Narrative:

We were informed by flight attendants that seat (seatback) would not remain locked in the upright position. On the ground at sna, we called maintenance control via radio and informed them of the problem. They called contract maintenance at sna. He came out, locked the seatback in the upright position. (We would then be able to put passenger in it.) I put the discrepancy in the logbook, and contract maintenance wrote the work/corrective action in the logbook. We contacted maintenance control who gave us an unmanned release to also put in the logbook. We told maintenance that contract maintenance had signed the work off. Our maintenance said 'no,' do not have him write in the logbook, and cross out his corrective action. Maintenance control was wrong! We have to have contract maintenance action in the logbook to make the unmanned station release (umsr) legal. We were at departure time, tired and confused, so we took the airplane with the logbook as maintenance controller wanted it (the work write- up's crossed out). Unfortunately, after talking to our head check airmen about this situation, we realized how wrong maintenance was, and how we could get violated for this. Our company recently laid off/fired 400 mechanics, and unfortunately our experienced maintenance controllers were laid off. Our company has had recurring problems with maintenance write- offs/umsr's etc due to our maintenance controllers' lack of knowledge and procedures. I hope I don't end up violated because of this. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was never contacted by the FAA regarding this matter and the company has educated their maintenance to properly recognize the significance of the maintenance contractor's aircraft logbook signoff.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLC OF AN MLG OPERATED THE ACFT WITHOUT THE PROPER MAINT SIGNOFF IN THE ACFT LOGBOOK FOR A PAX SEATBACK DISCREPANCY ACTION.

Narrative: WE WERE INFORMED BY FLT ATTENDANTS THAT SEAT (SEATBACK) WOULD NOT REMAIN LOCKED IN THE UPRIGHT POS. ON THE GND AT SNA, WE CALLED MAINT CTL VIA RADIO AND INFORMED THEM OF THE PROB. THEY CALLED CONTRACT MAINT AT SNA. HE CAME OUT, LOCKED THE SEATBACK IN THE UPRIGHT POS. (WE WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO PUT PAX IN IT.) I PUT THE DISCREPANCY IN THE LOGBOOK, AND CONTRACT MAINT WROTE THE WORK/CORRECTIVE ACTION IN THE LOGBOOK. WE CONTACTED MAINT CTL WHO GAVE US AN UNMANNED RELEASE TO ALSO PUT IN THE LOGBOOK. WE TOLD MAINT THAT CONTRACT MAINT HAD SIGNED THE WORK OFF. OUR MAINT SAID 'NO,' DO NOT HAVE HIM WRITE IN THE LOGBOOK, AND CROSS OUT HIS CORRECTIVE ACTION. MAINT CTL WAS WRONG! WE HAVE TO HAVE CONTRACT MAINT ACTION IN THE LOGBOOK TO MAKE THE UNMANNED STATION RELEASE (UMSR) LEGAL. WE WERE AT DEP TIME, TIRED AND CONFUSED, SO WE TOOK THE AIRPLANE WITH THE LOGBOOK AS MAINT CTLR WANTED IT (THE WORK WRITE- UP'S CROSSED OUT). UNFORTUNATELY, AFTER TALKING TO OUR HEAD CHK AIRMEN ABOUT THIS SIT, WE REALIZED HOW WRONG MAINT WAS, AND HOW WE COULD GET VIOLATED FOR THIS. OUR COMPANY RECENTLY LAID OFF/FIRED 400 MECHS, AND UNFORTUNATELY OUR EXPERIENCED MAINT CTLRS WERE LAID OFF. OUR COMPANY HAS HAD RECURRING PROBS WITH MAINT WRITE- OFFS/UMSR'S ETC DUE TO OUR MAINT CTLRS' LACK OF KNOWLEDGE AND PROCS. I HOPE I DON'T END UP VIOLATED BECAUSE OF THIS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS NEVER CONTACTED BY THE FAA REGARDING THIS MATTER AND THE COMPANY HAS EDUCATED THEIR MAINT TO PROPERLY RECOGNIZE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MAINT CONTRACTOR'S ACFT LOGBOOK SIGNOFF.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.