Korean Pilots in Jail
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mid Atlantic
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-Steve you have my support. Maintain your dignity. You are right in all you've said.
Isn't it beginning to bother you pro-pilots reading this that the use of excessive and illegal sanctions against aircrew seems to be the latest management tactic, not just in Korea, but in CX and even in Europe at FR!
I would not for one instant compare the jailing of pilots in Korea with the illegal sackings, but the motivation is the same...to intimidate and break union resistance to management steam-roller tactics.
If this is allowed to pass, God help us all.
Isn't it beginning to bother you pro-pilots reading this that the use of excessive and illegal sanctions against aircrew seems to be the latest management tactic, not just in Korea, but in CX and even in Europe at FR!
I would not for one instant compare the jailing of pilots in Korea with the illegal sackings, but the motivation is the same...to intimidate and break union resistance to management steam-roller tactics.
If this is allowed to pass, God help us all.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With their recent accident record I would not consider flying with or for them, but this is even worse. Spread the word about their fascist practices and terrible safety record!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Aus
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is precisely because of Clown's comments that I write.
For Jailed, you have the right to do whatever you want with your own airline, and if you feel it necessary to take industrial action, that must be your decision. I base my comment about the strike being illegal on what I read in the local papers, and from conversations with friends who work for KAL. I did not see any statement from the union refuting the claim that their participation was illegal. Thus those who did take part knowingly risked jail or whatever punishment would be imposed. Of course it should not have reached that point and industrial action should not result in jail, but you are dealing with a government that does not have much sympathy for unionists.
The Korean pilots do, according to what I have been told, and from what I have seen, resent the employment of foreign pilots, and have been doing their best to have them dissmissed. The strike was settled, according to the media, after the company agreed to reduce the number of foreign pilots by around 30%. There was no pay rise, even though one had been offered. Does this not speak for itself?
I am not asking for pilot support for the foreign pilots employed by KAL (they would not want it, if my colleagues working there can be believed), but when you go out to support the KAL pilots, don't forget that there are two groups involved, one of which has no voice.
I am not a management pilot, nor do I have any affiliation with KAL, but I can see much merit in what the company is trying to do, and, frankly, not much at all in what the pilots are doing.
For Jailed, you have the right to do whatever you want with your own airline, and if you feel it necessary to take industrial action, that must be your decision. I base my comment about the strike being illegal on what I read in the local papers, and from conversations with friends who work for KAL. I did not see any statement from the union refuting the claim that their participation was illegal. Thus those who did take part knowingly risked jail or whatever punishment would be imposed. Of course it should not have reached that point and industrial action should not result in jail, but you are dealing with a government that does not have much sympathy for unionists.
The Korean pilots do, according to what I have been told, and from what I have seen, resent the employment of foreign pilots, and have been doing their best to have them dissmissed. The strike was settled, according to the media, after the company agreed to reduce the number of foreign pilots by around 30%. There was no pay rise, even though one had been offered. Does this not speak for itself?
I am not asking for pilot support for the foreign pilots employed by KAL (they would not want it, if my colleagues working there can be believed), but when you go out to support the KAL pilots, don't forget that there are two groups involved, one of which has no voice.
I am not a management pilot, nor do I have any affiliation with KAL, but I can see much merit in what the company is trying to do, and, frankly, not much at all in what the pilots are doing.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lizard Drinking.
The resentment of which you speak, is more a resentment of the percieved disparity between the conditons of the two groups, rather than a resentment of the pilots themselves.
As with any diverse group there are a few xenophobes in both camps, but they are very much in the minority.
GG
The resentment of which you speak, is more a resentment of the percieved disparity between the conditons of the two groups, rather than a resentment of the pilots themselves.
As with any diverse group there are a few xenophobes in both camps, but they are very much in the minority.
GG
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seoul, Korea
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Lizzard Drinking:
I bear no personal animosity to you.
I had hoped for arguments along industrial lines on these pages, regarding the way that KAL management had treated the pilots and their union, but matters never being so cut and dried, I recognize that one can become embroiled along issues which the unions call whipsawing, the pitting of one employee group against another. We would at all cost want to stay away from this trap.
As to the important issue of improving safety, like all professional trade unions, it was and is the stated objective of KAL Flight Crew Union, from its inception to contribute to KAL's operational safety through our involvement at the appropriate level in management.
Now then, allow me to reply to your comments:
You said,
"I did not see any statement from the union refuting the claim that their participation was illegal."
If indeed we are not refuting the CLAIM of illegal strike, by the Prosecutor in this case, why then the on-going trial, the third session scheduled for 27 August? The last Korean Supreme Court precedent of June 26 ruled on the legality of Hyundai Motors Services Union going against the Korean National Labor Relations Commission's administrative directive after the cool-off period had expired back in 1998, to uphold the union, and is considered a landmark case in Korea. It is the judiciary which must decide the constitutionality of interpretation on the labor statutes by the tripartite quasi-judicial organization of the executive branch, and the burden is entirely on the Prosecutor to prove these criminal charges as an illegal strike.
You said,
"The Korean pilots do... resent the employment of foreign pilots, and have been doing their best to have them dismissed."
I would simply thank Grange Guzzler in echoing his sentiments above, that it is more "a resentment of the perceived disparity between the conditions of the two groups, rather than a resentment of the pilots themselves." Let's not go there.
You said,
"The strike was settled... after the company agreed to reduce the number of foreign pilots by around 30%."
The agreement reads, freeze hiring by the end of 2001, to gradually reduce by 25 to 30% by the end of 2007. That comes out to 5% per year. Sounds more like natural attrition. And if management saw fit to concede this point, may I ask your motive in judging the outcome by the most directly related parties, if indeed you are not affiliated with KAL? Why the sour grapes?
Then you said,
"There was no pay rise, even though one had been offered. Does this not speak for itself?"
Were you there at the table, as I was, as a negotiator? The last response from management after we had foregone the remaining $24 million in stipends from the original $40 million opener, at 2AM on the morning of the strike, after we had extended the strike for 6 hours in hopes of getting a pulse out of management, was no one returning to the table to respond, until 5:30AM, when we walked out. The story you heard about management coming back with a counteroffer would dismantle their court strategy of claiming inability to proceed with negotiations for lack of agreement to limit the agenda to strictly pay issues.
Regarding safety issues, you said,
"I can see much merit in what the company is trying to do, and, frankly, not much at all in what the pilots are doing."
I have not praised KAL's efforts for safety improvements, nor have I discredited them here in this regard. But you have certainly attacked our union's intentions and efforts as being meritless. I think that you are not qualified to speak to others of our intentions.
Going back to your first letter, you said,
"In response to pressures from the Korean Govt and US/Canada/UK CAAs, the company has taken much of the control away from the Korean pilots and tasked foreigners to run or advise on the running of Operations and training..."
Today's decision by the FAA to downgrade Korea for KCAB's lack of oversight authority of KAL and Asiana would partially dispute your perspective on the issues. While they ran all these nice programs, they should have also engaged the representative union on property at face value. That has been our outcry since the beginning. As you would know very well, the first step in the implementation of any Safety Program is to identify the major stakeholders, and to involve their participation from the start. We have been ostracized from the start because of our affiliation with the KCTU.
And the last point, you said,
"Control of the airline is the real aim of the pilots. When they had it, there were more accidents and incidents, but that was an acceptable price to pay, in their opinion. Losing that control was the real bone of contention, and the locals will do anything they can to get that control back. Anything."
It has to do with our identity as a labor union, and I think you are completely confused about who we are, maybe because you only see life as expats or locals. (Now, I will admit that since starting union work, I tend to see delineation along management/labor, but not ethnicity.) When did the pilots ever have control of the airline?? The old cronies you are thinking of, were simply extensions of management, and I don't even consider them as one of the pilots. None of them have joined our union, by their own decision. Now I do agree with you a 100% that they really screwed up flight operations, complete with their xenophobic attitudes about expats. I wish I could say that these middle level managers are all gone, but they are still very much entrenched, trying to exercise what little despotic control over the vast majority of unionized pilots. Still, I think it is unfair to say "their opinion" is that accidents were an acceptable price to pay for maintaining control.
I bear no personal animosity to you.
I had hoped for arguments along industrial lines on these pages, regarding the way that KAL management had treated the pilots and their union, but matters never being so cut and dried, I recognize that one can become embroiled along issues which the unions call whipsawing, the pitting of one employee group against another. We would at all cost want to stay away from this trap.
As to the important issue of improving safety, like all professional trade unions, it was and is the stated objective of KAL Flight Crew Union, from its inception to contribute to KAL's operational safety through our involvement at the appropriate level in management.
Now then, allow me to reply to your comments:
You said,
"I did not see any statement from the union refuting the claim that their participation was illegal."
If indeed we are not refuting the CLAIM of illegal strike, by the Prosecutor in this case, why then the on-going trial, the third session scheduled for 27 August? The last Korean Supreme Court precedent of June 26 ruled on the legality of Hyundai Motors Services Union going against the Korean National Labor Relations Commission's administrative directive after the cool-off period had expired back in 1998, to uphold the union, and is considered a landmark case in Korea. It is the judiciary which must decide the constitutionality of interpretation on the labor statutes by the tripartite quasi-judicial organization of the executive branch, and the burden is entirely on the Prosecutor to prove these criminal charges as an illegal strike.
You said,
"The Korean pilots do... resent the employment of foreign pilots, and have been doing their best to have them dismissed."
I would simply thank Grange Guzzler in echoing his sentiments above, that it is more "a resentment of the perceived disparity between the conditions of the two groups, rather than a resentment of the pilots themselves." Let's not go there.
You said,
"The strike was settled... after the company agreed to reduce the number of foreign pilots by around 30%."
The agreement reads, freeze hiring by the end of 2001, to gradually reduce by 25 to 30% by the end of 2007. That comes out to 5% per year. Sounds more like natural attrition. And if management saw fit to concede this point, may I ask your motive in judging the outcome by the most directly related parties, if indeed you are not affiliated with KAL? Why the sour grapes?
Then you said,
"There was no pay rise, even though one had been offered. Does this not speak for itself?"
Were you there at the table, as I was, as a negotiator? The last response from management after we had foregone the remaining $24 million in stipends from the original $40 million opener, at 2AM on the morning of the strike, after we had extended the strike for 6 hours in hopes of getting a pulse out of management, was no one returning to the table to respond, until 5:30AM, when we walked out. The story you heard about management coming back with a counteroffer would dismantle their court strategy of claiming inability to proceed with negotiations for lack of agreement to limit the agenda to strictly pay issues.
Regarding safety issues, you said,
"I can see much merit in what the company is trying to do, and, frankly, not much at all in what the pilots are doing."
I have not praised KAL's efforts for safety improvements, nor have I discredited them here in this regard. But you have certainly attacked our union's intentions and efforts as being meritless. I think that you are not qualified to speak to others of our intentions.
Going back to your first letter, you said,
"In response to pressures from the Korean Govt and US/Canada/UK CAAs, the company has taken much of the control away from the Korean pilots and tasked foreigners to run or advise on the running of Operations and training..."
Today's decision by the FAA to downgrade Korea for KCAB's lack of oversight authority of KAL and Asiana would partially dispute your perspective on the issues. While they ran all these nice programs, they should have also engaged the representative union on property at face value. That has been our outcry since the beginning. As you would know very well, the first step in the implementation of any Safety Program is to identify the major stakeholders, and to involve their participation from the start. We have been ostracized from the start because of our affiliation with the KCTU.
And the last point, you said,
"Control of the airline is the real aim of the pilots. When they had it, there were more accidents and incidents, but that was an acceptable price to pay, in their opinion. Losing that control was the real bone of contention, and the locals will do anything they can to get that control back. Anything."
It has to do with our identity as a labor union, and I think you are completely confused about who we are, maybe because you only see life as expats or locals. (Now, I will admit that since starting union work, I tend to see delineation along management/labor, but not ethnicity.) When did the pilots ever have control of the airline?? The old cronies you are thinking of, were simply extensions of management, and I don't even consider them as one of the pilots. None of them have joined our union, by their own decision. Now I do agree with you a 100% that they really screwed up flight operations, complete with their xenophobic attitudes about expats. I wish I could say that these middle level managers are all gone, but they are still very much entrenched, trying to exercise what little despotic control over the vast majority of unionized pilots. Still, I think it is unfair to say "their opinion" is that accidents were an acceptable price to pay for maintaining control.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mid Atlantic
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lizard Drinking
I work as a pilot in a unionised airline in Europe.
It is our unions policy that we do not accept contract pilots unless there has been full consultation and agreement with our union reps.
The reason is nothing to do with dislike for expats.
Contract pilots are generally hired on a short term basis. They can be used by management to undermine a union. Any professional pilots association in a reputable airline with fixed contracts of permanent tenure and seniority system will always strive to have a fully permanent labour force...for the sake of the pilots in question as well as the union as a whole.
The figure of 30% contract pilots in Korean is shocking, and is far beyond anything our union would tolerate. So is 25%.
I sympathise with you if you've fallen foul of this philosophy, but it's a fact of life, and nothing personal.
As to safety. The safest airlineis one with a motivated and happy workforce.
I work as a pilot in a unionised airline in Europe.
It is our unions policy that we do not accept contract pilots unless there has been full consultation and agreement with our union reps.
The reason is nothing to do with dislike for expats.
Contract pilots are generally hired on a short term basis. They can be used by management to undermine a union. Any professional pilots association in a reputable airline with fixed contracts of permanent tenure and seniority system will always strive to have a fully permanent labour force...for the sake of the pilots in question as well as the union as a whole.
The figure of 30% contract pilots in Korean is shocking, and is far beyond anything our union would tolerate. So is 25%.
I sympathise with you if you've fallen foul of this philosophy, but it's a fact of life, and nothing personal.
As to safety. The safest airlineis one with a motivated and happy workforce.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Idunno
You have the wrong end of the stick. The figures of 25% and 30% you speak of, are not "of the total workforce.
The agreement is that numbers be capped as of 31 Dec 2001. That number (of foreign pilots) must then be reduced by 25-30% of THAT number by 31 Dec 2005. This is NOT 25 or 30 % OF THE TOTAL WORKFORCE.
GG
[ 17 August 2001: Message edited by: Grange Guzzler ]
You have the wrong end of the stick. The figures of 25% and 30% you speak of, are not "of the total workforce.
The agreement is that numbers be capped as of 31 Dec 2001. That number (of foreign pilots) must then be reduced by 25-30% of THAT number by 31 Dec 2005. This is NOT 25 or 30 % OF THE TOTAL WORKFORCE.
GG
[ 17 August 2001: Message edited by: Grange Guzzler ]
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Aus
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Jailed. Appreciate your views.
I guess we see things differently, since the fact that you are/were in jail shows that at that time the strike was illegal. I hope you get that decision reversed, and that you win your battles with KAL.
Question: What benefit would there be to you if the company was to be destroyed, or forced to shrink? And while answering that, can you, since you come across here as a reasonable and intelligent man, explain why the foreign pilots are so feared/hated/resented? And if you succeed in reducing the number to 70% of the Dec2001 number, what benefit will that be to you/KAL/Korea?
I have not seen a reference to the FAA action against the Korean CAA, but I assume you are stating that they have reduced Korea to Category 2? If true, how is that the fault of Korean Airlines management? Do you think that is a positive step?
Looking forward to your reply.
I guess we see things differently, since the fact that you are/were in jail shows that at that time the strike was illegal. I hope you get that decision reversed, and that you win your battles with KAL.
Question: What benefit would there be to you if the company was to be destroyed, or forced to shrink? And while answering that, can you, since you come across here as a reasonable and intelligent man, explain why the foreign pilots are so feared/hated/resented? And if you succeed in reducing the number to 70% of the Dec2001 number, what benefit will that be to you/KAL/Korea?
I have not seen a reference to the FAA action against the Korean CAA, but I assume you are stating that they have reduced Korea to Category 2? If true, how is that the fault of Korean Airlines management? Do you think that is a positive step?
Looking forward to your reply.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: US
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears to me that many well meaning folks are utterly naive about culture in the "hermit kingdom."
Before you wax sympathetic with platitudes...have you ever done business in Korea? Really dealt with Koreans? If not, then you aren't qualified to offer ethical viewpoints based on a foreign culture that is one of the most notoriously unethical in the world.
Let the Koreans solve their own problems. They eat each other like sharks...but they'd eat all of YOU without giving it a thought.
Before you wax sympathetic with platitudes...have you ever done business in Korea? Really dealt with Koreans? If not, then you aren't qualified to offer ethical viewpoints based on a foreign culture that is one of the most notoriously unethical in the world.
Let the Koreans solve their own problems. They eat each other like sharks...but they'd eat all of YOU without giving it a thought.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Irrespective of industrial confrontation, or whether expats should or shouldn't be on the property, the larger issue is flight safety.
The hardest part in changing KAL's cockpit culture is to unlearn the old ways of doing things. The quasi military hierarchy has to be dismantled in a tough in house "re-education" center. Disciplined cockpit procedures and crew coordination must be taught and practiced over and over in the Sim; performance must be videotaped and played back during critique. Strict standardization techniques must be enforced in the Sim and on the line. 300 hours operating experience under the supervision of a check airman. Captains cannot be allowed to individualize procedures; First Officers and Second Officers must be taught and encouraged to be assertive.
Only tough discipline and hard work will break the oldtimers out of the mold.
The hardest part in changing KAL's cockpit culture is to unlearn the old ways of doing things. The quasi military hierarchy has to be dismantled in a tough in house "re-education" center. Disciplined cockpit procedures and crew coordination must be taught and practiced over and over in the Sim; performance must be videotaped and played back during critique. Strict standardization techniques must be enforced in the Sim and on the line. 300 hours operating experience under the supervision of a check airman. Captains cannot be allowed to individualize procedures; First Officers and Second Officers must be taught and encouraged to be assertive.
Only tough discipline and hard work will break the oldtimers out of the mold.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glue Ball
How is it you know so much about what is required in KAL. It is obvious from your post you have never set foot inside the place. KAL does not have S/O's.
Your post is based on assumptions and in reality you have no idea of the procedures that have already been put in place. Please don't try to sound authoritative when shooting in the dark.
There are problems there and they are being worked on by a lot of dedicated people Korean and foreigner alike. Leave it to those in the know.
GG
How is it you know so much about what is required in KAL. It is obvious from your post you have never set foot inside the place. KAL does not have S/O's.
Your post is based on assumptions and in reality you have no idea of the procedures that have already been put in place. Please don't try to sound authoritative when shooting in the dark.
There are problems there and they are being worked on by a lot of dedicated people Korean and foreigner alike. Leave it to those in the know.
GG
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KAL's accident reports are in the public domain. Upon reading them any average reasonable person can deduct that KAL is suffering from a severe breakdown of crew discipline in the cockpit.
22 Dec 99 at STN, B74 rolled into 90 deg bank after IMC takeoff. Capt ADI frozen. Insufficient instrument scan.
15 Mar 99 at KPO, MD83 crashed during 2nd unstabilized IMC approach. Rwy Overrun.
15 Apr 99 at SHA, MD11 flown into ground by F/O after IMC takeoff. Insufficient instrument scan.
5 Aug 98 at SEL, B74 crashed during unstabilized IMC approach. Rwy Overrun.
6 Aug 97 at GUM, B74 crashed after premature descent below MDA. Insufficient instrument scan.
10 Aug 94 at CJU, A300 crashed during unstabilized approach. Rwy Overrun.
13 Jun 91 at TAE, B72 gear up landing. Gear horn CB pulled. Checklist negligence.
27 Jul 89 at TIP, D10 flown into ground during IMC approach. Premature descent below MDA. Insufficient instrument scan.
1 Sep 83 off Sakhalin, B74 way off course en route ANC-SEL. Shot down.
20 Apr 78 NW Russia, B70 way off course en route ORY-SEL. Shot down. (Crash landed).
22 Dec 99 at STN, B74 rolled into 90 deg bank after IMC takeoff. Capt ADI frozen. Insufficient instrument scan.
15 Mar 99 at KPO, MD83 crashed during 2nd unstabilized IMC approach. Rwy Overrun.
15 Apr 99 at SHA, MD11 flown into ground by F/O after IMC takeoff. Insufficient instrument scan.
5 Aug 98 at SEL, B74 crashed during unstabilized IMC approach. Rwy Overrun.
6 Aug 97 at GUM, B74 crashed after premature descent below MDA. Insufficient instrument scan.
10 Aug 94 at CJU, A300 crashed during unstabilized approach. Rwy Overrun.
13 Jun 91 at TAE, B72 gear up landing. Gear horn CB pulled. Checklist negligence.
27 Jul 89 at TIP, D10 flown into ground during IMC approach. Premature descent below MDA. Insufficient instrument scan.
1 Sep 83 off Sakhalin, B74 way off course en route ANC-SEL. Shot down.
20 Apr 78 NW Russia, B70 way off course en route ORY-SEL. Shot down. (Crash landed).
Join Date: May 2001
Location: HERE AND THERE
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and more will come, unfortunately.
They are a huge mistake on aviation matters: lack of a reasonable, fair and consistent evaluation system; a quasi military approach to hierarchy and cockpit decision making process, absolutely away from modern CRM, like the fellow above mentioned. The more they got crazy about doing things right, the more they became lost.
Congratulations to FAA, that timely dowgraded them. The better decision would be simply banning them from USA.
Air Traffic Control contributes a lot on this outstandingly dangerous situation: there is a mix of military and civilian traffic from two megairports surrounded by 5 active Air Force Bases, doing flight trainning almost every day, fighters maneuvering at visual range of airliners, at high speeds! All in a specific frequency, different from that of general use, obviously.
Maybe Koreans think that to have money is enough: it would buy the finest machines, build nice airports and even buy expertise and experience.
Their arrogance will kill much more people.
They are a huge mistake on aviation matters: lack of a reasonable, fair and consistent evaluation system; a quasi military approach to hierarchy and cockpit decision making process, absolutely away from modern CRM, like the fellow above mentioned. The more they got crazy about doing things right, the more they became lost.
Congratulations to FAA, that timely dowgraded them. The better decision would be simply banning them from USA.
Air Traffic Control contributes a lot on this outstandingly dangerous situation: there is a mix of military and civilian traffic from two megairports surrounded by 5 active Air Force Bases, doing flight trainning almost every day, fighters maneuvering at visual range of airliners, at high speeds! All in a specific frequency, different from that of general use, obviously.
Maybe Koreans think that to have money is enough: it would buy the finest machines, build nice airports and even buy expertise and experience.
Their arrogance will kill much more people.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glue Ball
I was not suggesting there were no problems. As you point out its all a matter of public record, and its horrible.
What intrigues me is how you can be so authorative on the basis of reports read, of accidents, some of which are about 20 years old, and with an obvious lack of knowledge of what is presently occuring internally. For you to make comments about the Korean nature, attitude and culture, without firsthand knowledge, is arogance in the extreme.
Rest assured, there are a lot of very able and dedicated people working overtime to rectify the ills of the past.
KAL's maintenance is top level. It is very rare to take an aircraft away from home base with anything in the book. MEL's are rarely used, they fix the sucker.
The FOQA program is probably as comprehensive as any in the world. All exceedences get a good going over with a full analysis and rectification action where necessary.
The simulator training has all been taken over by Flight Safety Boeing, with their guys also doing the sim checks.
All crews have undergone additional sim training, particularily in risk management, over the past couple of years.
An extensive English Language program is in place, with English level 5 a requirement for promotion.
These and many other programs are in the mill and have been for some time. Considerable progress has occured and improvements are continuing. But its a long slow process.
Full Forward. The FAA downgrading, is of the KMOCT (Korean Ministry of Transport and Construction) the CAA/FAA equivalent. It is not a downgrading of either KAL or Asiana. However the penalties of that downgrading will be worn by those airlines.
GG
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: Grange Guzzler ]
I was not suggesting there were no problems. As you point out its all a matter of public record, and its horrible.
What intrigues me is how you can be so authorative on the basis of reports read, of accidents, some of which are about 20 years old, and with an obvious lack of knowledge of what is presently occuring internally. For you to make comments about the Korean nature, attitude and culture, without firsthand knowledge, is arogance in the extreme.
Rest assured, there are a lot of very able and dedicated people working overtime to rectify the ills of the past.
KAL's maintenance is top level. It is very rare to take an aircraft away from home base with anything in the book. MEL's are rarely used, they fix the sucker.
The FOQA program is probably as comprehensive as any in the world. All exceedences get a good going over with a full analysis and rectification action where necessary.
The simulator training has all been taken over by Flight Safety Boeing, with their guys also doing the sim checks.
All crews have undergone additional sim training, particularily in risk management, over the past couple of years.
An extensive English Language program is in place, with English level 5 a requirement for promotion.
These and many other programs are in the mill and have been for some time. Considerable progress has occured and improvements are continuing. But its a long slow process.
Full Forward. The FAA downgrading, is of the KMOCT (Korean Ministry of Transport and Construction) the CAA/FAA equivalent. It is not a downgrading of either KAL or Asiana. However the penalties of that downgrading will be worn by those airlines.
GG
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: Grange Guzzler ]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: HERE AND THERE
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GG
That is true, but the comments are largely deserved by the airlines themselves.
KAL has been making serious efforts, Asiana situation is worse.
But still there are excessive military approach to civil aviation in Korea, wich is largely inappropriate and this influence is spread over all aspects.
That is true, but the comments are largely deserved by the airlines themselves.
KAL has been making serious efforts, Asiana situation is worse.
But still there are excessive military approach to civil aviation in Korea, wich is largely inappropriate and this influence is spread over all aspects.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/2000/AAR0001.pdf
"KAL's training in the execution of non precision approaches is ineffective....
"There are underlying systemic problems with KAL's operations and pilot training programs.
"The Korean CAB is ineffective in its oversight of KAL's operations and pilot training program....
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: GlueBall ]
"KAL's training in the execution of non precision approaches is ineffective....
"There are underlying systemic problems with KAL's operations and pilot training programs.
"The Korean CAB is ineffective in its oversight of KAL's operations and pilot training program....
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: GlueBall ]
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Formerly in Seoul
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NTSB report on the KAL Guam accident cannot be disputed, however many changes, as detailed by Grange Guzzler, have taken place in Korean since then. A better operation is the result of these changes. The proof is the reduction in the number of KAL incidents in the last 18 months.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear lizard drinking
As you rightly pointed out, the reason for your strike was to:
"... get the agreement to get rid of the foreign pilots..." (Quoting from your post).
Yes you have a right to assert your career aspirations, Yes you have a right to fill those jobs being held down by ex-pats.
Couldn't agree more. That is, provided you are at least as capable and as competent as those you resent being there.
Now, let us reflect upon reality in Korea. Direct entry captains ex-military with ZERO hours heavy airraft experience.
Bypass of co-pilots by ex military pilots with less experience.
Promotion based upon politics as opposed ability.
A higher kill rate that any air force or military can ever admit to.(In Civil Aviation, that is!!!!)
More hull losses per year, and deaths than any other country, OR INDEED, the rest of the World put together!
Some claim to fame.
I resent your attitide, it does little for you or your country. However, Jailed KAL Pilot has my admiration. Whatever his background, he has admiration, respect, and support.
And
Grange Guzzler,
whatever you have to say about how things have changed is largely as a result of the threatened ban on their operations into the US. Subsequent to that, Delta conducted an audit that was; to say the least, frightening to say the least.
Korea is in a time and culture Warp that it badly does not need.
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: tonyryan ]
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: tonyryan ]
As you rightly pointed out, the reason for your strike was to:
"... get the agreement to get rid of the foreign pilots..." (Quoting from your post).
Yes you have a right to assert your career aspirations, Yes you have a right to fill those jobs being held down by ex-pats.
Couldn't agree more. That is, provided you are at least as capable and as competent as those you resent being there.
Now, let us reflect upon reality in Korea. Direct entry captains ex-military with ZERO hours heavy airraft experience.
Bypass of co-pilots by ex military pilots with less experience.
Promotion based upon politics as opposed ability.
A higher kill rate that any air force or military can ever admit to.(In Civil Aviation, that is!!!!)
More hull losses per year, and deaths than any other country, OR INDEED, the rest of the World put together!
Some claim to fame.
I resent your attitide, it does little for you or your country. However, Jailed KAL Pilot has my admiration. Whatever his background, he has admiration, respect, and support.
And
Grange Guzzler,
whatever you have to say about how things have changed is largely as a result of the threatened ban on their operations into the US. Subsequent to that, Delta conducted an audit that was; to say the least, frightening to say the least.
Korea is in a time and culture Warp that it badly does not need.
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: tonyryan ]
[ 19 August 2001: Message edited by: tonyryan ]