Narrative:

While experiencing a delay due a mechanical problem, I received a visit in the cockpit from our base chief pilot. Since our company's performance has been lackluster, our management has come up with a coordinated effort to put management personnel on the scene whenever a delay is occurring. During 2 previous visits, this same chief pilot asked questions like 'when did you discover this problem?' note that I perceived his tone as being accusatory and menacing. Also note that his questioning contributed nothing to resolving the problem. If anything, it caused me to view him as a hindrance. When the chief pilot appeared this time we were almost ready to go, the load manifest math was being doublechked and we were awaiting the return of the maintenance log. The appearance of the chief pilot disrupted our flow and concentration as we now had another problem, a management representative to whom we were directly subordinate. We handed him the completed paperwork and he left. The flight attendant closed the cabin door and as I was about to call for the pushback checklist, the maintenance person arrived with the maintenance log. I realized we almost pushed without the required maintenance paperwork. Even though we may well have caught the oversight before it became an issue, it makes crystal clear to me that the appearance of management personnel in the cockpit on the flight line is unsafe. Flcs do not need such distrs while we try to do our jobs. Our company already has a well-defined assignment of duties which assure that maintenance issues are dealt with in a logical and legal method. For instance, when the flight crew discovers a discrepancy, the captain is notified. The captain enters the discrepancy in the maintenance log and notifies the operations personnel. The operations personnel notify the maintenance personnel who coordinate with the gate personnel. If management wishes to discuss such issues, those discussions should occur off-line in a different setting. I am sure that an attorney representing someone injured or killed in a plane crash would find a coordinate pattern of harassment and interference of flcs very useful during the resultant lawsuits, even if the expressed purpose of these teams was not to harass. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter said he considers the activities of the lower management akin to pilot pushing. They appear to be under heavy pressure from above in the management chain to change what has been a lack of good economic performance. The problem with this close, in your face, supervision is that it is extremely distracting and disrupts the normal flow of the operation. He also reports that different stations in their system have different management team makeup so that in some instances the qualifications of the team are not related to the problem that is being addressed. There have been calls to the FAA hotline. FAA investigators have been at the airline, but reporter does not know the result. The maintenance department is losing employees rptedly because of the unpleasant work environment and perceived intimidation. Flcs are finding more problems because of the inexperience of the replacement employees.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR CAPT RPTS EXCESSIVE ON SITE MGMNT ACTIVITY THAT APCHS HARASSMENT AND PLT RUSHING.

Narrative: WHILE EXPERIENCING A DELAY DUE A MECHANICAL PROB, I RECEIVED A VISIT IN THE COCKPIT FROM OUR BASE CHIEF PLT. SINCE OUR COMPANY'S PERFORMANCE HAS BEEN LACKLUSTER, OUR MGMNT HAS COME UP WITH A COORDINATED EFFORT TO PUT MGMNT PERSONNEL ON THE SCENE WHENEVER A DELAY IS OCCURRING. DURING 2 PREVIOUS VISITS, THIS SAME CHIEF PLT ASKED QUESTIONS LIKE 'WHEN DID YOU DISCOVER THIS PROB?' NOTE THAT I PERCEIVED HIS TONE AS BEING ACCUSATORY AND MENACING. ALSO NOTE THAT HIS QUESTIONING CONTRIBUTED NOTHING TO RESOLVING THE PROB. IF ANYTHING, IT CAUSED ME TO VIEW HIM AS A HINDRANCE. WHEN THE CHIEF PLT APPEARED THIS TIME WE WERE ALMOST READY TO GO, THE LOAD MANIFEST MATH WAS BEING DOUBLECHKED AND WE WERE AWAITING THE RETURN OF THE MAINT LOG. THE APPEARANCE OF THE CHIEF PLT DISRUPTED OUR FLOW AND CONCENTRATION AS WE NOW HAD ANOTHER PROB, A MGMNT REPRESENTATIVE TO WHOM WE WERE DIRECTLY SUBORDINATE. WE HANDED HIM THE COMPLETED PAPERWORK AND HE LEFT. THE FLT ATTENDANT CLOSED THE CABIN DOOR AND AS I WAS ABOUT TO CALL FOR THE PUSHBACK CHKLIST, THE MAINT PERSON ARRIVED WITH THE MAINT LOG. I REALIZED WE ALMOST PUSHED WITHOUT THE REQUIRED MAINT PAPERWORK. EVEN THOUGH WE MAY WELL HAVE CAUGHT THE OVERSIGHT BEFORE IT BECAME AN ISSUE, IT MAKES CRYSTAL CLR TO ME THAT THE APPEARANCE OF MGMNT PERSONNEL IN THE COCKPIT ON THE FLT LINE IS UNSAFE. FLCS DO NOT NEED SUCH DISTRS WHILE WE TRY TO DO OUR JOBS. OUR COMPANY ALREADY HAS A WELL-DEFINED ASSIGNMENT OF DUTIES WHICH ASSURE THAT MAINT ISSUES ARE DEALT WITH IN A LOGICAL AND LEGAL METHOD. FOR INSTANCE, WHEN THE FLC DISCOVERS A DISCREPANCY, THE CAPT IS NOTIFIED. THE CAPT ENTERS THE DISCREPANCY IN THE MAINT LOG AND NOTIFIES THE OPS PERSONNEL. THE OPS PERSONNEL NOTIFY THE MAINT PERSONNEL WHO COORDINATE WITH THE GATE PERSONNEL. IF MGMNT WISHES TO DISCUSS SUCH ISSUES, THOSE DISCUSSIONS SHOULD OCCUR OFF-LINE IN A DIFFERENT SETTING. I AM SURE THAT AN ATTORNEY REPRESENTING SOMEONE INJURED OR KILLED IN A PLANE CRASH WOULD FIND A COORDINATE PATTERN OF HARASSMENT AND INTERFERENCE OF FLCS VERY USEFUL DURING THE RESULTANT LAWSUITS, EVEN IF THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE OF THESE TEAMS WAS NOT TO HARASS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR SAID HE CONSIDERS THE ACTIVITIES OF THE LOWER MGMNT AKIN TO PLT PUSHING. THEY APPEAR TO BE UNDER HVY PRESSURE FROM ABOVE IN THE MGMNT CHAIN TO CHANGE WHAT HAS BEEN A LACK OF GOOD ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE. THE PROB WITH THIS CLOSE, IN YOUR FACE, SUPERVISION IS THAT IT IS EXTREMELY DISTRACTING AND DISRUPTS THE NORMAL FLOW OF THE OP. HE ALSO RPTS THAT DIFFERENT STATIONS IN THEIR SYS HAVE DIFFERENT MGMNT TEAM MAKEUP SO THAT IN SOME INSTANCES THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE TEAM ARE NOT RELATED TO THE PROB THAT IS BEING ADDRESSED. THERE HAVE BEEN CALLS TO THE FAA HOTLINE. FAA INVESTIGATORS HAVE BEEN AT THE AIRLINE, BUT RPTR DOES NOT KNOW THE RESULT. THE MAINT DEPT IS LOSING EMPLOYEES RPTEDLY BECAUSE OF THE UNPLEASANT WORK ENVIRONMENT AND PERCEIVED INTIMIDATION. FLCS ARE FINDING MORE PROBS BECAUSE OF THE INEXPERIENCE OF THE REPLACEMENT EMPLOYEES.

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.