CBC The National: Report on SMS this Wednesday

[swordfish]

I wonder if they feel the same way in Great Britain, Ireland, Australia, United States, South Africa, New Zealand, and most of the JAA contracting states. Not sure about Japan, but I believe they have a parallel system.

[TheStig]

Specifics of the CBC report and the Transwest accident aside, great discussion, kinda surprised that a forum of aviation professionals hasn't had a more serious discussion about SMS to this point? As mentioned the CBC may have been able to find a more suitable accident for their report, but it has certainly brought the SMS system to the forefront of our discussion.

IMHO SMS works very well in some organizations and has simply handed the wolves the keys to the henhouse in others. From my experience it seems like there is a direct connection between the influence/distance between management and ownership in how realistic the chances of SMS being used as envisioned are.

When the owners of an air operator also acts as DFO, CP, DoM, and CCP, what are the realistic chances of no-fault reporting working? Also is this an unfair burden to place on these air operators?

[jeta1]

.

[FL500]

Specifics of the CBC report and the Transwest accident aside, great discussion, kinda surprised that a forum of aviation professionals hasn't had a more serious discussion about SMS to this point?

well it would if the mods could stop screwing around the posts and delete what they wish at their whim... There was a good debate started between STL and old fog just yesterday and now wham... its gone. Fog was challenging STL for his negative views on SMS and given these two are somewhat veterans here, it made for interesting debate. Why bother coming back to follow a thread if the mods delete legitimate arguments... I did not read inappropriate materials in their back and forth... at least for the first 6 to 8 posts.

I respect both these two old guard fellas but in that discussion I agreed with Fog and I am also one who accepted SMS only after I fully understood what it stood for and what it ca do. The issue as stated is how TC is dealing with it. It's like anti-rust on a car - great concept, but if you dont apply it properly, it aint worth a nickel.

+1 I was really enjoying the debate between them and was hoping to learn more about SMS as I am on the fence regarding the issue and would like to learn more.

[Sasquash]

agreed. Perhaps the moderator in light of the above statements, might want to review the decision to delete the post between STL and the Fog. I found it a good source of information and besides, everyone is allowed to express their opinion and debate their opinion as necessary. We are all grown up, when I come across something I don`t like, I just don`t look at it...

[sky's the limit]

I removed the entire conversation between myself and Ofd because he broke a major rule of the site: keeping PM's private. In this case I trusted him with some very volatile information concerning the state of our industry - I made a severe error in judgement in that regard. My mistake.

He was given the opportunity to engage in a constructive conversation about SMS with someone who as a contract pilot gets to experience them on varying scales in a difficult sector of the industry - he chose to ignore the explicite rules of the site in addition to behaving in a manner that was less than civil or respectful in any way, while intentionally misrepresenting the information in an effort to discredit my opposing view. His account is currently under review by the Administrator.

I am sorry if some of you found the exchange useful, but that type of posting behaviour is absolutely forbidden on Avcanada's aviation forums, and will be removed immediately.

For what it is worth, I am happy to relay my personal experience's with SMS and my opinion of its implementation here in Canada via PM to anyone who is interested, but I have decided to refrain from further routine engagement on these boards in a public manner. It simply is not worth the time or energy anymore as people are generally more interested in argument and chest beating than constructive discussion.

Make no mistake, this system as it stands is flawed whether people who are married to the concept want to believe it or not, and the system includes how it is implemented - they simply are not two separate issues. The concept holds some promise, but so do chocolate cake recipes... and we all know how those turn out without the proper care and attention when mixing the ingredients.

stl

[The Old Fogducker]

Well, I'm always willing to make a contribution which will enhance the general understanding of various systems in Canadian aviation.

Safety Management Systems is a good tool inside an organization with at least some basic moral sense of right and wrong. Otherwise, it is as useless in changing the corporate culture as anything else that might be tried.

There are some cultures which cannot be rehabilitated by any means except eradication ... meaning, pulling the AOC and putting them out of business.

Trust me, I was very anti-SMS, and am now a convert, although it still has a long way to go.

There are some company executives which are blissfully unaware for the effect of the Westray Mine findings on all persons in a supervisory role, and may have to learn that lesson the hard way when an employee complains of unsafe working conditions and then no action is taken.

The Old Fogducker

PS ... regrettably STL destroyed the evidence which would have called his judgement into question. There was no posting of a PM as he alleges.

No doubt, he'll toast this post in seconds because he disagrees with it.

No, I'll leave it here for all to see Foggy. Lying now are we? Unbelievable. stl

[mcrit]

There was no posting of a PM as he alleges.

I can understand why STL wouldn't want his private messages made public.

[foxmoth]

Swordish

I am having trouble figuringt you out. After 40 years, you like SMS but do not like critisism of it. Are you on the 'sms team" for TC???

"The few that abuse the system doesn't mean the whole system is fucked"

Actually YES IT DOES!!! You build a law, everyone is supposed to abide by it.
We all know that people abuse the system. Why is it TC does not suspend their OC's??????
Why are poeple allowed to 'abuse' without response? (i.e. oversight) Why is 704/703 not made to comply?

If I speed on the highway an get caught, that is a law I broke. (Unless I surender myself in true SMS style.)

When I am in the hangar deciding on a trip, my Boss, the Owner, the President confrunts me one on one. I do not have a union rep, a chief pilot, an SMS manager, a Director of Flight Ops, to insulate me from his abuse. He signed the "Responsible Executive" mission statement but does nt give a rats ass.
Old Fog Ducker has it right.

[Old Dog Flying]

This whole SMS situation has me quite perplexed. Supposedly 703/704 operators are not required to participate but talking to a friend today who operates a ONE MAN aerial application business has been pressured into setting up his SMS system..how the hell does this work?

"Pardon me for a moment, I must report myself for having a messy hangar..and write up corrective action."

Again a case of the fox guarding the hen house!

[Prairie Chicken]

If tc wanted to provide high oversight with low staffing it would be in the form of radar, scales, ramp checks, and popup audits. You could find violations easily.

The work only starts after you find those alleged violations.

[Nephilim]

Thanks for the notes of support and constructive questions/criticisms from my last post (“Just say no”. I would have liked to have responded in a timely fashion, but was warned of a possible libel suit if I continued. I was impressed and thankful AvCanada kept open that thread as once before it was pulled when this all started coming to a head a few years ago. Well I now have a libel suit coming anyways, from the company for my comments on that thread, which comments were only meant to enhance safety in the aviation industry. My former employer has threatened me with a libel lawsuit, unless I apologize on this forum for what they say to be untrue statements. But then I would be telling a lie!

The Canadian Human Rights Commission has ruled that the matter is “not in the public interest” to be pursued, but that I should have accepted the company offer of $20,000 for pain and suffering and $10,000 for legal fees, and walk away from all other claims against the company. I disagree and do think that this matter is in the public interest under aviation safety and needs to be reviewed! I am willing to go through all the pain and humiliation etc, to have this case moved forward through the courts, and invite you (the aviation public) to learn from my mistakes and the company’s mistakes during this process.

I have also invited the CBC News, in light of its recent investigations into the CAR’s 703 SMS and Transport Canada joke, to follow this story as it unfolds. I have the truth and the documentation to prove it (did I tell you I was the only approved SMS Officer of the Company trying to implement this bullshit – when ‘root cause analysis’ was most often the mismanagement of the Accountable Executive)! Ooops, I forgot! That was delegated to me too!

In regards to wisdom for the young fellas out there in this industry, the advise from Mig29 is the best; “It is pretty disappointing when you go through all of these Gov't agencies for help, and they just turned their backs or pretend they didn't see anything. Sometimes I wonder if it's better in certain cases just to resign and walkway with no headaches and a clean reputation, with hopes of gaining a better job down the road, then to put up a fight with these morons?”

Very true and good advise under that scenario! In my case however, after a workplace “accident” and diagnosis of recurrent PTSD (originally caused by a 1981 airplane crash – mechanical failure) I approached the company H&S Rep for help but instead my reputation was ruined when this request for help was used against me to advance his career.

My health continued to deteriorate as I was worked (on call) 24/7. I first complained to Transport Canada in 2009 but my concerns were ignored and in fact TSB published wrong data concerning the accident details, which has only recently has been correctly amended. I requested my file from Transport Canada enforcement which of some 160 pages in length I received only 25 pages mostly blacked out and of no use (other than Transport Canada’s admission of responsibility). This error in part allowed my employer to believe there had been no accident as which story was being pushed by the H&S Rep, which misinformation the employer passed on to WSIB which has since denied my claim. After no accommodations were forth coming from the Employer as my health continued to deteriorate, I tried to resign in 2009 from the CP’s position, but was promised accommodation again by the employer only to have it denied once again two moths later.

I requested an internal investigation by the employer to resolve the issues but the company instead formed a secret committee to watch and report any wrong doing on my part while paying me a $20,000 bonus that year to shut up?). I approached the Labour Board in June 2010 with my many concerns including harassment and threats of violence in the workplace by that time. Despite cooperating fully with a supposed independent Health and Safety Officer approved through the Federal Government (but paid by the employer being investigated???) I was never given a copy of the report or any findings (despite the admission that there was harassment and violence in the workplace). My wrongful dismissal charge has been totally ignored pending the CHRC findings (which they have thus far refused to investigate because again, they say is not in the public interest).

My pilot’s license was pulled in August 2010 pending further medical examination but the company would still not accommodate, forcing me to resign from the Chief Pilot’s position as the License is a necessary ingredient to hold that job. The employer then told the authorities that I had resigned employment totally, and would have been dismissed “with just cause,” with absolutely no evidence against me.

The CHRC has now moved to a higher level of court in Toronto to determine if this case is in the public interest to proceed. For me to proceed will cost an additional several thousand dollars on top of the tens of thousands already spent, forcing me to re-mortgage our home to the hilt if I am to proceed through the courts. I will proceed … despite having much to loose.

Safe flying folks.

Ps. SMS is great for large companies as it provides another level of safety and is in their advantage to utilize that additional safety layer. However, as has been documented by the CBC, SMS for small carriers with a tight budget and capitalist for a boss with no Transport Canada responsibility is many disasters waiting to happen across Canada as is starting to be evident (or has this year been just bad luck in this industry?). Speaking of that, have you ever wondered how Transport Canada can allow non-aviation licensed people, not qualified in any way but being a wannabe capitalist (which is what any business owner is), to be the operations manager’s or accountable executive of an aviation company with the power to over rule those with the licenses and the experience?

[The Weasel]

However, as has been documented by the CBC, SMS for small carriers with a tight budget and capitalist for a boss with no Transport Canada responsibility is many disasters waiting to happen across Canada as is starting to be evident (or has this year been just bad luck in this industry?).

I don't see how companies with a tight budget and a 'capitalist' for a boss have operated any differently in the past, without SMS. But, I suppose as long as people choose to work for those kinds of companies and put up with their crap, they will continue to exist...

SMS itself isn't the problem, it's the implementation timeline that has been mis-managed. Just get the darn system into place for all operators.