37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 490766 |
Time | |
Date | 200011 |
Day | Wed |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : mco.airport |
State Reference | FL |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet CL65, Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | ground : preflight |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 240 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 11000 |
ASRS Report | 490766 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial pilot : instrument |
ASRS Report | 491639 |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : company policies non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | none taken : unable |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Company Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance |
Primary Problem | Company |
Narrative:
On arrival at assigned aircraft I was met by the chief pilot. We were both based in mco. He asked if he could walk with me on the preflight. He did. I asked why he felt the need. He responded that he would like to see the items that were mechanical discrepancies so that hangar maintenance could correct the problems before I 'grounded' the aircraft. I told him I did not ground aircraft I simply record discrepancies as directed by far's and our operations manual. As I neared the end of my preflight I found a discrepancy that did in fact send the aircraft back to the hangar for approximately 6 hours. I informed the chief pilot of this. I also asked why I was the only pilot that received this attention. I told him that I felt this was harassment and that I would be calling the local FSDO to speak with an inspector. This resulted in the chief pilot shouting at me on the ramp in front of my crew, a mechanic and ramp personnel. The situation was so bad I informed him I would not continue this on the ramp and turned to walk away. He then ordered me into his office where the director of flight administration was on speaker phone. After the incident I asked numerous employees, pilots, flight attendants, and even ramp agents if he had ever done this to another pilot .the answer was no. Even people who are the 5 days per week when the chief pilot is there said I was the only one. I feel intimidated knowing that the next time I find a broken airplane that I may lose my job. This airline is famous for this. Supplemental information from acn 491639: I feel there is a situation that can be considered dangerous and illegal. When in mco during preflight I noticed a possible crack in the cargo bin. Maintenance was at the aircraft. We told them of the possibility and they said that I am not allowed to look in there during preflight. I told them that the FAA says I am to do a complete and accurate preflight. He started yelling and said that that would be really stupid to ground the aircraft for that. The problem is there is a fiberglass panel on the aft bulkhead of the cargo area that is constantly having cracks due to the weakness of the panel. Since this is a halon equipped cargo area we were told in training that this should be sealed. I also feel that due to contract talks the company is threatening pilots with their jobs. The FAA however is very strict when it comes to the safety of the passenger. I just don't understand how a company who says they are safety conscious can try and do such an old and outdated tactic.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: 2 SEPARATE CREW MEMBERS RPT INTIMIDATION AND PLT PUSHING AT AN ACR.
Narrative: ON ARR AT ASSIGNED ACFT I WAS MET BY THE CHIEF PLT. WE WERE BOTH BASED IN MCO. HE ASKED IF HE COULD WALK WITH ME ON THE PREFLT. HE DID. I ASKED WHY HE FELT THE NEED. HE RESPONDED THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ITEMS THAT WERE MECHANICAL DISCREPANCIES SO THAT HANGAR MAINT COULD CORRECT THE PROBS BEFORE I 'GROUNDED' THE ACFT. I TOLD HIM I DID NOT GND ACFT I SIMPLY RECORD DISCREPANCIES AS DIRECTED BY FAR'S AND OUR OPS MANUAL. AS I NEARED THE END OF MY PREFLT I FOUND A DISCREPANCY THAT DID IN FACT SEND THE ACFT BACK TO THE HANGAR FOR APPROX 6 HRS. I INFORMED THE CHIEF PLT OF THIS. I ALSO ASKED WHY I WAS THE ONLY PLT THAT RECEIVED THIS ATTN. I TOLD HIM THAT I FELT THIS WAS HARASSMENT AND THAT I WOULD BE CALLING THE LCL FSDO TO SPEAK WITH AN INSPECTOR. THIS RESULTED IN THE CHIEF PLT SHOUTING AT ME ON THE RAMP IN FRONT OF MY CREW, A MECH AND RAMP PERSONNEL. THE SIT WAS SO BAD I INFORMED HIM I WOULD NOT CONTINUE THIS ON THE RAMP AND TURNED TO WALK AWAY. HE THEN ORDERED ME INTO HIS OFFICE WHERE THE DIRECTOR OF FLT ADMINISTRATION WAS ON SPEAKER PHONE. AFTER THE INCIDENT I ASKED NUMEROUS EMPLOYEES, PLTS, FLT ATTENDANTS, AND EVEN RAMP AGENTS IF HE HAD EVER DONE THIS TO ANOTHER PLT .THE ANSWER WAS NO. EVEN PEOPLE WHO ARE THE 5 DAYS PER WEEK WHEN THE CHIEF PLT IS THERE SAID I WAS THE ONLY ONE. I FEEL INTIMIDATED KNOWING THAT THE NEXT TIME I FIND A BROKEN AIRPLANE THAT I MAY LOSE MY JOB. THIS AIRLINE IS FAMOUS FOR THIS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 491639: I FEEL THERE IS A SIT THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED DANGEROUS AND ILLEGAL. WHEN IN MCO DURING PREFLT I NOTICED A POSSIBLE CRACK IN THE CARGO BIN. MAINT WAS AT THE ACFT. WE TOLD THEM OF THE POSSIBILITY AND THEY SAID THAT I AM NOT ALLOWED TO LOOK IN THERE DURING PREFLT. I TOLD THEM THAT THE FAA SAYS I AM TO DO A COMPLETE AND ACCURATE PREFLT. HE STARTED YELLING AND SAID THAT THAT WOULD BE REALLY STUPID TO GND THE ACFT FOR THAT. THE PROB IS THERE IS A FIBERGLASS PANEL ON THE AFT BULKHEAD OF THE CARGO AREA THAT IS CONSTANTLY HAVING CRACKS DUE TO THE WEAKNESS OF THE PANEL. SINCE THIS IS A HALON EQUIPPED CARGO AREA WE WERE TOLD IN TRAINING THAT THIS SHOULD BE SEALED. I ALSO FEEL THAT DUE TO CONTRACT TALKS THE COMPANY IS THREATENING PLTS WITH THEIR JOBS. THE FAA HOWEVER IS VERY STRICT WHEN IT COMES TO THE SAFETY OF THE PAX. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW A COMPANY WHO SAYS THEY ARE SAFETY CONSCIOUS CAN TRY AND DO SUCH AN OLD AND OUTDATED TACTIC.
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.