CHIRP report

CC7186 - Unacceptable attitude of senior management in communications towards operational crew

Initial Report

At my airline, morale is at rock bottom, thanks to serious concerns at operational safety standards, several incidents involving the aircraft, constant technical issues, cancellations and delays. Also understaffing, fatiguing rosters and poor HR conditions. This has been ongoing for in excess of a year and is wearing everyone’s patience extremely thin. The company displays a total indifference to addressing most of these issues, and dislikes criticism of any kind. Moreover, our daily life in the airline is taken up with constant emails from senior management, often several in one day, pointing out shortcomings, observations, disappointments and failures. None more so than one this week which I have taken the liberty of copying and pasting here (names removed). This email highlights beautifully how a company can be alienated from its workforce, despite holding that same company together.

This email, from a senior Manager has incensed many of us. Pre-existing problems at my airline are numerous, and deep- seated. This message has served only to underline how concerned we should really be at the fractured relationship we have with our management.

I have zero confidence in anything changing at my company. They talk a lot ‘at’ us, but do not like to hear constructive feedback. They bury their heads in the sand and deny that there are issues to be addressed. This is what undermines safety. Safety, or rather the lack of it, is foremost in our minds. The inference that we are harming safety by discussing issues is misguided, in my opinion and the suggestion that silencing us in the only situations we are in each other’s company, i.e. the crew room and on board the aircraft, displays a naivety of judgement. Collectively, we are appalled at how our company functions and the how it sees itself functioning in relation to the operating crew. It seems to be a self-serving hierarchy of out-of-touch and out-of-their-depth managers, sadly.

comments

Company Comment

The Communication issued by our colleague was in response to concerns raised by many other colleagues. We had received reports that negative engagement – by a very small number – was creating a distraction during pre-flight preparation / briefings; with the potential for diminishing the focus on safe operations. The Communication was issued as ion was to encourage issues to be raised in an appropriate manner, at appropriate times and such that no adverse effect was had upon their colleagues’ ability to undertake duties in a safe manner.

Our colleagues play a vital role in safety, security and compliance and, we encourage – regularly – reporting through the various available channels (including confidential and, as occasionally has been the case, by telephone to a member of the Safety Team). We have very strict procedures in place to guarantee confidentiality. Every non-confidential (i.e. open) report is reviewed by the entire management team (i.e. including the Accountable Manager), classified and actions raised / assigned accordingly. We place considerable emphasis upon the provision of feedback, on both individual events and on the collective use to which certain reports have been put.

All reporting options are set out in our Management System Manual and are included in both initial and recurrent training for all employees. We publicise the CHIRP newsletters and, moreover, have written permission to re-use – internally – any of the material published therein. Finally, we promote the option of the CAA’s various confidential reporting options (available to all personnel) and, cooperate both fully and openly if and when such reporting channels are used.

We are passionately committed to providing a safe working environment for all.

CAA Comment

Effective communication and safety promotion are seen as important factors in maintaining crew engagement and driving continuous safety improvement. The aviation safety regulations require operators to establish voluntary and mandatory occurrence reporting systems, as well as reactive and proactive schemes for hazard identification. These provide the formal means of collecting, recording, analysing, acting on and generating feedback about hazards and the associated risks, and are therefore the preferred methods for crew members to provide feedback. There are many means of collecting feedback from crew members (e.g. informal meetings, safety studies and safety surveys) but whichever method is used, it is critical that operators adopt a just culture to encourage individuals to contribute openly and report safety-related information.

CHIRP Comment

This report highlights how staff morale, communication and management practices directly impact safety. Operational pressures, staffing shortages, fatigue and technical issues can create stress and affect performance. Safety depends not only on individual actions but also on the environment in which crew operate.

If crew are raising legitimate safety concerns, the company must listen. Keep reporting, your observations help management understand the full picture, take action and improve safety systems. A strong reporting culture, based on trust and a just culture, ensures crew can speak up without fear.

The “mission bubble” principle is also key: once on duty, crew must set distractions aside and focus on operating safely. Both sides share responsibility—management must respond to feedback and crew must maintain focus whilst operating. Crew should be mindful that a negative outlook at the start of duty can affect team dynamics, communication and morale. Setting a constructive and professional tone helps promote effective teamwork, encourages open and safe discussions and contributes to a positive environment both in the crew room and during flight operations.