Stroppy First Officers - CRM issue
Talking about Stroppy First Officers, what about Stroppy Second Officers?
I was an F/O on the B747-400 and had about 6,000 hours on that machine alone and I flew this very nice approach into LHR years ago and the Second Officer attempted to debrief me on the preceedings. I nearly fell out of the seat as did the Captain.
When I recovered I pointed out that if any debriefing was to be done it would be by the Captain and not by the S/O.
Great snapping sea serpents, my ATPL was at least five years older than this twerp.
I haven't see him since so I don't know what he's like these days.
Takes all types I suppose.
I was an F/O on the B747-400 and had about 6,000 hours on that machine alone and I flew this very nice approach into LHR years ago and the Second Officer attempted to debrief me on the preceedings. I nearly fell out of the seat as did the Captain.
When I recovered I pointed out that if any debriefing was to be done it would be by the Captain and not by the S/O.
Great snapping sea serpents, my ATPL was at least five years older than this twerp.
I haven't see him since so I don't know what he's like these days.
Takes all types I suppose.
But did he have a point?
The particular Captain made no comment about my flying but agreed with me telling the Second Officer to pull his head in.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sand Pit for now.....
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day,
What BH wrote about his SO was "SO AWSOME"... I am amazed how you didn't tell him off rite away. Anyways, just a few weeks ago, I was operating as safety FO, the occupant of the RH seat was a DEFO doing his first sector of line training, while the CN had been an Instructor for about 8 months.
The Trainee FO was PF, and asked the CN to do the B4 start, after the subsequent Cxlist completion by CN, this trainee said: "It wasn't done that way in my previous outfit, and their Cxlist works better than it is here, you know, paying attention to this small little
(yes he said on his first line training sector) what made my previous outfit considered me to become commander"
....... we pushed back like 7 minutes late, coz the CN decided that I should replace him in the RH, and that sector became another observation flight for this poor guy.....
What BH wrote about his SO was "SO AWSOME"... I am amazed how you didn't tell him off rite away. Anyways, just a few weeks ago, I was operating as safety FO, the occupant of the RH seat was a DEFO doing his first sector of line training, while the CN had been an Instructor for about 8 months.
The Trainee FO was PF, and asked the CN to do the B4 start, after the subsequent Cxlist completion by CN, this trainee said: "It wasn't done that way in my previous outfit, and their Cxlist works better than it is here, you know, paying attention to this small little
(yes he said on his first line training sector) what made my previous outfit considered me to become commander"....... we pushed back like 7 minutes late, coz the CN decided that I should replace him in the RH, and that sector became another observation flight for this poor guy.....
Talking about Stroppy First Officers, what about Stroppy Second Officers?
I was an F/O on the B747-400 and had about 6,000 hours on that machine alone and I flew this very nice approach into LHR years ago and the Second Officer attempted to debrief me on the preceedings. I nearly fell out of the seat as did the Captain.
When I recovered I pointed out that if any debriefing was to be done it would be by the Captain and not by the S/O.
Great snapping sea serpents, my ATPL was at least five years older than this twerp.
I was an F/O on the B747-400 and had about 6,000 hours on that machine alone and I flew this very nice approach into LHR years ago and the Second Officer attempted to debrief me on the preceedings. I nearly fell out of the seat as did the Captain.
When I recovered I pointed out that if any debriefing was to be done it would be by the Captain and not by the S/O.
Great snapping sea serpents, my ATPL was at least five years older than this twerp.
I don't care where the input is coming from. If it is valid, it is important to me to listen.
I don't care where the input is coming from. If it is valid,
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: 5530N
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a cordial relationship with my F/O's. Those that dont play ball and are out of line.........well put it like this, they know who's daddy when the day's done. This rarely rarely happens and I find my f/o's top notch, willing to learn and those coming up for command like hoovers dragging info from you. In all facets of the airline game you'll get the odd one that will pull against you, is rude to ccm's and demanding, walks through doors ahead of you and doesnt hold door....basically disrespectful.....not on my watch.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going back to the original post, there is no question this FO's attitude is lacking. By putting up with it you just encourage this bully.
Most of the time a word to the wise is sufficient. This guy knows exacty what he is doing.
Reading the riot act is not necessary. You should always be polite and respectful, as though you had an audience, and not say anything you could regret later. A quiet word before the flight and avoid any conflict on the flight deck is preferable.
These guys know the game. They know you are the one ultimately responsible for the flight. No you don't have to be buddies, but there should be an "open, friendly and relaxed" atmosphere on the flight deck.
I don't think a stroppy FO (or stroppy captain for that matter) should be so easily wiped off as a "personality conflict" as it lets the individual off too lightly.
You need to politely illuminate the error of this guy's ways, or you are being neglectful of your own duties.
CRM includes keeping the lines of communication open, but always with respect.
If the going got tough, can you rely on this guy to back you up to the best of his abilities? If he can't see sense, offload him and find one of the majority FOs who are professional.
Most of the time a word to the wise is sufficient. This guy knows exacty what he is doing.
Reading the riot act is not necessary. You should always be polite and respectful, as though you had an audience, and not say anything you could regret later. A quiet word before the flight and avoid any conflict on the flight deck is preferable.
These guys know the game. They know you are the one ultimately responsible for the flight. No you don't have to be buddies, but there should be an "open, friendly and relaxed" atmosphere on the flight deck.
I don't think a stroppy FO (or stroppy captain for that matter) should be so easily wiped off as a "personality conflict" as it lets the individual off too lightly.
You need to politely illuminate the error of this guy's ways, or you are being neglectful of your own duties.
CRM includes keeping the lines of communication open, but always with respect.
If the going got tough, can you rely on this guy to back you up to the best of his abilities? If he can't see sense, offload him and find one of the majority FOs who are professional.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: FL410
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Captain?
Hypothetical situation:
Low houred FO on a medium jet with about 500 hours on type flies with Captain of about 4000 hours. The FO is from an integrated fATPL background and is in his first job. The Captain from a single engine, done-it-the-hard-way background and has only ever flown for this one particular low-cost carrier (I'm not saying either is better!).
The Captain's attitude is that he knows better than the people who write company SOPs and regularly disregards them when PF. The FO has a good knowledge of company SOPs and adheres to them unless there is a very good reason not to. Not only does the Captain disregard SOPs but he expects the FO to do the same and brings up point of debate constantly while the FO is PF during the "sterile cockpit" phases of flight and the cruise. Eg - "why did you wait to set standard til then?", "why are you entering descent wind forecasts in the FMC?", "why are you getting out of your seat to open the FD door? use the switch" etc etc. The answer to his questions are invariably "that's the SOP".
The Captain also has an abrasive personality and likes to do things his own way. He likes to argue the point that he is right, but never concedes that the SOP way might be the correct way. He constantly crosses lines of responsibility (Eg by making AFDS inputs when he is PNF) and has almost no interest in the FO's contribution to the operation. When the FO tries to debate any kind of SOP point in the cruise or on the ground, the Captain's response is bordering on aggressive. The Captain is also constantly rushing to make up time, even when there is no delay. The FO feels constantly pushed and flustered and has never flown with anyone else of such a character. He also feels like his initiative is stifled and despite trying to remain professional and rise above it, after some hours of this he does not feel over inclined to help the Captain out. This is the 2nd time they have flown together and the first day was no different.
My question is this - what would you do if you were the FO in question? Attempts to discuss the points have failed. Would you speak to management? Or just ask rostering not to roster you to fly with him again?
Ok so its not really hypothetical, but nevertheless, I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts....
Low houred FO on a medium jet with about 500 hours on type flies with Captain of about 4000 hours. The FO is from an integrated fATPL background and is in his first job. The Captain from a single engine, done-it-the-hard-way background and has only ever flown for this one particular low-cost carrier (I'm not saying either is better!).
The Captain's attitude is that he knows better than the people who write company SOPs and regularly disregards them when PF. The FO has a good knowledge of company SOPs and adheres to them unless there is a very good reason not to. Not only does the Captain disregard SOPs but he expects the FO to do the same and brings up point of debate constantly while the FO is PF during the "sterile cockpit" phases of flight and the cruise. Eg - "why did you wait to set standard til then?", "why are you entering descent wind forecasts in the FMC?", "why are you getting out of your seat to open the FD door? use the switch" etc etc. The answer to his questions are invariably "that's the SOP".
The Captain also has an abrasive personality and likes to do things his own way. He likes to argue the point that he is right, but never concedes that the SOP way might be the correct way. He constantly crosses lines of responsibility (Eg by making AFDS inputs when he is PNF) and has almost no interest in the FO's contribution to the operation. When the FO tries to debate any kind of SOP point in the cruise or on the ground, the Captain's response is bordering on aggressive. The Captain is also constantly rushing to make up time, even when there is no delay. The FO feels constantly pushed and flustered and has never flown with anyone else of such a character. He also feels like his initiative is stifled and despite trying to remain professional and rise above it, after some hours of this he does not feel over inclined to help the Captain out. This is the 2nd time they have flown together and the first day was no different.
My question is this - what would you do if you were the FO in question? Attempts to discuss the points have failed. Would you speak to management? Or just ask rostering not to roster you to fly with him again?
Ok so its not really hypothetical, but nevertheless, I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts....
Last edited by D O Guerrero; 24th Jun 2009 at 14:07.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Malta
Age: 50
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This guy is going to be a hazzard soon, looks like he thinks he knows everything and does not repect the captains opinion or knowledge. He needs to be put into his place before he causes an accident. People need to work together on the flight deck, if they dont things go wrong.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 908
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am the orchestra(FO), and you are the conductor(Captain)
Everday we play out exactly the same song. Its called the "SOP"
Some like to conduct the song this way, some another. I don,t mind, as long as he sticks to the music who cares. If he wants it rock and roll, cool. I don,t care because we are all different and it makes him happy. As long as it is the same song!
One thing us orchestras should always remember. If things go bad, ultimately they always end up blaming the conductor.
Everday we play out exactly the same song. Its called the "SOP"
Some like to conduct the song this way, some another. I don,t mind, as long as he sticks to the music who cares. If he wants it rock and roll, cool. I don,t care because we are all different and it makes him happy. As long as it is the same song!
One thing us orchestras should always remember. If things go bad, ultimately they always end up blaming the conductor.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have a good working relationship with your rostering department then yes, you can ask them not to roster you with this (very bad and unprofessional) captain, such requests often find their way back to management anyway, certainly if they get more than one request.
Once this chap realises he has been 'fingered' ,from what you say of his attitude, you can expect him to get even more aggressive and defend himself by going for you, declaring you to be incompetent etc. hence his continual badgering of you, so, at this stage, going to management may not be the way ahead but eventually you may have to if rostering can't help.
Once this chap realises he has been 'fingered' ,from what you say of his attitude, you can expect him to get even more aggressive and defend himself by going for you, declaring you to be incompetent etc. hence his continual badgering of you, so, at this stage, going to management may not be the way ahead but eventually you may have to if rostering can't help.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Willie
Sounds like a CRM class gone awry. The last part of PIC is "command'. Not 'consensus'. And it just sounds like a continued erosion of the authority of the PIC. It seems some believe the 4th stripe merely indicates a pay raise.
Good leadership skills usually obviate having to 'command' or 'boss' anyone around but occasionally one has to get the attention of those you are leading or at least working with.
And yes, there are Capts who fail to demonstrate leadership. And there are F/Os who push the envelope.
From the initial post, THIS F/O is creating problems. Unnecessary problems. The guy is a rogue. And he will most likely continue to create problems with increasing consequence until someone exerts their authority and challenges him. Or at least gives him reason to change behavior.
Therefore, my opinion, Captains aren't in a position of 'bossing' anyone around let alone 'commanding', 'ordering' or 'telling' an F/O what to do and what not to do. Those days are gone I'm afraid.
Good leadership skills usually obviate having to 'command' or 'boss' anyone around but occasionally one has to get the attention of those you are leading or at least working with.
And yes, there are Capts who fail to demonstrate leadership. And there are F/Os who push the envelope.
From the initial post, THIS F/O is creating problems. Unnecessary problems. The guy is a rogue. And he will most likely continue to create problems with increasing consequence until someone exerts their authority and challenges him. Or at least gives him reason to change behavior.
Last edited by wileydog3; 25th Jun 2009 at 16:28.
Random thoughts :-
SOP's are just that - standard procedures for standard operations and here I include the majority of non-normals. There are however situations which require a degree of lateral thinking that go beyond' standard procedures'. You can call this what you will, airmanship, experience, thinking on one's feet, intuition, no matter what - perhaps the Hudson Airbus incident is a case in point - how many times do we practice a double engine failure immediately after departure followed by a ditching ? SOP's are great, we always had them but they were not known by that name and certainly there were less of them. A new generation of pilots believe that SOP's are the panacea for all evils but they are not; they are a great set of building blocks but they don't give every answer and some of the younger troops have not yet grasped that fact.
Make no mistake, there are plenty of 'dodgy' captains as well as FO's/SO's. I would hesitate to categorize myself however ! We have the SOP zealots at one end of the spectrum all the way through to the downright gash at the other end. The balance lies between extremes with a slant to the former rather than the latter. There are Captains who are bullies - probably coincidence but so many of these seem to spend a lot of time calling themselves Captain way beyond the flightdeck. There are First Officers who will not stand up for themselves and will happily allow the Captain to screw up. There are Captains who are probably a little too unassertive allowing both junior pilots, cabin crew, crewing and operations to push them into corners where they really do not want to go. We have junior pilots in the right hand seat who believe they have the whole operation sorted out - I had one the other month who opened up his laptop halfway across the Atlantic in order to watch Top Gear ! ( did not stay open for long !!! ). Guess what, these characters have always been with us and probably always will despite the best efforts of CRM,MCC, psycho-babble testing etc. One former Company of mine employed people on the basis that they would fit in with their prospective colleagues - they obviously had to have the licence and the experience but would they fit in, would they be team players or arrogant individualists - say what you like, the policy seemed to work quite well.
Lost and much lamented Flight Engineers did not always solve these problems - plenty of cases where any two out of three on the flight deck ganged up on the third !
Huge generalization but as a group we are somewhat egotistical, arrogant and selfish, it seems to go with the territory, why I'm not quite sure. As a result we will have clashes on the flightdeck, we will have differences of opinion and attitude to our job. CRM has helped without doubt but it does not weed out all the problems, something we all need to remember from time to time !
SOP's are just that - standard procedures for standard operations and here I include the majority of non-normals. There are however situations which require a degree of lateral thinking that go beyond' standard procedures'. You can call this what you will, airmanship, experience, thinking on one's feet, intuition, no matter what - perhaps the Hudson Airbus incident is a case in point - how many times do we practice a double engine failure immediately after departure followed by a ditching ? SOP's are great, we always had them but they were not known by that name and certainly there were less of them. A new generation of pilots believe that SOP's are the panacea for all evils but they are not; they are a great set of building blocks but they don't give every answer and some of the younger troops have not yet grasped that fact.
Make no mistake, there are plenty of 'dodgy' captains as well as FO's/SO's. I would hesitate to categorize myself however ! We have the SOP zealots at one end of the spectrum all the way through to the downright gash at the other end. The balance lies between extremes with a slant to the former rather than the latter. There are Captains who are bullies - probably coincidence but so many of these seem to spend a lot of time calling themselves Captain way beyond the flightdeck. There are First Officers who will not stand up for themselves and will happily allow the Captain to screw up. There are Captains who are probably a little too unassertive allowing both junior pilots, cabin crew, crewing and operations to push them into corners where they really do not want to go. We have junior pilots in the right hand seat who believe they have the whole operation sorted out - I had one the other month who opened up his laptop halfway across the Atlantic in order to watch Top Gear ! ( did not stay open for long !!! ). Guess what, these characters have always been with us and probably always will despite the best efforts of CRM,MCC, psycho-babble testing etc. One former Company of mine employed people on the basis that they would fit in with their prospective colleagues - they obviously had to have the licence and the experience but would they fit in, would they be team players or arrogant individualists - say what you like, the policy seemed to work quite well.
Lost and much lamented Flight Engineers did not always solve these problems - plenty of cases where any two out of three on the flight deck ganged up on the third !
Huge generalization but as a group we are somewhat egotistical, arrogant and selfish, it seems to go with the territory, why I'm not quite sure. As a result we will have clashes on the flightdeck, we will have differences of opinion and attitude to our job. CRM has helped without doubt but it does not weed out all the problems, something we all need to remember from time to time !
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great perspective frombeamer and wileydog.
As an F/O I think it is always easy to assume, out of the two roles on the flightdeck, we have the tougher deal. A requirement to rapidly assess the character and personal preferences of your captain, how they like to operate the a/c (harking back to beamer's point about the SOP to Gash spectrum) and all the while keeping them within their comfort zone with regards your own performance. And of course laughing at their jokes and sympathising about the ex-wife/annoying teenager/costly second mortgage etc.
The more experience I get I realise it is actually a lot more difficult from the LHS, and I think certainly the F/O in question in this thread would do well to remember this!
D O Guerrero
Personally I wouldn't avoid flying with the guy, it would be avoiding the problem. I would choose from two options. Option 1, at the pre-flight briefing politely inform the captain you don't wish to fly any sectors as PF that day. This (should) prompt the question why, and it is up to you how you answer.
Option 2 is to carry on with the day as normal, if you feel you are being pushed into operating outside of your comfort zone, hand over control and once on the ground explain the reasons you decided it best the captain have control, and that is the way you think the rest of the day should be.
If he constantly deviates from SOP all you can do is operate within them. Personally I wouldn't go to management unless you really feel you have to. I have a friend who went to management over an incident with a captain and it made life difficult for quite some time after. I think the best way is always to speak to the captain about whatever it is and take it from there.
As an F/O I think it is always easy to assume, out of the two roles on the flightdeck, we have the tougher deal. A requirement to rapidly assess the character and personal preferences of your captain, how they like to operate the a/c (harking back to beamer's point about the SOP to Gash spectrum) and all the while keeping them within their comfort zone with regards your own performance. And of course laughing at their jokes and sympathising about the ex-wife/annoying teenager/costly second mortgage etc.
The more experience I get I realise it is actually a lot more difficult from the LHS, and I think certainly the F/O in question in this thread would do well to remember this!
My question is this - what would you do if you were the FO in question?
Personally I wouldn't avoid flying with the guy, it would be avoiding the problem. I would choose from two options. Option 1, at the pre-flight briefing politely inform the captain you don't wish to fly any sectors as PF that day. This (should) prompt the question why, and it is up to you how you answer.
Option 2 is to carry on with the day as normal, if you feel you are being pushed into operating outside of your comfort zone, hand over control and once on the ground explain the reasons you decided it best the captain have control, and that is the way you think the rest of the day should be.
If he constantly deviates from SOP all you can do is operate within them. Personally I wouldn't go to management unless you really feel you have to. I have a friend who went to management over an incident with a captain and it made life difficult for quite some time after. I think the best way is always to speak to the captain about whatever it is and take it from there.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: FL410
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good points from you all - thanks. I decided to do nothing for the moment. If I fly with him again, I'll deal with it head on if necessary.
Thanks for making some of the more sensible comments I have read on PPRUNE...
Thanks for making some of the more sensible comments I have read on PPRUNE...
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: No one's home...
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bitmorerightrudder
It surely can be. That depends on the crew and the Captain's pacing.
I came back off a medical and spent six months in the right seat flying with some Capts who were not hired when I checked out and some who had flown right seat with me.
The workload was quite different. It took a while to get on pace with loading the FMS, running the checks and checklists and watching while we taxied to ensure we were complying with the clearance. I saw how easy it was to overload a F/O with multiple tasks. I also understood how and what the Capt was thinking. When I returned to the left seat, I remembered the workload in the right seat and deliberately decided to slow my pacing down.
A really good crew makes it all look easy. And a crew where there are problems makes almost everything a major effort. And it often is.
As an F/O I think it is always easy to assume, out of the two roles on the flightdeck, we have the tougher deal.
I came back off a medical and spent six months in the right seat flying with some Capts who were not hired when I checked out and some who had flown right seat with me.
The workload was quite different. It took a while to get on pace with loading the FMS, running the checks and checklists and watching while we taxied to ensure we were complying with the clearance. I saw how easy it was to overload a F/O with multiple tasks. I also understood how and what the Capt was thinking. When I returned to the left seat, I remembered the workload in the right seat and deliberately decided to slow my pacing down.
A really good crew makes it all look easy. And a crew where there are problems makes almost everything a major effort. And it often is.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One former Company of mine employed people on the basis that they would fit in with their prospective colleagues - they obviously had to have the licence and the experience but would they fit in, would they be team players or arrogant individualists - say what you like, the policy seemed to work quite well.
But in the subsequent simulator sessions ask these pilots what do they know about avoiding storms using airborne weather radar or the risks involved in climbing and cruising with actual altitude 4000 ft above optimum, most hadn't a clue. Some even arrive at the sim wearing designer aviator sunnies over the head and carefully ripped expensive jeans. These are the captains of the future..heaven help the passengers on a dark and stormy night over the Pacific.