Narrative:

Aircraft was taxied to the gate from the maintenance hangar 30 minutes late. During the preflight; we discovered two issues and called maintenance for corrective action. 1) correct a previous log entry and deferral; along with the missing 'inoperative' sticker. The write-up stated the engine wouldn't start and was deferred. No further information or inop sticker. 2) we also required maintenance to inspect a tire tread delamination issue. The first mechanic inspected the tire and felt it was fine. I explained I felt it should be replaced; so he called an additional mechanic. The second mechanic insisted the tire was fine. He questioned my concern the rubber may separate from the tire on take-off. I explained I was concerned and that it may end up in intake of the right engine behind the tire. I again stated I felt the tire should be replaced. I believed this was the best course of action; since the mechanics had not presented specific limitations regarding an acceptable level of tire debris separation during take-off. Secondly; our preflight procedures specifically state; 'tires are not too worn; not damaged; and there is no tread separation.' I told them to wait a minute; while I verify the tire change with the captain. Capt. Was aware of the tire issue; because he did the walk around that leg and discovered the problem. Suddenly; a very irritated individual; I believed to be a maintenance supervisor; appeared and bellowed; 'what's the problem here?' I briefly explained the tire condition and he stated it was fine. I asked if he had inspected the tire and he said 'yes; it's fine.' he asked if I was insisting they change the tire. I said; no; I'm not saying that. I'm on my way to ask the captain and he can make that call.I returned with capt. And the conversation continued with the same aggressive posturing from the maintenance supervisor; insisting the tire condition was fine. When we explained the additional log entry problem with the write-up; the placard and the lack of an 'inoperative' sticker; I was very surprised by the supervisor's response. Rather than simply correcting the issue; he was argumentative. He talked over the captain; explaining he could not change it; because the deferral paperwork was performed by contract maintenance. After some back and forth; the supervisor added that he could change the deferral; if we felt it necessary. The assumed supervisor seemed unfamiliar with basic maintenance procedure. When he tried to place the inoperative sticker; he asked where it should be placed. When we told him; next to the ignition switch; he argued that there was no room next to the switch. We explained it had to be placed next to the inoperable component. He then insinuated that the log entry and placard were fine; because we could simply look up the code to find out what was wrong. Great solution! Therefore; the current write-up stating; 'engine not start; engine deferred' has too much detail. I assume he suggests issuing a stamp to everyone that states; 'plane broke; plane deferred;' followed with a blank for hand written system codes.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD-80 First Officer reported receiving an aircraft from Maintenance with an MEL; but no inop sticker next to the inoperative component and a worn tire. A Maintenance Supervisor believed the tire was fine and would not change it and resisted placing the inop sticker next to the inoperative component.

Narrative: Aircraft was taxied to the gate from the maintenance hangar 30 minutes late. During the preflight; we discovered two issues and called maintenance for corrective action. 1) Correct a previous log entry and deferral; along with the missing 'INOP' sticker. The write-up stated the engine wouldn't start and was deferred. No further information or inop sticker. 2) We also required maintenance to inspect a tire tread delamination issue. The first mechanic inspected the tire and felt it was fine. I explained I felt it should be replaced; so he called an additional mechanic. The second mechanic insisted the tire was fine. He questioned my concern the rubber may separate from the tire on take-off. I explained I was concerned and that it may end up in intake of the right engine behind the tire. I again stated I felt the tire should be replaced. I believed this was the best course of action; since the mechanics had not presented specific limitations regarding an acceptable level of tire debris separation during take-off. Secondly; our preflight procedures specifically state; 'Tires are not too worn; not damaged; and there is no tread separation.' I told them to wait a minute; while I verify the tire change with the Captain. Capt. was aware of the tire issue; because he did the walk around that leg and discovered the problem. Suddenly; a very irritated individual; I believed to be a maintenance supervisor; appeared and bellowed; 'What's the problem here?' I briefly explained the tire condition and he stated it was fine. I asked if he had inspected the tire and he said 'yes; it's fine.' He asked if I was insisting they change the tire. I said; no; I'm not saying that. I'm on my way to ask the captain and he can make that call.I returned with Capt. and the conversation continued with the same aggressive posturing from the maintenance supervisor; insisting the tire condition was fine. When we explained the additional log entry problem with the write-up; the placard and the lack of an 'INOP' sticker; I was very surprised by the supervisor's response. Rather than simply correcting the issue; he was argumentative. He talked over the Captain; explaining he could not change it; because the deferral paperwork was performed by contract maintenance. After some back and forth; the supervisor added that he could change the deferral; if we felt it necessary. The assumed supervisor seemed unfamiliar with basic maintenance procedure. When he tried to place the INOP sticker; he asked where it should be placed. When we told him; next to the ignition switch; he argued that there was no room next to the switch. We explained it had to be placed next to the inoperable component. He then insinuated that the log entry and placard were fine; because we could simply look up the code to find out what was wrong. Great solution! Therefore; the current write-up stating; 'engine not start; engine deferred' has too much detail. I assume he suggests issuing a stamp to everyone that states; 'Plane Broke; Plane Deferred;' followed with a blank for hand written system codes.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.