"Who Are Those (Hanger) Guys?"
02-27-2013, 09:48 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: 757
Posts: 42
"Who Are Those (Hanger) Guys?"
Yes, I meant to spell "hanger" that way. The other spelling, hangar, is of course a building we park aircraft in. Hanger is better associated with heavy-rope neckties and trap doors installed on town square gallows of the wild west. So as Butch kept asking Sundance while being hunted by the posse, "Who are those guys?" I have the same question about our Hangar FCs.
Recently, a Hangar message told of a long delay one of our crews caused for multiple aircraft stuck behind them as they worked a malfunction. Without question, a bad event. As the story reads on, it’s clear the "focus" here was to put all the blame on the crew. So I ask, is this our new FC quality program?
Having done a considerable amount of quality assurance work and training in a previous life, quality-101 tells us that quality management focuses on the process. Old school pre-quality management puts all the blame on people (crews).
Not very long ago, an FCIF told the crew force that too many of us were returning to the gate with MELs. To do a better self-help job of moving the jets we were given more latitude to reset things and even a goody bag of CB collars to install on pulled CBs. Perhaps the next kit will include speed-tape and safety wire. Regardless, the management theme here was to try our best not to return to the gate. That said, while it’s obvious no one wants to block traffic while working a problem, management seems to be talking out of both sides of their mouth here.
Yes, this crew could have probably done a better job of getting out of the way. But should the entirety of this delay rest on their shoulders? I thought we were a team here. I mean after a few minutes, it would seem Ramp Tower could direct them to a gate or other out of the way location. Even in a worse case situation with the crew off frequency, a simple Ramp Tower phone call to GOC or MOCC could relay/ACARS the message that the crew needs to need to move the jet right now. FC quality improvement process anyone? Finally, I suppose as a last resort the company could send George Kennedy (Joe Patroni) to the scene with a tug and a tow-bar as the snowplow trucks lurch ever closer to our MEL-stricken 707.
Back to quality and process, our MEL/PDM guidance is quite scatted in a spider web of FCIF, MEL, PDM, QRH, FOM, Comm update and now FC Hangar comments. You know something here…we own Kinkos. Like the old laminated de-ice cards, which were a good thing we abandoned, perhaps a laminated cockpit card tying all of these MEL/PDM loose ends together could be used as an actual quality-driven process improvement. Thus, until we begin to see less blame-it-all-on-the-crew commentary, and more FC quality-driven process improvements emerge, I’ll have to keep wondering like Butch, "Who are those (hanger) guys?"
Recently, a Hangar message told of a long delay one of our crews caused for multiple aircraft stuck behind them as they worked a malfunction. Without question, a bad event. As the story reads on, it’s clear the "focus" here was to put all the blame on the crew. So I ask, is this our new FC quality program?
Having done a considerable amount of quality assurance work and training in a previous life, quality-101 tells us that quality management focuses on the process. Old school pre-quality management puts all the blame on people (crews).
Not very long ago, an FCIF told the crew force that too many of us were returning to the gate with MELs. To do a better self-help job of moving the jets we were given more latitude to reset things and even a goody bag of CB collars to install on pulled CBs. Perhaps the next kit will include speed-tape and safety wire. Regardless, the management theme here was to try our best not to return to the gate. That said, while it’s obvious no one wants to block traffic while working a problem, management seems to be talking out of both sides of their mouth here.
Yes, this crew could have probably done a better job of getting out of the way. But should the entirety of this delay rest on their shoulders? I thought we were a team here. I mean after a few minutes, it would seem Ramp Tower could direct them to a gate or other out of the way location. Even in a worse case situation with the crew off frequency, a simple Ramp Tower phone call to GOC or MOCC could relay/ACARS the message that the crew needs to need to move the jet right now. FC quality improvement process anyone? Finally, I suppose as a last resort the company could send George Kennedy (Joe Patroni) to the scene with a tug and a tow-bar as the snowplow trucks lurch ever closer to our MEL-stricken 707.
Back to quality and process, our MEL/PDM guidance is quite scatted in a spider web of FCIF, MEL, PDM, QRH, FOM, Comm update and now FC Hangar comments. You know something here…we own Kinkos. Like the old laminated de-ice cards, which were a good thing we abandoned, perhaps a laminated cockpit card tying all of these MEL/PDM loose ends together could be used as an actual quality-driven process improvement. Thus, until we begin to see less blame-it-all-on-the-crew commentary, and more FC quality-driven process improvements emerge, I’ll have to keep wondering like Butch, "Who are those (hanger) guys?"
02-27-2013, 11:00 AM
#4
Nice lookin' tree, there!
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD-11, old man
Posts: 2,198
Hi Velcro, I'm not throwing stones and I don't know the details here, other than what I've read on the company site but a very quick call to the Ramp Tower at the onset of this issue could/may have remedied the back up.
fbh
fbh
02-27-2013, 11:49 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
The PDM process is covered in the updated MEL Introduction pages. There is a link under Manuals too. An example of how to make the writeup is on a laminated card in the AML. Preface your ACARS msg to Mx (and Ops) with 'PDM'
02-28-2013, 10:17 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Left to right
Posts: 119
QDM guideline #1 at FedEx: Blame the pilots. Improving the process costs money from this years' budget. The bean counters won't approve that. I see the same mantra in the ASAP/SMS process here. Our benefits so far have been newsletters highlighting pilot gaffs. How about changing our fom, flight manuals, and training process to address our recurring safety events?
02-28-2013, 06:01 PM
#8
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by Velcro Captain
I’ll have to keep wondering like Butch, "Who are those (hanger) guys?"
.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
