Liability for the Rogue
CRMDEEN_at_aol.com
Wed, 8 Jul 1998 16:57:30 EDT
The discussion about the "rogue" has surfaced something we touched upon some
time ago: corporate liability. I think Doug's discussion of the rookie pilot
carrying the sports team is quite realistic. We are living in an age of
liability (especially in the USA), when it seems that every decision we make
as managers has an afterthought of "can I get sued?". I personally hate this,
but it seems real.
A recent event is a good case in point. The trial that is in progress now
about the American Marine jet crew that voilated altitude restrictions, and
accidentally caused the cable-car to fall, is expanding beyond the crew, and
into the organizational culture.
One of the recommendations I've seen scares the poop out of me. I can
understand a recommendation to take administrative action against the
commander, vice-commander, and the crew. The other target is "Any other
aviation safety officer for their direct failure to ensure adherance to the
regulations". And I emphasize "Any".
Does this mean that if an aviator "hears" of a fellow aviator performing
illegal processes, and does not intervene, they could be held liable for
damages?
I have no problem with a profession having standards of behavior, and
demanding that fellow professionals perform to those standards. In Chris's
case, there is a pilot who has a reputation of dangerous behavior, and no one
is apparently willing to confront him. Since the behavior has been condoned
by management for some time now, the behavior is acceptable to the
organizational culture, making them all at risk of liability for his actions.
What better motivation for management, and peers, to draw the line, and
demand high standards of safe and efficient flight operations.
I also know this is one of things that is "easier said, then done."
Greg Deen
Raytheon