Narrative:

Arrived in operations 1 hour prior to push for the flight. Met another crew; specifically the captain who relayed to me the following events. His flight is now delayed because he refused the airplane with a certain deferral of a flight control computer; an elac. He then told me that operations was planning on swapping the airplane with my flight. The thinking being; that if he refused it; another pilot will accept it. We spoke in detail about the inoperative equipment and I agreed with his thinking. If another failure occurred; it would degrade the flight controls further. This would be unacceptable. I spoke with dispatch; and then a 3-WAY call with operations and I mentioned that I too would not take the airplane as is; with the deferral. Normally; this would not be of significance except for the fact that prior to entering operations in ZZZ; the station manager was waiting outside the door for me. She asked if she could speak with me prior to entering operations. I told her I would. I waited; until the door to operations was opened; and at that time I met the captain of the other flight. Starting to put the pieces together; I realized that they may have been a subtle attempt to have me fly that airplane without the full picture; that another crew refused it. Now I do realize that certain deferrals may affect different operations in many ways. The point of this narrative is that if a crew refuses the airplane due to safety concerns; specifically regarding the degradation of flying characteristics with the subsequent failure of a redundant piece of equipment; the airplane should not be shopped around trying to find a crew who will take it.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A320 CAPT RPTS A SUBTLE ATTEMPT BY OPS TO FLY AN AIRPLANE A PREVIOUS CREW REFUSED. ACFT HAD ONE FAILED ELEVATOR AILERON COMPUTER DEFERRED AS INOP PER THE MEL.

Narrative: ARRIVED IN OPS 1 HR PRIOR TO PUSH FOR THE FLT. MET ANOTHER CREW; SPECIFICALLY THE CAPT WHO RELAYED TO ME THE FOLLOWING EVENTS. HIS FLT IS NOW DELAYED BECAUSE HE REFUSED THE AIRPLANE WITH A CERTAIN DEFERRAL OF A FLT CTL COMPUTER; AN ELAC. HE THEN TOLD ME THAT OPS WAS PLANNING ON SWAPPING THE AIRPLANE WITH MY FLT. THE THINKING BEING; THAT IF HE REFUSED IT; ANOTHER PLT WILL ACCEPT IT. WE SPOKE IN DETAIL ABOUT THE INOP EQUIP AND I AGREED WITH HIS THINKING. IF ANOTHER FAILURE OCCURRED; IT WOULD DEGRADE THE FLT CTLS FURTHER. THIS WOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE. I SPOKE WITH DISPATCH; AND THEN A 3-WAY CALL WITH OPS AND I MENTIONED THAT I TOO WOULD NOT TAKE THE AIRPLANE AS IS; WITH THE DEFERRAL. NORMALLY; THIS WOULD NOT BE OF SIGNIFICANCE EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT PRIOR TO ENTERING OPS IN ZZZ; THE STATION MGR WAS WAITING OUTSIDE THE DOOR FOR ME. SHE ASKED IF SHE COULD SPEAK WITH ME PRIOR TO ENTERING OPS. I TOLD HER I WOULD. I WAITED; UNTIL THE DOOR TO OPS WAS OPENED; AND AT THAT TIME I MET THE CAPT OF THE OTHER FLT. STARTING TO PUT THE PIECES TOGETHER; I REALIZED THAT THEY MAY HAVE BEEN A SUBTLE ATTEMPT TO HAVE ME FLY THAT AIRPLANE WITHOUT THE FULL PICTURE; THAT ANOTHER CREW REFUSED IT. NOW I DO REALIZE THAT CERTAIN DEFERRALS MAY AFFECT DIFFERENT OPS IN MANY WAYS. THE POINT OF THIS NARRATIVE IS THAT IF A CREW REFUSES THE AIRPLANE DUE TO SAFETY CONCERNS; SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THE DEGRADATION OF FLYING CHARACTERISTICS WITH THE SUBSEQUENT FAILURE OF A REDUNDANT PIECE OF EQUIP; THE AIRPLANE SHOULD NOT BE SHOPPED AROUND TRYING TO FIND A CREW WHO WILL TAKE IT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.