Narrative:

On a recent trip, I, as the captain, worked with 2 other crew members who in hindsight were clearly not fit to fly under the provisions of their medical certificates due to acute get homeitis. This is not intended to be taken lightly. I am very serious. Their judgement and job performance were influenced by their get homeitis. During this flight I witnessed several deviations from standard procedures simply for the sake of expediency without regard to the fact that within the very recent past people have been killed as a result of those same standard procedures not being complied with. One of the crew members was clearly motivated by a personal social engagement he wanted to get home to and the other crew member had a commuter flight that he unrealistically wanted to connect to. The commuter flight was scheduled to depart 24 mins after our flight's scheduled block-in time. (There were several subsequent non stop commuter flts to the same destination scheduled to depart within 1 hour 24 mins after our scheduled block-in time that he could have utilized.) one of the crew members, not very believably, tried to explain his actions by stating that he was acting as he was for the sake of the passenger and he explained any of the chief pilots would support his actions because it was a special day. Aviation history in general, and company reports specifically, clearly show that rushing, get homeitis, and succumbing to the pressures of on-time performance, lead to potentially dangerous sits. Apparently, some crew members believe that the chief pilots support disregard for regulatory and procedural compliance when such compliance gets in the way of expediency. I suggest that the chief pilots make it unmistakably clear that on-time performance as a priority comes somewhere after the priority of operating safely and operating in compliance with the established regulations and procedures. Furthermore, some individuals need to be reminded that personal off duty social activities and personal connections to commuter flts have no place as an influence in the conduct of, or the decision making process of, a working crew member. Although it is of little relevance other than to demonstrate the acuteness of my fellow crew members get homeitis, despite the facts that 1) the subject flight departed 24 mins after the scheduled departure time, and that 2) as the captain, to the other crew members obvious disliking, did not succumb to their pressures to conduct the flight at an unnecessarily low altitude and at the barber pole airspeed the subject flight arrived at the destination within 5 mins of the scheduled arrival time.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DC10 FLC FAILURE TO FOLLOW SOP'S ENRTE TO LAX.

Narrative: ON A RECENT TRIP, I, AS THE CAPT, WORKED WITH 2 OTHER CREW MEMBERS WHO IN HINDSIGHT WERE CLRLY NOT FIT TO FLY UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THEIR MEDICAL CERTIFICATES DUE TO ACUTE GET HOMEITIS. THIS IS NOT INTENDED TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. I AM VERY SERIOUS. THEIR JUDGEMENT AND JOB PERFORMANCE WERE INFLUENCED BY THEIR GET HOMEITIS. DURING THIS FLT I WITNESSED SEVERAL DEVS FROM STANDARD PROCS SIMPLY FOR THE SAKE OF EXPEDIENCY WITHOUT REGARD TO THE FACT THAT WITHIN THE VERY RECENT PAST PEOPLE HAVE BEEN KILLED AS A RESULT OF THOSE SAME STANDARD PROCS NOT BEING COMPLIED WITH. ONE OF THE CREW MEMBERS WAS CLRLY MOTIVATED BY A PERSONAL SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT HE WANTED TO GET HOME TO AND THE OTHER CREW MEMBER HAD A COMMUTER FLT THAT HE UNREALISTICALLY WANTED TO CONNECT TO. THE COMMUTER FLT WAS SCHEDULED TO DEPART 24 MINS AFTER OUR FLT'S SCHEDULED BLOCK-IN TIME. (THERE WERE SEVERAL SUBSEQUENT NON STOP COMMUTER FLTS TO THE SAME DEST SCHEDULED TO DEPART WITHIN 1 HR 24 MINS AFTER OUR SCHEDULED BLOCK-IN TIME THAT HE COULD HAVE UTILIZED.) ONE OF THE CREW MEMBERS, NOT VERY BELIEVABLY, TRIED TO EXPLAIN HIS ACTIONS BY STATING THAT HE WAS ACTING AS HE WAS FOR THE SAKE OF THE PAX AND HE EXPLAINED ANY OF THE CHIEF PLTS WOULD SUPPORT HIS ACTIONS BECAUSE IT WAS A SPECIAL DAY. AVIATION HISTORY IN GENERAL, AND COMPANY RPTS SPECIFICALLY, CLRLY SHOW THAT RUSHING, GET HOMEITIS, AND SUCCUMBING TO THE PRESSURES OF ON-TIME PERFORMANCE, LEAD TO POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITS. APPARENTLY, SOME CREW MEMBERS BELIEVE THAT THE CHIEF PLTS SUPPORT DISREGARD FOR REGULATORY AND PROCEDURAL COMPLIANCE WHEN SUCH COMPLIANCE GETS IN THE WAY OF EXPEDIENCY. I SUGGEST THAT THE CHIEF PLTS MAKE IT UNMISTAKABLY CLR THAT ON-TIME PERFORMANCE AS A PRIORITY COMES SOMEWHERE AFTER THE PRIORITY OF OPERATING SAFELY AND OPERATING IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ESTABLISHED REGS AND PROCS. FURTHERMORE, SOME INDIVIDUALS NEED TO BE REMINDED THAT PERSONAL OFF DUTY SOCIAL ACTIVITIES AND PERSONAL CONNECTIONS TO COMMUTER FLTS HAVE NO PLACE AS AN INFLUENCE IN THE CONDUCT OF, OR THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS OF, A WORKING CREW MEMBER. ALTHOUGH IT IS OF LITTLE RELEVANCE OTHER THAN TO DEMONSTRATE THE ACUTENESS OF MY FELLOW CREW MEMBERS GET HOMEITIS, DESPITE THE FACTS THAT 1) THE SUBJECT FLT DEPARTED 24 MINS AFTER THE SCHEDULED DEP TIME, AND THAT 2) AS THE CAPT, TO THE OTHER CREW MEMBERS OBVIOUS DISLIKING, DID NOT SUCCUMB TO THEIR PRESSURES TO CONDUCT THE FLT AT AN UNNECESSARILY LOW ALT AND AT THE BARBER POLE AIRSPD THE SUBJECT FLT ARRIVED AT THE DEST WITHIN 5 MINS OF THE SCHEDULED ARR TIME.

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.