Southwest has no plans to meet FAA fine deadline

[swa737-700]

I am getting really tired of the aimless, uneducated, and jealousy driven rantings of tankera$$. Will someone please explain how to put it on "ignore"? Thanks in advance.

 

[Jim Smyth]

Funny too, that the biggest fine goes to a carrier that can actually pay it.

Not to mention the airline with one of the best safety records in existence too!

 

[Bringupthebird]

Not to mention the airline with one of the best safety records in existence too!

That's open to debate! I think SWA is going to find itself on the losing end of this one in a big way. Regardless of whether or not they self disclose, they were willing accomplices in willfully violating FARs. There was absolutely no reason for them to do what they did other than they felt they could get away with it. Whether their buddies inside the FAA told them they could or not, they knew the regs and are bound by them. We are a country of laws, not men.

 

[B727Driver]

Read about the guy who beat the IRS. Now, that took some cojones.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Judging from the posts I am guessing that none of you have ever been involved with the FAA's Civil Penalty process. Cases are compromised all the time. In a case like this (above $1M) it is handled by a US Attorney (under a mil is an FAA attorney). Justice Dept attorneys have heavy caseloads and have to also deal with a criminal docket that cannot be placed on hold. The US Attorney is at an immediate disadvantage becasue they are not familiar with airline maintenance or operations. On the other hand on a case like this airlines pull out all the stops and hire very experienced regulatory attorneys with strong contacts in DC and better experts. In this case just from reading about the proceedings in congress WN will be able to prove that they self disclosed and that the disclosure was accepted by their PMI. The FAA can't go back and say "well you should not have asked for a self disclosure. . . and we should not have given it to you". The FAA is trying to go back after the fact and grab attention with a big proposed civil penalty. While the $$$ sought in this case are high these cases settle all the time typically at 10-30% of the proposed civil penalty. Other cases get tossed entirely.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Acceptance by a PMI means nothing. The regs stand regardless of who chooses to enforce them or not. SWA's failure to abide by an FAA order gives the FAA much more leverage to suspend their certificate. Paying and then appealing is the way it's done. Anything else is playing roulotte with their certificate.

 

[spitfire1500]

Way to go Southwest!! Maybe the FAA should pay all the airlines for the ATC screw up the other day or all the times they make a mistake...

 

[Raoul Duke]

Acceptance by a PMI means nothing. The regs stand regardless of who chooses to enforce them or not. SWA's failure to abide by an FAA order gives the FAA much more leverage to suspend their certificate. Paying and then appealing is the way it's done. Anything else is playing roulotte with their certificate.

------------------------

There is no option to pay and then appeal. If you pay, it is the same as admitting guilt. You either settle at the informal stage or you request a trial. Keep in mind that the FAA has to prove its case and can't use any of the tainted witnesses to do so - those that accepted the extensions. Also given the complexity of the maintenance programs of a carrier like WN (Manufacturer's Program, Carrier's Program, Special Programs etc) they will be able to muddy the water to the point where the fines seem disproportionate. I will put money that this case ends with WN paying less than 10% of the original penalty to the FAA with an additional 40% paid towards improving their MX reporting and tracking system.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Southwest's best strategy is to go to court. The FAA came out looking much worse than SWA in this. SWA self disclosed and it was accepted by the FAA - even thought the disclosure should not have been accepted. The longer SWA drags it out and the more publicly they do it the worse off the FAA looks. They will accept a much lower settlement to get this to go away.

Yeah, you really got them over a barrell

 

[habitual pilot]

Its about time the airlines start fighting back with some of the ridiculous and out of control regs being forced down their throats. The FAA is killing the airlines with rules and the govt is taxing their tickets to death.

Congrats to SWA and good luck. Finally, an airline with balls.

We need another step in this system where the airlines can fine the FAA for their missteps and recoup some of their $$.

How much did this cost the airlines?

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINN2643252620080827?rpc=44

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Judging from the posts I am guessing that none of you have ever been involved with the FAA's Civil Penalty process. Cases are compromised all the time. In a case like this (above $1M) it is handled by a US Attorney (under a mil is an FAA attorney). Justice Dept attorneys have heavy caseloads and have to also deal with a criminal docket that cannot be placed on hold. The US Attorney is at an immediate disadvantage becasue they are not familiar with airline maintenance or operations. On the other hand on a case like this airlines pull out all the stops and hire very experienced regulatory attorneys with strong contacts in DC and better experts. In this case just from reading about the proceedings in congress WN will be able to prove that they self disclosed and that the disclosure was accepted by their PMI. The FAA can't go back and say "well you should not have asked for a self disclosure. . . and we should not have given it to you". The FAA is trying to go back after the fact and grab attention with a big proposed civil penalty. While the $$$ sought in this case are high these cases settle all the time typically at 10-30% of the proposed civil penalty. Other cases get tossed entirely.

And, isn't whatever the amount agreed to, kept confidential?

I just knew that SWA wouldn't have to pay the entire 10 mil.

As far as certificate action goes....SWA is operating within the rules as established by the US govt....SWA knows this...as does the FAA

 

[hoover]

I applaud SWA for telling the FAA to shove it. As I understood the situation, the deferred inspections and whatnot happened with the FAA's blessing. Then when it became public, the FAA tried to save face. This whole deal is nothing more than the FAA trying to look like it is being tough on the industry.

Instead of fining SWA, why not let them keep that money so they can put it into fixing the supposed safety violations? SWA is a good company trying to do the right thing, not some bottom feeder operation with a history of accidents and violations.

The $hit of this is that there are carriers out there who are in a lot more need of increased FAA oversight than SWA.

But what really torques me off is that two days ago, the NAS and ATC were all fouled up because of technical issues that were within the FAA's control. No doubt it costs the airlines millions. The airlines actually suffered losses because of the FAA's incompetence. Yet you can't sue or fine them. No one is even raising an eyebrow. The ATA, ALPA, AAAE, and whoever else ought to be crucifying the FAA pubilicly right about now.

 

[Quimby]

Don't pay ontime and I imagine there will be penalties and interest added. If the FAA is not going to budge what will be the result? You can't just say 'I won't pay!' Could the FAA threaten to suspend their certificate over this?

Herb's a lawyer & SWA has plenty of legal talent. If they thought it was best to pay the fine already, they would have.

 

[no1pilot2000]

SAW puts on a better facade than most. SWA is no better or worse than other carriers, just luckier! SW's Management are just better BS artists than the other carriers...that's all! As far as the AD's are concerned, SWA just got caught with their pants down.

 

[CaptWidgeon]

we DID NOT get 'caught with our pants down'. do you have all the facts? they are out there, you have to dig through all the feces but they are there. the faa accepted our self disclosure then went back and said, nope, we aren't accepting it, you're guilty. if we are so guilty why did they wait a yr to act? isn't the faa just as guilty, if not more so, if they knew we were flying unsafe airplanes but waited a yr to do anything about it?

if you don't like swa and want to assume guilt without looking at the facts that's up to you. then you prob agree that tsa was correct that eagle didn't have their planes properly secured when their agent climbed all over them.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Not exactly. SWA discovered it had overflown ADs and then disclosed this to a buddy in the FAA. When someone who wasn't part of the SW/FAA boys club discovered this and said something they were told to go away. They didn't and SWA is still guilty of doing something they knew was wrong - with or without the blessing of their FAA insiders. They could have grounded the planes and performed all the repairs in strict compliance with the AD, but instead chose to gamble on the authority of one or two guys to interpret the rules on their own. They gambled and lost - to the tune of $10mil.

For the FAA to brush this too under the carpet would destroy the little remaining credibility they have and put all self-disclosure programs in jeopardy.

I guess SWA will be a little more careful who they crawl into bed with in the future.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

I guess SWA will be a little more careful who they crawl into bed with in the future.

How about companies just doing their AD's when they come out? that way they don't have to crawl into bed with anyone

 

[scoreboardII]

Dumb pilot, SWA did the AD's, because SWA wrote the AD, they discovered the problem and offered the solution, the FAA agreed and issued the AD. This is usually how the AD system works, carriers note the problem and write the fix, the FAA buys off on it. The problem in this case was well after SWA complied with the AD as written, the FAA then tweaked the AD and didn't notice the tweak.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

For the FAA to brush this too under the carpet would destroy the little remaining credibility they have and put all self-disclosure programs in jeopardy.

The FAA doesn't want to "brush" this under the carpet. But at this point...it is now in the hands of the federal court system.

Now all the FAA can do is put forth their best arguement to the judge...and hope for the best, while going against the best legal talent SWA has put together.