S.3048, allows management to use CVR's against pilots!
- Thread starter saxman
- Start date
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Nigel Croker
Well-Known Member
They will go buh-bye because pilots would literally shut the hell up and not say a word, hence killing their worth. Safety will be compromised, pilots will never discuss mistakes made with their peers ever again for fear of reprisal, and that alone will keep us from being able to talk to our peers about how to do it different next time, and in the end, safety will be compromised. I garrantee if this goes through, Ill stay in 135 and if it gets into 135 ops, then the only words out of my mouth are printed in the profile book, thing is Im already a pretty quiet guy and more than capable of flying for hours with nothing but my own thoughts...:insane:
seagull
Well-Known Member
We need to differentiate between two entirely different concepts.
1. The use of ANY aircraft recording device in the use of discipline should NEVER be allowed. At no time should a CVR be used by management for discipline. Therefore proposal by this legislator is awful and should be stopped.
2. Adding CVR to the FOQA type mix, as proposed by NTSB. In this scenario, the CVR data would be DEIDENTIFIED, and ONLY the union gatekeepers would know the identity of the crew. My thought is the union would transcribe it, so the voices are not there for anyone else. An identified problem with an individual would be addressed by pro stan.
Further, due to the workload (which is why ATA is concerned with the idea), it would only be done on flights where the FDM indicated a problem.
Now, with THAT backdrop, to say that adding that information would not be of value is to totally misunderstand post incident/accident analysis (should add that most pilot unions opposed CVRs in the first place based on many of the arguments proffered in this thread, i.e., "pilots would literally shut the hell up and not say a word, hence killing their worth", and none of those concerns proved to be founded). Having reviewed literally dozens of accidents/incidents/events, I can think of MANY times where the CVR would have been helpful to sort out what happened and why. The only other way is to interview the crew, but that might or might not give you good data. Human memory is not very good, for one thing. If there is a problem of willful non-compliance, then that information should be available to the company to incorporate into general training, safety promotion, etc. Particularly if it is a widespread issue.
The union can have their pro stan folks talk to the individual crews either way, but if it is a wide trend, the fix is going to be in the AQP, safety promotion and similar.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
In the event that CVR monitoring was added to FOQA, I can guarantee you that every MEC in the country would immediately shut down their FOQA programs. Nice safety enhancement.
seagull
Well-Known Member
In the event that CVR monitoring was added to FOQA, I can guarantee you that every MEC in the country would immediately shut down their FOQA programs. Nice safety enhancement.
Nice logical reasoning for not doing it.
That would be because ALPA doesn't care about safety? :insane:
This is the problem with the political types that get involved in the Association. They pander to their groups using arguments that lack any rational basis. I have yet to see ONE rational argument countering what I have advocated. Not ONE. Just a bunch of fear mongering and personal attacks against me!
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Nice logical reasoning for not doing it.
That would be because ALPA doesn't care about safety? :insane:
This is the problem with the political types that get involved in the Association. They pander to their groups using arguments that lack any rational basis. I have yet to see ONE rational argument countering what I have advocated. Not ONE. Just a bunch of fear mongering and personal attacks against me!
There are a number of reasons from Polar, above, which very clearly outline the position of many professionals.
However, if you need to keep crying victim, go right ahead.
Nigel Croker
Well-Known Member
Well for better or worse, this is what I fired off to Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida:
I urge you to not vote in favor of Sen. Demints proposed legislation. As a pilot I can assure you this will erode safety. Every pilot will become totally silent on the flightdeck, (save for the necessary words required to fly the plane) for fear that any word or sentence they utter can and may be taken out of context. This bill will remove safety from the flightdeck of the airlines. Pilots will no longer discuss how to do things differently after an event, nor will they voluntarily disclose mistakes (as we currently do now) in ASAP with the interest of making things safer. ASAP, and FOQA programs will cease to exist the minute this is voted in, I can absolutely guarantee this. Please take a moment to see just how much the ASAP and FOQA programs mean to the safety of the airlines. Crew resorce managment (CRM) is dependent on pilots communicating with each other during events, to back one another up and double the layers of safety. If you allow managment to eavesdrop on pilots punitivly, pilots will cease to excercise good CRM. They may subconsciously become more worried about how they will be judged, we dont need this during an emergency. I ask you "When" an emergency happens do you want a relaxed, comfortable pilots flying the plane your family is on, or do you want tense, uptight and possibly even paranoid pilots in control of that aircraft? This bill will become the law of unintended consequences. Please consider what I have said, and vote No on this bill.
I urge you to not vote in favor of Sen. Demints proposed legislation. As a pilot I can assure you this will erode safety. Every pilot will become totally silent on the flightdeck, (save for the necessary words required to fly the plane) for fear that any word or sentence they utter can and may be taken out of context. This bill will remove safety from the flightdeck of the airlines. Pilots will no longer discuss how to do things differently after an event, nor will they voluntarily disclose mistakes (as we currently do now) in ASAP with the interest of making things safer. ASAP, and FOQA programs will cease to exist the minute this is voted in, I can absolutely guarantee this. Please take a moment to see just how much the ASAP and FOQA programs mean to the safety of the airlines. Crew resorce managment (CRM) is dependent on pilots communicating with each other during events, to back one another up and double the layers of safety. If you allow managment to eavesdrop on pilots punitivly, pilots will cease to excercise good CRM. They may subconsciously become more worried about how they will be judged, we dont need this during an emergency. I ask you "When" an emergency happens do you want a relaxed, comfortable pilots flying the plane your family is on, or do you want tense, uptight and possibly even paranoid pilots in control of that aircraft? This bill will become the law of unintended consequences. Please consider what I have said, and vote No on this bill.
RightSeatGirl
KA'PLAH BITCHES!
The asinine thing about this legislative nonsense is the simple fact that airplanes aren't exactly falling out of the sky everyday now are they...
The United States Air Transport system is the safest in the world and it gets safer everyday with improvements of technology and equipment. Statistically, I would argue the industry can become significantly no safer then it already is regardless of any new legislation. What truly needs to be changed and enhanced are working conditions within the industry, change that, and I believe there may actually be a small, but meansurable, statistical increase in safety. It won't be monumental because as above I feel it just can't get much safer then it is. But this is a really nice effort to derail the real problem causers in the industry. Instead of blaming companies for bad schedules, ridiculous pay, etc..let's blame the pilots right! Because we all know that safety is the number one priority of the airlines.....Believe that, and I've got oceanfront property in Ohio for sale!
The United States Air Transport system is the safest in the world and it gets safer everyday with improvements of technology and equipment. Statistically, I would argue the industry can become significantly no safer then it already is regardless of any new legislation. What truly needs to be changed and enhanced are working conditions within the industry, change that, and I believe there may actually be a small, but meansurable, statistical increase in safety. It won't be monumental because as above I feel it just can't get much safer then it is. But this is a really nice effort to derail the real problem causers in the industry. Instead of blaming companies for bad schedules, ridiculous pay, etc..let's blame the pilots right! Because we all know that safety is the number one priority of the airlines.....Believe that, and I've got oceanfront property in Ohio for sale!
I have to completely agree with you on this. And I think this is an attempt to take the spotlight away from this exact thing. Shamefull isn't it.
Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
So yeah, I'm reading the sentiments of folks in this thread. Polar's statements seem to ring especially true.
... my inner conspiracy theorist wonders...
We've all seen legislation get written to change the way that airlines do business. Some of them have made some headway towards becoming laws.
Politics and posturing is as much a part of this job (in terms of Washington) as many other parts of society.
Here's a thought: We pass one of the pending legislations, which the companies and the ATA/RAA clearly doesn't want... it opens the door for further legislative change.
Polar has illustrated that this would only really be a useful mechanism for specifically targeting individuals and not data streaming in general.
I've heard some of the post-mishap and post-accident stories about how companies have tried to blame otherwise mechanical or exterior failures of the system on the pilots. Some of the arguments made have been ridiculous.
It's apparent to most pilots that the only real effective use of this program would be to 'keep us in line'. That would mean that the implied value of this bill is not an end improvement in safety, it's to try and scare people away from pushing legislative change in general, lest such efforts encourage the passing of THIS bill as well.
In other words, the ATA and the RAA have issued a challenge: "Make it harder on us, no matter what the intent or reason, and you're going to pay for it, dearly."
It's a fear grenade.
It's a definite threat and should be treated as such, but we should also look at it in a greater scope, I think. It's a cowardly move, and it gives clear perspective on who we're really dealing with.
(.... and yes, I know a Senator proposed this. Who do you think put him up to it? I think we all believe that lobbyists of all sides are working like mad these days.)
... my inner conspiracy theorist wonders...
We've all seen legislation get written to change the way that airlines do business. Some of them have made some headway towards becoming laws.
Politics and posturing is as much a part of this job (in terms of Washington) as many other parts of society.
Here's a thought: We pass one of the pending legislations, which the companies and the ATA/RAA clearly doesn't want... it opens the door for further legislative change.
Polar has illustrated that this would only really be a useful mechanism for specifically targeting individuals and not data streaming in general.
I've heard some of the post-mishap and post-accident stories about how companies have tried to blame otherwise mechanical or exterior failures of the system on the pilots. Some of the arguments made have been ridiculous.
It's apparent to most pilots that the only real effective use of this program would be to 'keep us in line'. That would mean that the implied value of this bill is not an end improvement in safety, it's to try and scare people away from pushing legislative change in general, lest such efforts encourage the passing of THIS bill as well.
In other words, the ATA and the RAA have issued a challenge: "Make it harder on us, no matter what the intent or reason, and you're going to pay for it, dearly."
It's a fear grenade.
It's a definite threat and should be treated as such, but we should also look at it in a greater scope, I think. It's a cowardly move, and it gives clear perspective on who we're really dealing with.
(.... and yes, I know a Senator proposed this. Who do you think put him up to it? I think we all believe that lobbyists of all sides are working like mad these days.)
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
Thought I warned you.
Don't waste anymore time with the non-vested interest individuals.
seagull
Well-Known Member
I was hardly crying victim, it would more appear that those with concerns are doing so?
In any event, what Polar was arguing is totally unrelated to what _I_ was proposing, which, I again reiterate, is NOT what this particular legislation was talking about either.
De-identified conversation, as a corrollary to FDM, would be useful in some FOQA analysis (not all, the time involved alone would preclude that!). However, there would be no reason for crews to be concerned IF THE UNION PILOTS WERE THE ONLY ONES WHO COULD ACCESS THE IDENTITY OF THE CREWS! That is what I am talking about, not management access to crew identities, or even the ability to do that.
And make it available to his employer, of course (the people he represents). I'd love to see that.
No you don't. You don't need to pay extra for a specialist, you just need someone who can listen attentively for things that seem out of place. If they find something, they can notify the higher-ups, and then you can have the pilot come in and explain themselves. If nothing was wrong, then nobody should have any cause to worry.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
FOQA alone may have done the job. No need to monitor CVRs. I highly doubt they would have NOT gone to FL410 and operated the aircraft in the manner they did simply because the CVR was being monitored. Maybe a few less f-bombs, and they may have fessed up to the dual engine failure earlier, but I don't think it would have prevented core lock on the engines.
seagull
Well-Known Member
FOQA might have pointed to a trend, if it happened a few times. That is not the best example. A better one would be a scenario where you are not sure if something you're seeing on FOQA is just a confusion issue or an intentional violation. With a true FOQA program, if you could add the CVR transcripts to the mix, it might point to a trend of willful non-compliance that could be addressed BEFORE a real event was not accepted by an ASAP ERC, so was sent to FAA for a violation. Used right (as I described above), it could result in FEWER actions against pilots.
FlyingPoke
I'm here to help...
Just wanted to say this was hilarious and I laughed out loud... alone, always feel like an idiot laughing alone at the computer.
Also, should this incredibly mindless bill come to fruition, it may just be bad enough to finally unite the entire 121 pilot group and show that if you all work together things could change... but thats probably just me dreaming a little.:insane:
jynxyjoe
Queso King
The more I work around pilots the more I see it's all about #1. The really new to this profession and the really senior in this profession never cease to amaze me with the "me first" mentality. I understand completely why unions used to crack peoples heads with lead pipes back in the days, I'd like to bring some of that back.
Makes me miss my ramping days.
