Narrative:

The occurrences detailed in this report took place immediately following [the] flight; which directly impacted the crew's decision making for another flight. It is also imperative to note that I am writing this from my view and I was not directly on the phone for the majority of conversations below. I could only go by what I witnessed and what the individual crewmembers said after each conversation.maintenance crew met us at the gate in an attempt to clear MEL 30-xx-xx 'ws wiper not parked ... Captain.' we were already approximately 2:00hrs behind schedule; all the restaurants; and vendors in the airport had closed hours ago. The gate agent came to me and indicated that a passenger who was fearful of flying was having an anxiety attack due to the entire situation. I brought a few extra snacks off the aircraft and spoke with the passenger directly; she was immediately calmed and said she felt 'much better'. I looked around the terminal approximately 63-passengers spread out around the area and thought I would give a little extra customer service. I returned to the aircraft; grabbed the large bag of pretzel; a couple sleeves of cookies; and went to speak with the demoralized crowd. Being that our passengers were the only ones left in the terminal; I made an announcement that we empathize with their frustrations; we appreciate their patience; and we were working to get the operations moving again as soon as possible. I walked around the terminal and spoke with each and every passenger individually; offering them snacks and answering any questions they may have. When a passenger asked if the flight was going to depart; I explained that we had a rested and experienced crew; good weather; and all we simply needed was to complete a minor maintenance function. I closed with the fact that we had every intention to deliver our passengers safely and comfortably to their destination. The passengers showed a resoundingly positive response to my actions. Most that looking tired; hungry and quite frankly extremely angry; had now accepted some snacks and thanked me with a huge smile or a joke in light of the situation. Confidence in our company had been restored.I returned to the aircraft to check the status of maintenance. After more waiting; maintenance was unsuccessful; so we expected to operate under the MEL's procedures/limitations. When we received the flight release; we noticed that although MEL 30-xx-xx was listed under the aircraft information; the speed schedule was not updated to reflect the climb 250/.70; cruise 250KIAS; descent .70/250 as required per the MEL. We called the dispatcher to correct the calculated data and confirm we were in fact operating under the MEL requirement for (D) dispatch:'if the wiper is not in the parked position; airspeed is limited to 250KIAS. When calculating the release; in fpcfp; under dp-perf; type 250KIAS. This will calculate release at 250kts. Verify on release under speed schedule that climb; cruise and descent read as follows: climb 250/.70; cruise 250KIAS; descent .70/250.'when we received the updated speed schedules and data calculations; we noticed that the data again looked erroneous; especially after what we experienced during the previous flight. The dispatcher concurred with our suspicion and said he was no longer willing to put his name on the release until he sought clarification from another person in dispatch. We inquired about the possibility of swapping aircraft; or exercising some other option to complete the flight. We were told that there were no other options. We waited an extended period of time for the dispatcher to return our call at which time they explained that if they calculate the data per the MEL procedure; the planning software would glitch and give erroneous calculation data. They indicated that there was no way to correct the issue while operating under the procedure in the MEL but they had a workaround 'profile' which would calculate more reasonable data. We again inquired about plane swapping to complete the flight; we were told there were no 700/900 aircraft available. Being unable to verify that the data we were receiving was correct and the fact that dispatch was not conducting operations in compliance with the MEL; the captain requested a conference call with the chief pilot. He was denied the conference call and thus disconnected his call with the dispatcher shortly after. He called the chief pilot and explained the situation in that the data was not being calculated in compliance with the MEL. The captain also indicated that we were not comfortable operating under a procedure so nonstandard and obviously not in MEL compliance. He was told by the chief pilot that the data we received via the 'profile' sounded comfortable and that he would operate with those numbers; outside of the MEL procedure. There was more back and forth about how dispatch was making the calculations; accuracy of the data and safety being a concern. The captain disconnected with the chief pilot and asked my opinion on the matter.I explained that in my opinion; if the dispatcher is telling us that they are unable to comply with the MEL procedure to accurately calculate the release; we were not legal. Further; how can we accept the data numbers they do give us based on a 'profile' they use as a work around; after we saw such a spread from the last flight; a serious compromise in safety. While we can add a surplus amount of fuel and most likely have no issues with fuel consumption; we are not in a business of 'winging it'. The captain concurred and called the dispatcher. He explained our position and explained that without dispatch being able to comply with the procedure in the MEL; we could not safely and legally conduct the flight. The flight was cancelled. The captain advised the gate manager and the ground personnel to deplane the passengers. The chief pilot called the captain shortly after the passengers were deplaned and questioned why the flight was cancelled. The chief pilot then revealed that there are emails between the FAA and company that authorize us to operate under the 'profile' instead of the under the MEL procedure. The captain's rebuttal was that the information would have been useful during the prior phone conversation and might have influenced the situation but regardless; these emails are not available to the pilots when operating and he had never heard of such a procedure for the situation. The chief pilot informed the captain that the entire crew was going to be investigated for interfering with the 121 operations; intentionally delaying and cancelling the flight; with penalties up to and including termination. Being threatened with losing his employment; the captain changed his mind and said 'ok; we can go again; let's board.' we had been on duty for 11:00+ hours so there was a brief discussion about legal duty period and how long it would take to corral the passengers back onto the aircraft. Under the circumstances; the lead flight attendant indicated that she didn't think we would be legal to continue operations. There was a brief argument and the captain put the flight attendant on the phone with the chief pilot. There was a discussion between the flight attendant; chief pilot and I believe a crew scheduler. The chief pilot asked the crew scheduler if we would indeed be legal and the scheduler indicated that we would not. Being that all the passengers had deplaned; we would have to stop the passengers in the terminal and gather them back to the gate to board again. With our duty time approaching and no confidence in gathering the passengers in time to board and push; the decision was made by the chief pilot to keep the flight cancelled and all crewmembers were officially released from duty.suggestions: there is no official guidance on a 'profile' workaround for our problem. We understood that dispatch was unable to comply with the specific process in the MEL. Eitherthe data calculation glitch needs to be fixed or the MEL needs to be revised.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ-700 flight crew reported that dispatch was unable to create an accurate flight plan because of an MEL; and thus declined the aircraft; a decision that was met with threats of termination form the Chief Pilot.

Narrative: The occurrences detailed in this report took place immediately following [the] flight; which directly impacted the crew's decision making for another flight. It is also imperative to note that I am writing this from my view and I was not directly on the phone for the majority of conversations below. I could only go by what I witnessed and what the individual crewmembers said after each conversation.Maintenance crew met us at the gate in an attempt to clear MEL 30-XX-XX 'WS WIPER NOT PARKED ... CAPT.' We were already approximately 2:00hrs behind schedule; all the restaurants; and vendors in the airport had closed hours ago. The gate agent came to me and indicated that a passenger who was fearful of flying was having an anxiety attack due to the entire situation. I brought a few extra snacks off the aircraft and spoke with the passenger directly; she was immediately calmed and said she felt 'much better'. I looked around the terminal approximately 63-passengers spread out around the area and thought I would give a little extra customer service. I returned to the aircraft; grabbed the large bag of pretzel; a couple sleeves of cookies; and went to speak with the demoralized crowd. Being that our passengers were the only ones left in the terminal; I made an announcement that we empathize with their frustrations; we appreciate their patience; and we were working to get the operations moving again ASAP. I walked around the terminal and spoke with each and every passenger individually; offering them snacks and answering any questions they may have. When a passenger asked if the flight was going to depart; I explained that we had a rested and experienced crew; good weather; and all we simply needed was to complete a minor maintenance function. I closed with the fact that we had every intention to deliver our passengers safely and comfortably to their destination. The passengers showed a resoundingly positive response to my actions. Most that looking tired; hungry and quite frankly extremely angry; had now accepted some snacks and thanked me with a huge smile or a joke in light of the situation. Confidence in our company had been restored.I returned to the aircraft to check the status of maintenance. After more waiting; maintenance was unsuccessful; so we expected to operate under the MEL's procedures/limitations. When we received the flight release; we noticed that although MEL 30-XX-XX was listed under the Aircraft Information; the speed schedule was not updated to reflect the CLIMB 250/.70; CRUISE 250KIAS; DESCENT .70/250 as required per the MEL. We called the dispatcher to correct the calculated data and confirm we were in fact operating under the MEL requirement for (D) DISPATCH:'If the wiper is NOT in the parked position; airspeed is limited to 250KIAS. When calculating the release; in FPCFP; under DP-Perf; type 250KIAS. This will calculate release at 250kts. Verify on release under SPEED SCHEDULE that climb; cruise and descent read as follows: CLIMB 250/.70; CRUISE 250KIAS; DESCENT .70/250.'When we received the updated speed schedules and data calculations; we noticed that the data again looked erroneous; especially after what we experienced during the previous flight. The dispatcher concurred with our suspicion and said he was no longer willing to put his name on the release until he sought clarification from another person in dispatch. We inquired about the possibility of swapping aircraft; or exercising some other option to complete the flight. We were told that there were no other options. We waited an extended period of time for the dispatcher to return our call at which time they explained that if they calculate the data per the MEL procedure; the planning software would glitch and give erroneous calculation data. They indicated that there was no way to correct the issue while operating under the procedure in the MEL but they had a workaround 'profile' which would calculate more reasonable data. We again inquired about plane swapping to complete the flight; we were told there were no 700/900 aircraft available. Being unable to verify that the data we were receiving was correct and the fact that dispatch was not conducting operations in compliance with the MEL; the captain requested a conference call with the Chief Pilot. He was denied the conference call and thus disconnected his call with the dispatcher shortly after. He called the Chief Pilot and explained the situation in that the data was not being calculated in compliance with the MEL. The Captain also indicated that we were not comfortable operating under a procedure so nonstandard and obviously not in MEL compliance. He was told by the Chief Pilot that the data we received via the 'profile' sounded comfortable and that he would operate with those numbers; outside of the MEL procedure. There was more back and forth about how dispatch was making the calculations; accuracy of the data and safety being a concern. The captain disconnected with the Chief Pilot and asked my opinion on the matter.I explained that in my opinion; if the dispatcher is telling us that they are unable to comply with the MEL procedure to accurately calculate the release; we were not legal. Further; how can we accept the data numbers they do give us based on a 'profile' they use as a work around; after we saw such a spread from the last flight; a serious compromise in safety. While we can add a surplus amount of fuel and most likely have no issues with fuel consumption; we are not in a business of 'winging it'. The captain concurred and called the dispatcher. He explained our position and explained that without dispatch being able to comply with the procedure in the MEL; we could not safely and legally conduct the flight. The flight was cancelled. The captain advised the gate manager and the ground personnel to deplane the passengers. The Chief Pilot called the Captain shortly after the passengers were deplaned and questioned why the flight was cancelled. The Chief Pilot then revealed that there are emails between the FAA and Company that authorize us to operate under the 'profile' instead of the under the MEL procedure. The Captain's rebuttal was that the information would have been useful during the prior phone conversation and might have influenced the situation but regardless; these emails are not available to the pilots when operating and he had never heard of such a procedure for the situation. The Chief Pilot informed the Captain that the entire crew was going to be investigated for interfering with the 121 operations; intentionally delaying and cancelling the flight; with penalties up to and including termination. Being threatened with losing his employment; the captain changed his mind and said 'ok; we can go again; let's board.' We had been on duty for 11:00+ hours so there was a brief discussion about legal duty period and how long it would take to corral the passengers back onto the aircraft. Under the circumstances; the lead flight attendant indicated that she didn't think we would be legal to continue operations. There was a brief argument and the Captain put the Flight Attendant on the phone with the Chief Pilot. There was a discussion between the Flight Attendant; Chief Pilot and I believe a crew scheduler. The Chief Pilot asked the crew scheduler if we would indeed be legal and the scheduler indicated that we would not. Being that all the passengers had deplaned; we would have to stop the passengers in the terminal and gather them back to the gate to board again. With our duty time approaching and no confidence in gathering the passengers in time to board and push; the decision was made by the Chief Pilot to keep the flight cancelled and all crewmembers were officially released from duty.Suggestions: There is no official guidance on a 'profile' workaround for our problem. We understood that dispatch was unable to comply with the specific process in the MEL. Eitherthe data calculation glitch needs to be fixed or the MEL needs to be revised.

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.