delay, divert, cancel, carry more fuel, deny boarding etc), the only measurable outcome is actually negative! You've cost the company money, bad PR, delayed flights with knock-on effects and so on. You can't prove that there would have been an accident, incident or negative outcome if you had persisted with Plan A, whatever it was. And, because of that , the company is naturally going to ask you why you chose your course of action, which is fair enough, but its the way they ask and how they manage the process that will determine what sort of organisation they are and will determine whether others will feel safe making safe decisions (irony).

So, again, its the Management that will directly affect whether you will have a reporting culture, and therefore, what type of safety culture you will have.

In my experience, such a culture in smaller companies is rare, but there are definitely some Corporate Flight Departments out there trying (they can afford to), as well as many of the major Flag carrier airlines. The other place you can see the theory in action is the company's that hold "special mission" contracts, where they're more likely to lose the contract by taking risks than if they were to down tools or or execute Plan B.

This is a very accurate description of how we see our jobs, and how we are perceived by management. That is why it will always be “affordable safety”.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gordonfvckingramsay (Post 11153482)

Two words to describe our industry: Morton Thiokol. Everything is fine until the tragedy.

I left out the fact that Astronauts sign up for and accept the risks, fare paying passengers don’t. Indeed, they are sold, pay for and sign up for a level
of safety that probably doesn’t actually exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paragraph377 (Post 11153401)

I recall a particularly very angry ex-chief pilot(he was always yelling, screaming and barking at the moon) who was the ex-chief pilot of a current Australian LCC and he previously worked for Qantas main competitor before they went bust in 2001. He would make Captains call him if they performed a go-around. He would demand details, berate the crew over the cost of the additional fuel burn and the flow-on delay to the next sector. Safety was never discussed, the bottom dollar was the only important consideration. Crews were scared to phone him. Unless the go-around was due to an another aircraft still on the runway you got blasted for being incompetent and blowing company money on a procedure detrimental to the airlines finances. No star jumps from him! As said earlier, most airlines are happy to preach about safety if they can see no added costs involved. A very immature and naive thought pattern. Throw money into the mix and suddenly this ‘safety first’ bull**** takes a back seat.

I find the trick with theses people is to really not care. Follow the rules, do your best to make Sure everyone gets home safely but, don't care about the company, the fuel, don't care about your image or how management perceive you, don't care how many go arounds you do, use full reverse, plenty Of TOGA take offs, don't ever rush anything (who cares if you are late and 99% chance it's not your fault) and just smile and nod when they yell and get angry. Don't read the propaganda e-mails or do their stupid surveys. Sleep soundly at night knowing you got paid. Do however try your best to avoid punching them in the face or telling them to F*** off, that's what they want. They hate people that don't care. Then they can't get to you.

OOOPPPSSSS....... TKS Roj,

Shoot me ! I'm goin' Senile....I completely overlooked 'Affordable Safety' .........(The 'Other' mantra..)..

How 'silly' of moi...
TKS !!

Eventually safety culture and management KPI’s and bonuses have a head on. I’m yet to work for, or hear of a company where KPI bonuses have lost.

Quote:

The existence of a Safety culture and a Just culture, will depend on the Organisational culture.

Some people in safety management don't subscribe to the concept of a separate safety culture. A beneficial safety environment in inextricably entwined with the culture of the company. If the company culture is poor, a good safety culture is near impossible. I worked at an airline which had an efficient safety system that was doing some good, but with a toxic company culture. Most pilots could not separate the two, so the safety system was doomed to fail. And it didn't help that the management couldn't leave the safety department alone to do their work as described by the SMS policy. This led to the deliberate sabotage of the safety department by management. The company culture has to embrace safety.

Unfortunately CI, they can get to you especially in smaller organisations. I've witnessed it, good people being "retrenched" simply because they wouldn't kotow to a vile, disgusting and abusive "accountable manager" over very fabricated issues. That is the one significant reason to support a seniority system it provides protection and it is the reason why management want to strip it out of industrial agreements.

Safety and the way it’s applied in the real world in any industry is an alibi at best. Like the alibi used by the Sharon Stone character in Basic instinct where she had previously written about a murder that was subsequently committed in exactly the same way.

You’re covered if you make a public song and dance about the details or circumstances of your crime in advance and then it subsequently happens; you maintain a very high level of deniability. Couple that with a distinct lack of prior accidents and you’re pretty much free to claim you have a robust, worlds best practice safety system even if you don’t.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sumtingwong (Post 11154013)

Eventually safety culture and management KPI’s and bonuses have a head on. I’m yet to work for, or hear of a company where KPI bonuses have lost.

Trick is to link management KPIs to safety culture, the concept relies on being top-down driven.