On the surface this would certainly appear to be a case of undermining the Captain’s authority, but to be fair we only have the pilot’s version of just what actually transpired.

The Captains authority and responsibility it clearly established in the Air Navigation Act, Regulations and Orders and further supported by both the Tokyo and Montreal Conventions.

However, in a dispute of this kind with the aircraft on the ground, doors open and not yet released by dispatch we enter a grey area of responsibility.

When I read this report words like “Dispute Resolution & Anger Management” come to mind and are more appropriate to the situation than exercising authority, which seems to have been on the minds of each of the participants of this fiasco.

When I was a young F/O I flew with some, but fortunately few, captains who went out of their way to use their authority at the slightest provocation as a chance to “Get back at the company”. And this was at a time when pilots were treated as professionals, and captains regarded as executives of the company.

Whether it was a traffic delay, a mechanical or an operational problem I have always adopted a more proactive approach, with a mind set to get the job done to the best of my ability. After all, that is what I was being paid to do.

Getting to know the station manager and traffic staff at each port by name, even if it meant jotting it down in that little book of route info that we all carried. Little gestures like fudging and off blocks time to avoid a station having to log a delay, or allowing a staff member to use the jump seat when the flight was full all paid dividends in spades.

Maybe that is part of the problem today we are all becoming isolated in our own little worlds. :sad:

Shell Managementhttp://www.photography-cafe.com/foru...ve/lg_rofl.gif


That's never stopped you.