Narrative:

This concerns MEL 31-63-01 condition 'D' versus condition 'B.' during flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1; the status display unit (sdu) aka: lower ECAM display unit was written up as 'too dim in flight' and notice was sent to ZZZ1 maintenance via ACARS. After parking at gate; two maintenance personnel came to the cockpit with checklist in hand and began checking out the sdu. They pointed out that the screen brightened with direct light from a flashlight and I said that it wasn't bright enough during flight with direct sunlight or even with overcast skies. They stated that there were no displays available in ZZZ1 and I replied that an MEL for that display would be fine.I departed the aircraft to get lunch and upon returning found that the first officer's navigation display (nd) and the sdu had been switched with each other; thus the MEL would now be for the nd (condition B) not the sdu (condition D)! The first officer would now have an inoperable navigation display; therefore no route; altitude constraints; en route airport/VOR positions; and very importantly; no radar display available. On the other hand; the sdu; used only occasionally; would be fine. I asked why they switched the two displays and they explained that the nd MEL was easier to apply than the sdu MEL. So; for the sake of a few minutes of MEL checklist items (one and one half pages) required for the sdu MEL; they were willing to sacrifice a safety of flight item; the nd (which only required four or five checklist items). The operational 'O' required checklist items was fairly long also; being about 3/4's of a page.I requested the displays be returned to their original positions and the sdu be MEL'ed. I was told to talk with maintenance controller X and I called him from the [passenger] loading bridge. He insisted that it was easier to MEL the nd; but after mentioning my safety of flight concerns of not having the navigation display and after a long pause; he said to switch them back. This was accomplished with the proper MEL placed on the sdu. After some difficulty proceeding through the sdu MEL checklist; the maintenance personnel went inside and retrieved an updated revision to this MEL; which simplified their procedures quite a bit (about a half-page long). We were also told that our next destination; ZZZ2; had a new display to replace the MEL'ed sdu and they did so.maintenance control wanted to take the easy/quickest way out with no regard for the safest way to resolve the problem of a 'lower ECAM (sdu) too dim in flight' write up. This was passed down from maintenance control; no less.maintenance should always have the latest MEL revisions available. If they had; they would have been able to place the MEL much more quickly on the sdu and therefore not compromise the safety of our flight by dispatching with only one navigation display. Safety is always first!

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An A319 pilot raises 'safety of flight' concerns after Maintenance Control instructs mechanics to swap a lower ECAM status display unit that was written-up for 'too dim in flight' with a functional First Officer's Navigation Display (ND) for deferral under MEL 31-63-01; category 'D' versus category 'B.'

Narrative: This concerns MEL 31-63-01 condition 'D' versus condition 'B.' During flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1; the Status Display Unit (SDU) aka: lower ECAM display unit was written up as 'too dim in flight' and notice was sent to ZZZ1 Maintenance via ACARS. After parking at gate; two Maintenance personnel came to the cockpit with checklist in hand and began checking out the SDU. They pointed out that the screen brightened with direct light from a flashlight and I said that it wasn't bright enough during flight with direct sunlight or even with overcast skies. They stated that there were no displays available in ZZZ1 and I replied that an MEL for that display would be fine.I departed the aircraft to get lunch and upon returning found that the First Officer's Navigation Display (ND) and the SDU had been switched with each other; thus the MEL would now be for the ND (condition B) not the SDU (condition D)! The First Officer would now have an inoperable NAV display; therefore no route; altitude constraints; en route airport/VOR positions; and very importantly; no radar display available. On the other hand; the SDU; used only occasionally; would be fine. I asked why they switched the two displays and they explained that the ND MEL was easier to apply than the SDU MEL. So; for the sake of a few minutes of MEL checklist items (one and one half pages) required for the SDU MEL; they were willing to sacrifice a safety of flight item; the ND (which only required four or five checklist items). The operational 'O' required checklist items was fairly long also; being about 3/4's of a page.I requested the displays be returned to their original positions and the SDU be MEL'ed. I was told to talk with Maintenance Controller X and I called him from the [passenger] loading bridge. He insisted that it was easier to MEL the ND; but after mentioning my safety of flight concerns of not having the NAV display and after a long pause; he said to switch them back. This was accomplished with the proper MEL placed on the SDU. After some difficulty proceeding through the SDU MEL checklist; the Maintenance personnel went inside and retrieved an updated revision to this MEL; which simplified their procedures quite a bit (about a half-page long). We were also told that our next destination; ZZZ2; had a new display to replace the MEL'ed SDU and they did so.Maintenance Control wanted to take the easy/quickest way out with no regard for the safest way to resolve the problem of a 'lower ECAM (SDU) too dim in flight' write up. This was passed down from Maintenance Control; no less.Maintenance should always have the latest MEL revisions available. If they had; they would have been able to place the MEL much more quickly on the SDU and therefore not compromise the safety of our flight by dispatching with only one NAV display. Safety is always first!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.