SWA Fires LGA CA
10-03-2013 | 04:46 PM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
In much the same way that Naval Aviation would run at least two concurrent investigations. SIR (Safety related with the concept of 'Privilege') and the JAGMAN (Legal related). There will also be a FFPB conducted by the squadron with the express purpose of figuring out if any disciplinary steps should be taken with a range of actions.
10-03-2013 | 09:57 PM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,305
Likes: 249
One would hope! Compared to other carriers, SWA taxi is fast, and they usually take the first turnoff after landing. Perhaps a cultural change is needed? When you pay pilots based on fixed trip values it creates a culture in which the job needs to completed in a minimal amount of time. Sometimes this leads to rushing.
10-03-2013 | 10:11 PM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,305
Likes: 249
From my experience, this is usually the way an investigation is conducted. As soon as the accident/incident is reported, the NTSB "duty officer", or whatever the official title is these days, will make a determination as to whether the "Go Team" is to be launched. If so, the Investigator In Charge (IIC) will make the initial assignment to the various working groups. They may include the maintenance group; operations group, CVR/DVR group, etc. Each group leader will in turn assign various duties to team members.
It's common for the NTSB, airline, aircraft manufacturer, airport, possible union personnel and others to be represented in each group as appropriate.
I served on the CVR/DVR working group in both NTSB accident investigations I was a part of. We were all present when the CVR and DVR were opened and we listened to the CVR tapes over and over. As per NTSB protocols, we each had to write down every word that was spoken on the CVR. That's listening to the tapes hundreds of times. Incidentally, it wasn't fun in the second in which both crewmembers were killed instantly.
I suspect that when the initial meetings of each working group were completed, the SWA representatives went back to Dallas and conducted their own in-house investigation based on what they had seen and heard in their working groups. If enough evidence (yes, this IS a legal proceeding) exists to discipline an employee, there are channels for that to occur. One does NOT have to wait for the "official" NTSB final report to be issued to take required action against the employee. That doesn't mean the employee does not have legal recourse. Of course they do. It's just that the SWA internal investigation and the NTSB investigations have different mandates and different objectives.
When the NTSB final report is issued, we should be able to objectively look at the results of that report with the focus being on preventing future re-occurrences.
Just my two cents, which is worth $.011765 on today's' market close.
G'Day Mates
It's common for the NTSB, airline, aircraft manufacturer, airport, possible union personnel and others to be represented in each group as appropriate.
I served on the CVR/DVR working group in both NTSB accident investigations I was a part of. We were all present when the CVR and DVR were opened and we listened to the CVR tapes over and over. As per NTSB protocols, we each had to write down every word that was spoken on the CVR. That's listening to the tapes hundreds of times. Incidentally, it wasn't fun in the second in which both crewmembers were killed instantly.
I suspect that when the initial meetings of each working group were completed, the SWA representatives went back to Dallas and conducted their own in-house investigation based on what they had seen and heard in their working groups. If enough evidence (yes, this IS a legal proceeding) exists to discipline an employee, there are channels for that to occur. One does NOT have to wait for the "official" NTSB final report to be issued to take required action against the employee. That doesn't mean the employee does not have legal recourse. Of course they do. It's just that the SWA internal investigation and the NTSB investigations have different mandates and different objectives.
When the NTSB final report is issued, we should be able to objectively look at the results of that report with the focus being on preventing future re-occurrences.
Just my two cents, which is worth $.011765 on today's' market close.
G'Day Mates
Also, do you or anyone else know why the NTSB released only a partial CVR transcript for an accident like Colgan 3407? Initially, they did not release any of the FO comments about how the company kept screwing her, her problems with vacation/pay, schedules, etc etc. Only later did they add this information. Why not a full CVR release initially?
10-03-2013 | 10:53 PM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
As a "SWA-hater", I think we have to avoid getting wrapped-up in details. The big picture is quite simple. IF the rumored details are factual, then good on SW for firing the Captain. What would it say if they didn't? It would suggest they prefer loyalty over safety. As described here and elsewhere, the actions of the Captain are so outside the norm for any airline, that I don't see how SW could do anything but cut their losses in this case. Seems quite rational to me.
Again, based myself purely on rumors, I think there is no issue explaining the dismissal. It might be more problematic explaining how this Captain was not fired much earlier. Even there, I'd give SW the benefit of the doubt.
Again, based myself purely on rumors, I think there is no issue explaining the dismissal. It might be more problematic explaining how this Captain was not fired much earlier. Even there, I'd give SW the benefit of the doubt.
10-04-2013 | 03:37 AM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Harsh crowd.
We're not talking about firing someone from a job; we're talking about ending someone's career. I'm not sure what exactly should result in re-training, and when someone should have their career ended. It will be interesting to see the final report.
We're not talking about firing someone from a job; we're talking about ending someone's career. I'm not sure what exactly should result in re-training, and when someone should have their career ended. It will be interesting to see the final report.
10-04-2013 | 05:35 AM
#66
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 1
The Captain of AA 331 in Kingston, Jamaica got his job back. That was obviously a full hull loss, while SWA was not. So why should she not be given the opportunity to get her job back like the AA 331 Captain did? On top of that, the AA Captain spoke with the press in the days after the accident.
10-04-2013 | 05:40 AM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
Likes: 0
I think the reason some of the judgments seem harsh is that they're not based on upcoming reports, but on leaks/rumors yet to be proved or disproved. Out of respect for the person that told me what might be the inside story, and for SW, I'm not going to expand.
I've long been a critic of SWA's culture when it comes to safety, but many on here have argued convincingly that my views were outdated. They're probably right.
Based on what think I "know", this person was an outlier, who doesn't represent the men and women that fly for SW very well.
Based on the actual evidence released to date, you might be right to say the judgment is harsh.
Of course, SWA has the evidence you and I don't have or can't validate, and it doesn't look like they erred in firing the Captain.
I've long been a critic of SWA's culture when it comes to safety, but many on here have argued convincingly that my views were outdated. They're probably right.
Based on what think I "know", this person was an outlier, who doesn't represent the men and women that fly for SW very well.
Based on the actual evidence released to date, you might be right to say the judgment is harsh.
Of course, SWA has the evidence you and I don't have or can't validate, and it doesn't look like they erred in firing the Captain.
10-04-2013 | 05:44 AM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
From: Doing what you do, for less.
Sure, it sucks for the pilot involved, but thats not something you can say "oh everyone does that, its ok, we'll fix it, everything will be made all better."
10-04-2013 | 05:44 AM
#70
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 1
I'm not rendering a personal opinion, just stating the facts. When lawyers get involved, everything is on the table.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
