37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 657791 |
Time | |
Date | 200505 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : sfo.airport |
State Reference | CA |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | A320 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | ground : parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 13000 flight time type : 2500 |
ASRS Report | 657791 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 279 flight time total : 9200 flight time type : 4500 |
ASRS Report | 657794 |
Events | |
Anomaly | non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far non adherence : company policies non adherence other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | other |
Consequence | faa : assigned or threatened penalties Other |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Passenger Human Performance FAA Environmental Factor |
Primary Problem | FAA |
Narrative:
FAA safety inspector ms X arrived in the cockpit at approximately xa:50 am on 5/sun/05; 5 mins prior to departure. It was my understanding that ms X was a revenue passenger on flight XXX; sfo-ZZZ. The passenger agent informed me that ms X arrived late and her seat had been released. She then requested the jumpseat which was presently assigned to 2 air carrier X capts. Ms X was told by the customer service rep that she was not entitled to the jumpseat under the circumstances; but that he would check with the captain. After my discussion with the customer service rep; the first officer and I referenced the fom and confirmed our understanding that if ms X was to be granted cockpit authority under priority status; she would need to present a valid FAA identification; form XXX. And an omc boarding card. I informed the customer service rep of this and he told me that ms X was outside the cockpit door and wanted to talk with me. At this time; ms X entered the cockpit. Present at the time was myself; the first officer; and both captain omcs. Ms X presented her identification and stated that she was entitled to the jump seat in the capacity of an FAA safety inspector. As I began to discuss the required credentials; ms X interrupted me and stated that she 'was aware of form XXX' but that she 'does not need it to gain access to the jumpseat.' I told her that I was required to work within the rules of the fom and attempted to show her the company regulations. She stated that she knew what the manual said; but that I had discretion to work around that and not require form XXX. I told her that I could not do that and as I attempted to further elaborate; she again interrupted me and became more aggressive and insistent on her position that I may deviate from the fom in this case. At this time I suggested that I call the flight managers in sfo to see if they had authority to authorize her request. While I was on the jetway phone; ms X began an inspection of my crew's documents. Without presenting identification to the purser; she asked for his name and employee number. She entered the cockpit and said; 'mr copilot; I want to see your license and medical.' the first officer cooperated and presented these documents. Ms X then copied down the information. I had a bit of wait on the phone because a flight manager had to be located. I was then asked if I could hold because the flight manager was on the phone; to which I responded that our flight was now delayed due to an issue with an FAA inspector. The flight manager was advised and he took my call. I explained the situation and asked if he had the authority to authorize the jumpseat. He said no; but that he would talk to the flight operations duty manager and meet me at the gate. This information is significant because later in the sequence of events; while the flight manager was on the phone with the flight operations duty manager; ms X accused me of 'spending a long time on the phone in order to conspire with the flight manager to deny her the jumpseat.' as I stated above; this was not what transpired during that phone call. After my phone conversation with the flight manager; I went back to the aircraft and found ms X in the galley with two flight attendants. She asked me for my license and medical. While writing down my information; ms X again told me that 'air carrier X only selectively requires form XXX and that I must use my authority as PIC to deviate from the fom;.' I told her I could not do that; but that I had completed the phone call and a flight manager was on the way. I further stated that I felt it was unfair and unprofessional of her to continue to ask me to deviate from the explicit rules of the fom. I also tried; but was continually interrupted; to tell her that I felt her continued insistence that I deviate was rising to the level of strong-arming and intimidation especially in light of the fact that I had solicited my flight manager for her; even though our flight was now delayed. She next told me that if I did not do what I was supposed to do that 'you'll pay' and 'air carrier X will pay' as she pointed her index finger at my face. She continued; 'I know how these things work because I used to work with air carrier X in certification.' in my debrief with the purser; he stated that while I was on the phone; she said that 'if she does not get on this flight; heads will roll.' this situation concluded when the flight operations duty manager told her that she will not be granted access without the required form XXX. The flight then departed 27 minutes late. There are a few more things I would like to note. First; the first officer; 2 omc's; and I; all felt that ms X's conduct presented a potential safety of flight issue as she applied undue pressure and intimidation on the crew. Second; upon the flight manager's arrival to the gate; I informed him that regardless of the outcome; I would need to be replaced on this flight if ms X was granted access because of her threats; actions; and general conduct. I have also informed my flight manager and the flight operations duty manager that I must respectfully decline to fly any future flts with ms X in the cockpit because of my concerns about her threat to 'make me pay.' I'm afraid the level of anxiety created by this would be a distraction and therefore infringe on the safe operation of the flight. Supplemental information from acn 657794: she addressed me as 'mr copilot' and asked for my license and medical. Then; heard by the flight attendants; the 2 omc's; and possibly the first class passenger; ms X stated that; 'if I don't get on this flight; heads will roll.' it is my professional opinion that if ms X ever conducted an FAA check at air carrier X that resulted in a violation of the crew; based on her statements; I would have serious doubts as to the credibility of such actions. Callback conversation with reporter acn 657791 revealed the following information: the captain added that the inspector remained hostile and demanding until the air carrier chief pilot suggested they contact the poi assigned to the carrier. At that point the inspector stated that wouldn't be necessary and ceased making demands. Reporter advised that the company has discussed this incident; found the crew to have acted properly and in compliance with company's operations manual requirement for cockpit access. It is his understanding the FAA will be taking action to reinforce to their inspectors the need to strictly comply with cockpit access protocols during their inspection activities. The reporter was advised it was unlikely the inspector would be personally confronted. Reporter stated he continued to be unwilling to undergo an en route check from this inspector in the future because of her overt threats during the original altercation.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: FLT CREW OF AN A320 ARE CONFRONTED BY AN IMPROPERLY CREDENTIALED FAA SAFETY INSPECTOR DEMANDING ACCESS TO COCKPIT JUMP SEATS IN CONTRADICTION TO ACR POLICY. ACI ACTS IN AN INTIMIDATING FASHION AND THREATENS ENFORCEMENT ACTION UNLESS THE CAPT DISREGARDS ACR'S OPS MANUAL REQUIREMENTS AND ALLOWS HER ACCESS UNILATERALLY.
Narrative: FAA SAFETY INSPECTOR MS X ARRIVED IN THE COCKPIT AT APPROX XA:50 AM ON 5/SUN/05; 5 MINS PRIOR TO DEP. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MS X WAS A REVENUE PAX ON FLT XXX; SFO-ZZZ. THE PAX AGENT INFORMED ME THAT MS X ARRIVED LATE AND HER SEAT HAD BEEN RELEASED. SHE THEN REQUESTED THE JUMPSEAT WHICH WAS PRESENTLY ASSIGNED TO 2 ACR X CAPTS. MS X WAS TOLD BY THE CUSTOMER SERVICE REP THAT SHE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE JUMPSEAT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES; BUT THAT HE WOULD CHK WITH THE CAPT. AFTER MY DISCUSSION WITH THE CUSTOMER SERVICE REP; THE FO AND I REFERENCED THE FOM AND CONFIRMED OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IF MS X WAS TO BE GRANTED COCKPIT AUTHORITY UNDER PRIORITY STATUS; SHE WOULD NEED TO PRESENT A VALID FAA ID; FORM XXX. AND AN OMC BOARDING CARD. I INFORMED THE CUSTOMER SERVICE REP OF THIS AND HE TOLD ME THAT MS X WAS OUTSIDE THE COCKPIT DOOR AND WANTED TO TALK WITH ME. AT THIS TIME; MS X ENTERED THE COCKPIT. PRESENT AT THE TIME WAS MYSELF; THE FO; AND BOTH CAPT OMCS. MS X PRESENTED HER ID AND STATED THAT SHE WAS ENTITLED TO THE JUMP SEAT IN THE CAPACITY OF AN FAA SAFETY INSPECTOR. AS I BEGAN TO DISCUSS THE REQUIRED CREDENTIALS; MS X INTERRUPTED ME AND STATED THAT SHE 'WAS AWARE OF FORM XXX' BUT THAT SHE 'DOES NOT NEED IT TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE JUMPSEAT.' I TOLD HER THAT I WAS REQUIRED TO WORK WITHIN THE RULES OF THE FOM AND ATTEMPTED TO SHOW HER THE COMPANY REGULATIONS. SHE STATED THAT SHE KNEW WHAT THE MANUAL SAID; BUT THAT I HAD DISCRETION TO WORK AROUND THAT AND NOT REQUIRE FORM XXX. I TOLD HER THAT I COULD NOT DO THAT AND AS I ATTEMPTED TO FURTHER ELABORATE; SHE AGAIN INTERRUPTED ME AND BECAME MORE AGGRESSIVE AND INSISTENT ON HER POSITION THAT I MAY DEVIATE FROM THE FOM IN THIS CASE. AT THIS TIME I SUGGESTED THAT I CALL THE FLT MANAGERS IN SFO TO SEE IF THEY HAD AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE HER REQUEST. WHILE I WAS ON THE JETWAY PHONE; MS X BEGAN AN INSPECTION OF MY CREW'S DOCUMENTS. WITHOUT PRESENTING ID TO THE PURSER; SHE ASKED FOR HIS NAME AND EMPLOYEE NUMBER. SHE ENTERED THE COCKPIT AND SAID; 'MR COPLT; I WANT TO SEE YOUR LICENSE AND MEDICAL.' THE FO COOPERATED AND PRESENTED THESE DOCUMENTS. MS X THEN COPIED DOWN THE INFO. I HAD A BIT OF WAIT ON THE PHONE BECAUSE A FLT MANAGER HAD TO BE LOCATED. I WAS THEN ASKED IF I COULD HOLD BECAUSE THE FLT MANAGER WAS ON THE PHONE; TO WHICH I RESPONDED THAT OUR FLT WAS NOW DELAYED DUE TO AN ISSUE WITH AN FAA INSPECTOR. THE FLT MANAGER WAS ADVISED AND HE TOOK MY CALL. I EXPLAINED THE SIT AND ASKED IF HE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO AUTHORIZE THE JUMPSEAT. HE SAID NO; BUT THAT HE WOULD TALK TO THE FLT OPS DUTY MANAGER AND MEET ME AT THE GATE. THIS INFO IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE LATER IN THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS; WHILE THE FLT MANAGER WAS ON THE PHONE WITH THE FLT OPS DUTY MANAGER; MS X ACCUSED ME OF 'SPENDING A LONG TIME ON THE PHONE IN ORDER TO CONSPIRE WITH THE FLT MANAGER TO DENY HER THE JUMPSEAT.' AS I STATED ABOVE; THIS WAS NOT WHAT TRANSPIRED DURING THAT PHONE CALL. AFTER MY PHONE CONVERSATION WITH THE FLT MANAGER; I WENT BACK TO THE ACFT AND FOUND MS X IN THE GALLEY WITH TWO FLT ATTENDANTS. SHE ASKED ME FOR MY LICENSE AND MEDICAL. WHILE WRITING DOWN MY INFO; MS X AGAIN TOLD ME THAT 'ACR X ONLY SELECTIVELY REQUIRES FORM XXX AND THAT I MUST USE MY AUTHORITY AS PIC TO DEVIATE FROM THE FOM;.' I TOLD HER I COULD NOT DO THAT; BUT THAT I HAD COMPLETED THE PHONE CALL AND A FLT MANAGER WAS ON THE WAY. I FURTHER STATED THAT I FELT IT WAS UNFAIR AND UNPROFESSIONAL OF HER TO CONTINUE TO ASK ME TO DEVIATE FROM THE EXPLICIT RULES OF THE FOM. I ALSO TRIED; BUT WAS CONTINUALLY INTERRUPTED; TO TELL HER THAT I FELT HER CONTINUED INSISTENCE THAT I DEVIATE WAS RISING TO THE LEVEL OF STRONG-ARMING AND INTIMIDATION ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT I HAD SOLICITED MY FLT MANAGER FOR HER; EVEN THOUGH OUR FLT WAS NOW DELAYED. SHE NEXT TOLD ME THAT IF I DID NOT DO WHAT I WAS SUPPOSED TO DO THAT 'YOU'LL PAY' AND 'ACR X WILL PAY' AS SHE POINTED HER INDEX FINGER AT MY FACE. SHE CONTINUED; 'I KNOW HOW THESE THINGS WORK BECAUSE I USED TO WORK WITH ACR X IN CERTIFICATION.' IN MY DEBRIEF WITH THE PURSER; HE STATED THAT WHILE I WAS ON THE PHONE; SHE SAID THAT 'IF SHE DOES NOT GET ON THIS FLT; HEADS WILL ROLL.' THIS SIT CONCLUDED WHEN THE FLT OPS DUTY MANAGER TOLD HER THAT SHE WILL NOT BE GRANTED ACCESS WITHOUT THE REQUIRED FORM XXX. THE FLT THEN DEPARTED 27 MINUTES LATE. THERE ARE A FEW MORE THINGS I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE. FIRST; THE FO; 2 OMC'S; AND I; ALL FELT THAT MS X'S CONDUCT PRESENTED A POTENTIAL SAFETY OF FLT ISSUE AS SHE APPLIED UNDUE PRESSURE AND INTIMIDATION ON THE CREW. SECOND; UPON THE FLT MANAGER'S ARR TO THE GATE; I INFORMED HIM THAT REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME; I WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED ON THIS FLT IF MS X WAS GRANTED ACCESS BECAUSE OF HER THREATS; ACTIONS; AND GENERAL CONDUCT. I HAVE ALSO INFORMED MY FLT MANAGER AND THE FLT OPS DUTY MANAGER THAT I MUST RESPECTFULLY DECLINE TO FLY ANY FUTURE FLTS WITH MS X IN THE COCKPIT BECAUSE OF MY CONCERNS ABOUT HER THREAT TO 'MAKE ME PAY.' I'M AFRAID THE LEVEL OF ANXIETY CREATED BY THIS WOULD BE A DISTRACTION AND THEREFORE INFRINGE ON THE SAFE OP OF THE FLT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 657794: SHE ADDRESSED ME AS 'MR COPLT' AND ASKED FOR MY LICENSE AND MEDICAL. THEN; HEARD BY THE FLT ATTENDANTS; THE 2 OMC'S; AND POSSIBLY THE FIRST CLASS PAX; MS X STATED THAT; 'IF I DON'T GET ON THIS FLT; HEADS WILL ROLL.' IT IS MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION THAT IF MS X EVER CONDUCTED AN FAA CHECK AT ACR X THAT RESULTED IN A VIOLATION OF THE CREW; BASED ON HER STATEMENTS; I WOULD HAVE SERIOUS DOUBTS AS TO THE CREDIBILITY OF SUCH ACTIONS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR ACN 657791 REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE CAPT ADDED THAT THE INSPECTOR REMAINED HOSTILE AND DEMANDING UNTIL THE ACR CHIEF PLT SUGGESTED THEY CONTACT THE POI ASSIGNED TO THE CARRIER. AT THAT POINT THE INSPECTOR STATED THAT WOULDN'T BE NECESSARY AND CEASED MAKING DEMANDS. RPTR ADVISED THAT THE COMPANY HAS DISCUSSED THIS INCIDENT; FOUND THE CREW TO HAVE ACTED PROPERLY AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH COMPANY'S OPS MANUAL REQUIREMENT FOR COCKPIT ACCESS. IT IS HIS UNDERSTANDING THE FAA WILL BE TAKING ACTION TO REINFORCE TO THEIR INSPECTORS THE NEED TO STRICTLY COMPLY WITH COCKPIT ACCESS PROTOCOLS DURING THEIR INSPECTION ACTIVITIES. THE RPTR WAS ADVISED IT WAS UNLIKELY THE INSPECTOR WOULD BE PERSONALLY CONFRONTED. RPTR STATED HE CONTINUED TO BE UNWILLING TO UNDERGO AN ENRTE CHK FROM THIS INSPECTOR IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE OF HER OVERT THREATS DURING THE ORIGINAL ALTERCATION.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.