Narrative:

Dear FAA administrator: I am addressing this directly to you because I believe the safety system at our newly merged airline is not working properly. Our management has been allowed to make wholesale changes to our operating procedures without traditional and time proven training methods to introduce; support and ensure proficiency with those changes. This is a tremendous step backwards and is reducing the level of safety below what the traveling public deserves and expects. What is needed is immediate cranial-rectal disengagement at several levels of the chain to put a halt to another 'fast and furious' debacle like what has happened at other airlines. Do people have to die here too?basically; the normal; abnormal and emergency procedures of our merger partner are being injected into our airline's line operations with only glossy magazines and powerpoint presentations to train us. The fallacious argument being made to support this 'fast and furious' race to a common operating certificate is that our pilots will revert to our old procedures when not sure what to do. Our old procedures were safe; ergo all will be safe; no matter which procedures get done; right? Wrong! Imagine yourself at the big table before congress defending that idea.the fallacy is what really happens is not a binary path of either airline a or airline B procedures. It is a confused distracted mixture where some of the new procedures are followed; but then some of the old procedures get done and critical things get missed. In practice; your approval and requirement that we use airline B's procedures without proper training/checking to proficiency is a violation of your own [FAA's] sterile cockpit rules designed to prevent unsafe distraction of flight crew! Case in point: before we departed last night I asked my first officer if he knew his after-landing flow. He said he had no idea; even though he had done the cbt [computer based training] a while back. I also was unable to recall all the changes to the procedures; so I delayed the flight at the gate so we could get out the manuals and practice the new procedures and discuss the other changes to the go-around profiles etc. We then departed 42 minutes late.however; we later found that was not enough training either. When we got our final vector onto the ILS at our destination we failed to intercept the localizer because neither of us had tuned it in. The new checklist no longer has the 'fmcs; radios' item on it which would have jogged my memory to check it. We got so busy trying to do all the new procedures correctly that we missed it. About the time we realized we didn't have the localizer displayed we broke out of the clouds at 2;000 ft and saw the runway as we tuned up the localizer. Obviously I will have to conduct more training in the cockpit tonight before flying home. The bottom line is this. Right now; all the pilots on airline a's 757/767 fleet are at such a low level of procedural proficiency that under normal circumstances at any other airline; we would not be released from IOE to the line; yet here we are with planes full of passengers! Is operation 'fast and furious' being applied over at airline B? Are the furloughed airline a pilots now being hired by airline B being given only the same cbt/glossy magazine training prior to being released to the line? Of course not; they are getting real training/checking that assures proficiency before line operations. Why are you allowing airline a to get away with it?I'm sure airline a's management has told you the same lies they told the federal court last week; that pilots like me expressing these concerns are just disgruntled miscreants intent on exerting economic pressure towards contract goals; but that is not the case here. While I hold our management in very low esteem after their use of bankruptcy court to take away my pension and pay while continuing to enjoy utterly breathless levels of compensation and benefits [for themselves];what economic pressure could I possibly expect to exert by having to use hand written cheat-sheets in the cockpit while taxiing after landing to make sure the first officer has accomplished his new 12-step after landing flow? Management told the court that any pilots wanting extra training would get it; yet I spent the previous month and expressed my demands for extra training to five different managers at airline a; yet I was basically stonewalled from getting it. Management will tell you that a vast majority of pilots do not complain about the changes; but I submit that they are afraid to stick their necks on the line with a management known for punishing and terminating pilots; and they also believe that their complaints will not result in change. I don't think this report will change anything either; but I owe it to the traveling public and my own conscience to do so anyway. With all the negative things that have happened to us; most pilots want to just fly their trips; get through each leg and go home with as little effort as possible. For most pilots; that means not fighting city hall. In other words; there are economic concerns and there are safety concerns. Having been a former president of a major airline pilot's union hopefully you are still familiar with that union's code of ethics. I assure you that my concerns are not about economics; but truly about safety. The real culprit--of using economic concerns; and especially the federal court system to their advantage--is the same one accusing us; airline a's management. The same management that said a recent commuter partner's crash was not their fault; yet fights the very changes you propose to keep it from happening again. Something needs to be done quickly to fix this situation; which is only getting worse. Obviously; with a merger changes have to be made; but how those changes are implemented is the real problem here. Calculated increases in risk have been purposely introduced into our flight operations; and the calculations were made with too much emphasis on saving time and money. Operation 'fast and furious' is being implemented here and the poi assigned to us has seemingly bought into management's fallacious justification. Either he needs more guidance and support from above; or he should be replaced. Our airline's management needs sharper; more critical oversight of their methodology towards a merged flight crew culture. During this period of immense change; we should be held to the highest levels of safety by FAA; not the most economical.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757-200 Captain shared a letter the original of which was directed to the FAA Administrator which discussed at length his concerns about insufficient training in flight operations procedures provided by his newly merged airline's training department for all pilots from the airline whose procedures have been largely replaced. He believes the training was predicated on cost effectiveness to the detriment of operational safety.

Narrative: DEAR FAA ADMINISTRATOR: I am addressing this directly to you because I believe the safety system at our newly merged airline is not working properly. Our management has been allowed to make wholesale changes to our operating procedures without traditional and time proven training methods to introduce; support and ensure proficiency with those changes. This is a tremendous step backwards and is reducing the level of safety below what the traveling public deserves and expects. What is needed is immediate cranial-rectal disengagement at several levels of the chain to put a halt to another 'Fast and Furious' debacle like what has happened at other airlines. Do people have to die here too?Basically; the normal; abnormal and emergency procedures of our merger partner are being injected into our airline's line operations with only glossy magazines and PowerPoint presentations to train us. The fallacious argument being made to support this 'Fast and Furious' race to a common operating certificate is that our pilots will revert to our old procedures when not sure what to do. Our old procedures were safe; ergo all will be safe; no matter which procedures get done; right? WRONG! Imagine yourself at the big table before congress defending that idea.The fallacy is what really happens is not a binary path of either Airline A or Airline B procedures. It is a confused distracted mixture where some of the new procedures are followed; but then some of the old procedures get done AND CRITICAL THINGS GET MISSED. In practice; your approval and requirement that we use Airline B's procedures without proper training/checking to proficiency is a violation of your own [FAA's] STERILE COCKPIT rules designed to prevent unsafe distraction of flight crew! Case in point: Before we departed last night I asked my First Officer if he knew his after-landing flow. He said he had no idea; even though he had done the CBT [Computer Based Training] a while back. I also was unable to recall all the changes to the procedures; so I delayed the flight at the gate so we could get out the manuals and practice the new procedures and discuss the other changes to the go-around profiles etc. We then departed 42 minutes late.However; we later found that was not enough training either. When we got our final vector onto the ILS at our destination we failed to intercept the localizer because neither of us had tuned it in. The new checklist no longer has the 'FMCs; radios' item on it which would have jogged my memory to check it. We got so busy trying to do all the new procedures correctly that we missed it. About the time we realized we didn't have the localizer displayed we broke out of the clouds at 2;000 FT and saw the runway as we tuned up the LOC. Obviously I will have to conduct more training in the cockpit tonight before flying home. The bottom line is this. Right now; all the pilots on Airline A's 757/767 fleet are at such a low level of procedural proficiency that under normal circumstances at any other airline; we would not be released from IOE to the line; yet here we are with planes full of passengers! Is operation 'Fast and Furious' being applied over at Airline B? Are the furloughed Airline A pilots now being hired by Airline B being given only the same CBT/glossy magazine training prior to being released to the line? Of course not; they are getting real training/checking that assures proficiency before line operations. Why are you allowing Airline A to get away with it?I'm sure Airline A's management has told you the same lies they told the federal court last week; that pilots like me expressing these concerns are just disgruntled miscreants intent on exerting economic pressure towards contract goals; but that is not the case here. While I hold our management in very low esteem after their use of bankruptcy court to take away my pension and pay while continuing to enjoy utterly breathless levels of compensation and benefits [for themselves];what economic pressure could I possibly expect to exert by having to use hand written cheat-sheets in the cockpit while taxiing after landing to make sure the First Officer has accomplished his new 12-step after landing flow? Management told the court that any pilots wanting extra training would get it; yet I spent the previous month and expressed my demands for extra training to five different managers at Airline A; yet I was basically stonewalled from getting it. Management will tell you that a vast majority of pilots do not complain about the changes; but I submit that they are afraid to stick their necks on the line with a management known for punishing and terminating pilots; and they also believe that their complaints will not result in change. I don't think this report will change anything either; but I owe it to the traveling public and my own conscience to do so anyway. With all the negative things that have happened to us; most pilots want to just fly their trips; get through each leg and go home with as little effort as possible. For most pilots; that means not fighting City Hall. In other words; there are economic concerns and there are safety concerns. Having been a former President of a Major Airline Pilot's Union hopefully you are still familiar with that union's Code of Ethics. I assure you that my concerns are not about economics; but truly about safety. The real culprit--of using economic concerns; and especially the federal court system to their advantage--is the same one accusing us; Airline A's management. The same management that said a recent commuter partner's crash was not their fault; yet fights the very changes you propose to keep it from happening again. Something needs to be done quickly to fix this situation; which is only getting worse. Obviously; with a merger changes have to be made; but how those changes are implemented is the real problem here. Calculated increases in risk have been purposely introduced into our flight operations; and the calculations were made with too much emphasis on saving time and money. Operation 'Fast and Furious' is being implemented here and the POI assigned to us has seemingly bought into management's fallacious justification. Either he needs more guidance and support from above; or he should be replaced. Our airline's management needs sharper; more critical oversight of their methodology towards a merged flight crew culture. During this period of immense change; we should be held to the highest levels of safety by FAA; not the most economical.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.