Air Canada Pilots support new Safety Management System, parliamentary committee told
OTTAWA, Feb. 22 /CNW/ - Canada's largest commercial airline pilot group told the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities (TRAN) yesterday that it supports the introduction of a Safety Management System (SMS) for commercial aviation in Canada. The pilot group is also, for the most part, in favor of the other proposed amendments to the Aeronautics Act encompassed in Bill C-6.
"We understand that the rationale for the bill is to enhance the safety of Canada's aviation system and we believe that SMS is an important advance in this area," said Capt. Brian Boucher, Senior Director of Flight Safety for the Air Canada Pilots Association. "We deal daily with the operational implications of the air regulations. It is not an exaggeration to say that flight safety is our world."
SMS aims to achieve a culture wherein each individual contributes to and is responsible for safety, and where the reporting of safety concerns is actively encouraged.
While more responsibility is placed with the individual and airline, Boucher also said Transport Canada as a regulator must continue to play an active role in overseeing air safety in Canada.
Boucher also told the committee that the role of the regulator changes under SMS, but it does not disappear.
"When it comes to Air Canada, we are working with management to ensure that safety issues are addressed in a proactive and positive way," Boucher adds. "Our ability to participate in this process is enhanced by SMS."
ACPA is the largest professional pilot group in Canada, representing the over 3,100 pilots who operate Air Canada's mainline fleet.
Press Release
Air Canada Pilots support new Safety Management System
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
Crazed Windscreen
- Rank 2
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:02 am
You must work for a responsible operation. As discussed on the SMS threads, responsible ops who are already safety concious are not the problem ... it is the irresponsible operators who do not operate safely that are causing the problems. SMS won't make a scrap of difference if TC backs off still more on their oversight.
And you know what, I am becoming a bit of an expert.
And you know what, I am becoming a bit of an expert.
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Actually it could make it easier for uncscrupulous operators to cut corners."" it is the irresponsible operators who do not operate safely that are causing the problems. SMS won't make a scrap of difference if TC backs off still more on their oversight.
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Thank you Cat, allow me to rephrase myself:
" it is the irresponsible operators who do not operate safely that are causing the problems. SMS won't make a scrap of difference if TC backs off still more on their oversight, except to open doors further for said unscrupulous operators.
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
-
parrot_head
- Rank 2
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 7:24 pm
Just to add fuel to the fire.....
Airline passenger safety in jeopardy, inspectors warn
Union raises alarmover pending changes
CARLY WEEKS CanWest News ServiceOTTAWA
The safety ofCanada’saviation system is in jeopardy because of radical changes the government is making to the way its federal inspectors operate and by allowing the industry to increasingly oversee its own safety standards, theheadof the union representing inspectors saidWednesday.
In fact, a new poll commissioned by theCanadianFederalPilots Association found that 74 per cent of safety inspectors felt amajor air accident is likely to occur in Canada in the near future— and 61 per cent said the proposed changes would increase the risk.
The group said the federal government is shifting important safety responsibilities onto the industry to cut costs and Canadian passengers will be forced to pay the price.
“We’re reducing what we do in safety oversight to what’s affordable,” said union chairmanGreg Holbrook.
TransportCanadais rolling out anew safety-management system that will change the way government inspectors operate. Instead of conducting blanket audits andinspections of all airlines, inspectors will focus on companies that areidentifiedas having thegreatest risk.
While the union representing the inspectors says the changes will be detrimental toCanada’sair safety, Transport Canada says it will improve its checksand-balances systemand help allocate resources more efficiently.
“The inspectors are going to be asked to do things a little bit differently,” TransportCanada spokeswomanLucie Vignola said.“In someforms, wearebasically askingfor theindustry tobemore activeinaviation safety. We want them to identify the issues.”
TransportMinister LawrenceCannon saidWednesday the new safety-management systems would enhance the sound system that’s already inplaceand pointed to Canada’s good air safety recordas proof thedepartment is committed to quality.
“We are putting in place a securitymanagement system that basically calls upon everybody who is involved in the industry to add on an additional layer in terms of security and safety to those who take our airlines,” he said during Question Period.
But Holbrook said the government’s plan wouldallow theairlineindustry to be responsible for monitoring its safety standards and compliance with regulations. Many inspectors are concerned that could create a situation where some major problems aren’t detected or corrected.
Nearly 250 inspectors, or about 65per cent of those employed by Transport Canada, completed the Pollara survey between Jan. 26 and Feb. 2.
The group, which appeared at the Commons transport committee Wednesday, is calling on the federal government to reject changes they say would turn safety inspections over toindustry associations.
NDP transport critic Peter Julian said theproposedchanges represent serious safety risks and accused Cannon of putting the lives of Canadians at risk.
“The fact is the minister is promoting the reckless endangerment of Canadians,” Julian said during question period.
But the Air Transport Association of Canada, which represents commercial airlines, dismissedclaims thesechanges willimpede safety and said thenew systemis a step in the right direction.
“Passengers by no means should be concernedat all,” saidFredGasper, vicepresident of policy and strategic planning. “The safety and security of our passengersis something we wouldnever compromise on.”
Airline passenger safety in jeopardy, inspectors warn
Union raises alarmover pending changes
CARLY WEEKS CanWest News ServiceOTTAWA
The safety ofCanada’saviation system is in jeopardy because of radical changes the government is making to the way its federal inspectors operate and by allowing the industry to increasingly oversee its own safety standards, theheadof the union representing inspectors saidWednesday.
In fact, a new poll commissioned by theCanadianFederalPilots Association found that 74 per cent of safety inspectors felt amajor air accident is likely to occur in Canada in the near future— and 61 per cent said the proposed changes would increase the risk.
The group said the federal government is shifting important safety responsibilities onto the industry to cut costs and Canadian passengers will be forced to pay the price.
“We’re reducing what we do in safety oversight to what’s affordable,” said union chairmanGreg Holbrook.
TransportCanadais rolling out anew safety-management system that will change the way government inspectors operate. Instead of conducting blanket audits andinspections of all airlines, inspectors will focus on companies that areidentifiedas having thegreatest risk.
While the union representing the inspectors says the changes will be detrimental toCanada’sair safety, Transport Canada says it will improve its checksand-balances systemand help allocate resources more efficiently.
“The inspectors are going to be asked to do things a little bit differently,” TransportCanada spokeswomanLucie Vignola said.“In someforms, wearebasically askingfor theindustry tobemore activeinaviation safety. We want them to identify the issues.”
TransportMinister LawrenceCannon saidWednesday the new safety-management systems would enhance the sound system that’s already inplaceand pointed to Canada’s good air safety recordas proof thedepartment is committed to quality.
“We are putting in place a securitymanagement system that basically calls upon everybody who is involved in the industry to add on an additional layer in terms of security and safety to those who take our airlines,” he said during Question Period.
But Holbrook said the government’s plan wouldallow theairlineindustry to be responsible for monitoring its safety standards and compliance with regulations. Many inspectors are concerned that could create a situation where some major problems aren’t detected or corrected.
Nearly 250 inspectors, or about 65per cent of those employed by Transport Canada, completed the Pollara survey between Jan. 26 and Feb. 2.
The group, which appeared at the Commons transport committee Wednesday, is calling on the federal government to reject changes they say would turn safety inspections over toindustry associations.
NDP transport critic Peter Julian said theproposedchanges represent serious safety risks and accused Cannon of putting the lives of Canadians at risk.
“The fact is the minister is promoting the reckless endangerment of Canadians,” Julian said during question period.
But the Air Transport Association of Canada, which represents commercial airlines, dismissedclaims thesechanges willimpede safety and said thenew systemis a step in the right direction.
“Passengers by no means should be concernedat all,” saidFredGasper, vicepresident of policy and strategic planning. “The safety and security of our passengersis something we wouldnever compromise on.”
-
Crazed Windscreen
- Rank 2
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:02 am
Widow [/quote]responsible ops who are already safety concious are not the problem ... it is the irresponsible operators who do not operate safely that are causing the problems. SMS won't make a scrap of difference if TC backs off still more on their oversight.
And you know what, I am becoming a bit of an expert.
And you know what, I am becoming a bit of an expert.
So when a responsible operator has an accident its ok because they have SMS?
And your an expert because......?
-
Crazed Windscreen
- Rank 2
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:02 am
Widow [/quote]responsible ops who are already safety concious are not the problem ... it is the irresponsible operators who do not operate safely that are causing the problems. SMS won't make a scrap of difference if TC backs off still more on their oversight.
And you know what, I am becoming a bit of an expert.[quote]
So when a responsible operator has an accident its ok because they have SMS?
And your an expert because......?
And you know what, I am becoming a bit of an expert.[quote]
So when a responsible operator has an accident its ok because they have SMS?
And your an expert because......?
-
Crazed Windscreen
- Rank 2
- Posts: 76
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:02 am
Let me get into this a bit.
First of all crazed one, before you question anybody's credentials for posting perhaps you should look at your own, and further, look at how you are able to pass judgement on anybody's credentials. Knowledge, in this case, I believe makes someone an expert. And the truth is the truth, no matter what the source. So let me ask you. What makes you feel that you can post disparging remarks about other posters.?
With regard to your statement that it is OK for a responsible operator to have an accident because they have SMS. I do not know where you got that bit of reasoning. Are you making a statement or really asking a question?
Now on to the topic. Air Canada has a great infrastructure which means that SMS is pretty much already there. Does not cause more paperwork, and means less regualatory oversight. Seems like a no brainer to support it.
On the other hand, to some operators, SMS is not in place, and they dont want more paperwork...less oversight means more opportunity to abuse the regulations. I believe that is why the TC inspectors themselves are not in favor of it. They seem to be able to better predict the consequences of less oversight to some operators.
However, it could also mean that the good operators will have less oversight and the sleazos are able to get more attention. The problem is that it will, as alway with TC, be a paper thing, and the sleazos will do the paper.
It is just one more beuracratic attempt to document evidence.
First of all crazed one, before you question anybody's credentials for posting perhaps you should look at your own, and further, look at how you are able to pass judgement on anybody's credentials. Knowledge, in this case, I believe makes someone an expert. And the truth is the truth, no matter what the source. So let me ask you. What makes you feel that you can post disparging remarks about other posters.?
With regard to your statement that it is OK for a responsible operator to have an accident because they have SMS. I do not know where you got that bit of reasoning. Are you making a statement or really asking a question?
Now on to the topic. Air Canada has a great infrastructure which means that SMS is pretty much already there. Does not cause more paperwork, and means less regualatory oversight. Seems like a no brainer to support it.
On the other hand, to some operators, SMS is not in place, and they dont want more paperwork...less oversight means more opportunity to abuse the regulations. I believe that is why the TC inspectors themselves are not in favor of it. They seem to be able to better predict the consequences of less oversight to some operators.
However, it could also mean that the good operators will have less oversight and the sleazos are able to get more attention. The problem is that it will, as alway with TC, be a paper thing, and the sleazos will do the paper.
It is just one more beuracratic attempt to document evidence.
No, when a responsible operator has an accident, they will deal with it through SMS, as they probably already did before SMS was introduced. When they have an accident, it is more likely because of unforeseen circumstances.Crazed Windscreen wrote:
So when a responsible operator has an accident its ok because they have SMS?
And your an expert because......?
When an irresponsible operator has an accident, they will not deal with it through SMS, in fact are more likely to hide anything which would indicate their own culpability, as they did before SMS. When they have an accident, it is likely to be because of systematic problems in the company (poor maintenance, poor training, poor communications).
Understand?
I am becoming an expert because .... this is a very important issue which has a lot of relevance to the changes I would like to see in order to prevent similar accidents to the one that killed my husband. I have spent a lot of time researching, and not just accepted one persons "it works for us" and anothers "it won't work".
Former Advocate for Floatplane Safety
Having stayed away from Widow's topics, I just have to say this;
Having obtained a CPL with minimum hours, people concider themselves professionals when in fact, they have barely scratched the surface of aviation.
Having read Widow's posts and website it is easy to see she has dug deeper into this industry than most "drivers" will in their entire career.
In my opinion, that makes her an expert. Not a pilot but an aviation industry expert none the less.
Good points as usual Trey.
Having obtained a CPL with minimum hours, people concider themselves professionals when in fact, they have barely scratched the surface of aviation.
Having read Widow's posts and website it is easy to see she has dug deeper into this industry than most "drivers" will in their entire career.
In my opinion, that makes her an expert. Not a pilot but an aviation industry expert none the less.
Good points as usual Trey.
