Jumpseat and Politics

[chase]

Well, NO ProStan committee has real "teeth", however, a properly run program can rein in bad actors before Company disciplinary action has to get involved.

If you have a respected committee like ours, the Company will even refer a problem to them in order to avoid having to officially discipline a pilot. If the behavior continues beyond that, then the discipline system is invoked.

Now, in your case (apparently) your committee is so backwards, the average rank and file pilot prefers to refer problems directly to the BCP simply because they're not getting any satisfaction from ProStans.

Fubi,

I don't know what type of program your airline has but the following would surprise me if it isn't true:

1. Isolated incidents do get fixed by our Pro Stands and when necessary our CPs and I assume yours also.

2. The "true bad actors", less than 1%, know precisely where the line is and what they can get away with and when the union "must" represent them.

3. A "bad actor" is under no pressure/incentive to respond, comply with or engage with pro stds if they don't wish to. Again, this isn't their first rodeo and play the system like tournament level players.

4. Some wear their reputation as being a pain as a "badge of honor"...why? Because they can hold pro stds off at arms length while smiling politely in the CP's office saying, "I didn't violate the FOM, I flew the airplane within limits and my social skills suck...you can't fire me fro that?"....and so they walk.

While "hostile work environment" gives companies greater leeway than in the past, unions must still defend the bad actors. Who represents the FO (or CA) when he complains? Pro stands but again who have the leverage? The bad actor since he hasn't violated any directives but simply violated commonly acceptable modes of behavior.

Get the company out of the mix and let the associations work the issue internally with tools that can affect change. After the first couple of bad actors are marched through the gauntlet, other trouble children will not want to be dragged through the consequences or process.

Make it painful enough and people change behavior....we have programs for those with drug and alcohol problems and they are successful ...why? Because folks are motivated to not run afoul and suffer the pain/consequences....the same can be done for bad actors toward our own if we as pilots are willing to tackle the issue as group instead of leaving it to management.

 

[slaquer5]

Fubi,



4. Some wear their reputation as being a pain as a "badge of honor"...why? Because they can hold pro stds off at arms length while smiling politely in the CP's office saying, "I didn't violate the FOM, I flew the airplane within limits and my social skills suck...you can't fire me fro that?"....and so they walk.

While "hostile work environment" gives companies greater leeway than in the past, unions must still defend the bad actors. Who represents the FO (or CA) when he complains? Pro stands but again who have the leverage? The bad actor since he hasn't violated any directives but simply violated commonly acceptable modes of behavior.

.

Once again you have no clue what you are talking about. If the company or FAA knew what they where doing they would no longer have a job. The pilots that fly with them take it to P/S which in turn can not do a dammm thing. It is cray how some on here think you are in the know or know what your talking about. i do think your heart is in the right place, but you do not have a clue my brother.

 

[chase]

Slaquer5,

My apologies if my comments offend you or come off as knowing more than you...I'm not a pro stds guy nor have I been one.

I have spoken a lot to CPs, union reps, pro stds persons at SWA and other airlines about the topic. I have also seen the scenario I described up close and in person with a CA I flew when years ago.

I have heard similar stories told me as an FO and after I became a CA.

If you believe my statements are without evidence, no worries...they are based upon interviews with management, union personnnel and many pilots who have confirmed the same type of experience I encountered.

The frustration felt by some within pro stds and their eventual departure is partially fueled by the bad actors walking the line and feeling ineffective in making changes.

We obviously have different experiences and thus different opinions.

Pls provide if you wish your remedy for correcting bad actors? Thanks in advance for your reply.

 

[slaquer5]

Slaquer5,

My apologies if my comments offend you or come off as knowing more than you...I'm not a pro stds guy nor have I been one.

I have spoken a lot to CPs, union reps, pro stds persons at SWA and other airlines about the topic. I have also seen the scenario I described up close and in person with a CA I flew when years ago.

I have heard similar stories told me as an FO and after I became a CA.

If you believe my statements are without evidence, no worries...they are based upon interviews with management, union personnnel and many pilots who have confirmed the same type of experience I encountered.

The frustration felt by some within pro stds and their eventual departure is partially fueled by the bad actors walking the line and feeling ineffective in making changes.

We obviously have different experiences and thus different opinions.

Pls provide if you wish your remedy for correcting bad actors? Thanks in advance for your reply.

I am not going to rattle off on a pubic forum , what I am talking about. I don't care who you have talked to, you are wrong. Just like You saying someone could get fired for letting a family member go on cwa . If you want to bring this to pprure I will engage. You are very wrong and confused if you think the ones that PS calls on a regular basis, fly the aircraft safe and know the FOM. I know for a fact the CP do not tell you that.

Your heart is in the right place, but please do not try to defend these pilots. It is a lot like ACLU defending child molesters rights.

 

[Dan Roman]

Some good points being brought up here, let me throw this out there.

1) ProStan is supposed to be the safe haven were a pilot can go if he is having a problem with a fellow crewmember. It's supposed to be a place were he can get resolution without the worry of getting in trouble. For this reason, if ProStan is seen as a disciplinary committee, pilot's will be less likely to come to them with a problem.
ProStan should be the safe haven to work out a problem confidentially, it is up to management to do the disciplining if ProStan cannot get a resolution.
For this reason, talk of them "having teeth" may sound good, but how do you do it?
Chase, you did bring up some good ideas, but again, if ProStan is seen as too much of a disciplinarian people will avoid them when they have a problem. What then? As has been pointed out, they really don't have the power to do anything. Only management can, ProStan can only give them a warning, so to speak, it's up to management to deal with the bad actors if they don't want to heed the advice of ProStan.

1) It's not unheard of for someone to complain to ProStan about someone, but when they don't get the resolution they want, they blame ProStan. When in reality they may very well be part of the problem. It often takes two "bad actors" to create a problem.


Yes, I am involved with ProStan work and am putting this out there to hear what people think and to get ideas.

Thanks

 

[Dan Roman]

Slaquer5, it sounds like the few you are talking about are beyond getting help from ProStan and just flat need to be disciplined by the company.
My position is if they don't want to listen to ProStan and heed their advice, they have thrown out their free get out of jail card.
ProStan can only do so much.

 

[Dan Roman]

Fubi,

I don't know what type of program your airline has but the following would surprise me if it isn't true:

1. Isolated incidents do get fixed by our Pro Stands and when necessary our CPs and I assume yours also.

2. The "true bad actors", less than 1%, know precisely where the line is and what they can get away with and when the union "must" represent them.

3. A "bad actor" is under no pressure/incentive to respond, comply with or engage with pro stds if they don't wish to. Again, this isn't their first rodeo and play the system like tournament level players.

4. Some wear their reputation as being a pain as a "badge of honor"...why? Because they can hold pro stds off at arms length while smiling politely in the CP's office saying, "I didn't violate the FOM, I flew the airplane within limits and my social skills suck...you can't fire me fro that?"....and so they walk.

While "hostile work environment" gives companies greater leeway than in the past, unions must still defend the bad actors. Who represents the FO (or CA) when he complains? Pro stands but again who have the leverage? The bad actor since he hasn't violated any directives but simply violated commonly acceptable modes of behavior.

Get the company out of the mix and let the associations work the issue internally with tools that can affect change. After the first couple of bad actors are marched through the gauntlet, other trouble children will not want to be dragged through the consequences or process.

Make it painful enough and people change behavior....we have programs for those with drug and alcohol problems and they are successful ...why? Because folks are motivated to not run afoul and suffer the pain/consequences....the same can be done for bad actors toward our own if we as pilots are willing to tackle the issue as group instead of leaving it to management.

This is very similar to what I am saying. My take is, the bad actor goes for CRM training on his day off if ProStan deems it necessary (most ProStan problems are CRM problems). If he refuses he is on his own.

 

[Dan Roman]

Gee, is it my breath? I was hoping to get a conversation going about different points of views on ProStan's expectations but the thread seems to have come to a halt.
Anybody else with a perspective on how ProStan should deal with problems?

 

[Fubijaakr]

Well, I can tell you this...our CP has been known to refer cases to ProStan because he wanted to give someone a break. If the Union could take care of the problem, then he didn't have to bring the weight of Company discipline down on them.

 

[Dan Roman]

Well, I can tell you this...our CP has been known to refer cases to ProStan because he wanted to give someone a break. If the Union could take care of the problem, then he didn't have to bring the weight of Company discipline down on them.

That's the way it is here too.

 

[humveedriver]

Ive never called pro Stan or had them call me. I have had some frank conversations with FO's and CA's depending on what seat I am in, and that made the trip at least tolerable if not almost pleasant. CRM can be a very fickle art depending on the combinations of personalities in the cockpit, cabin or gate. The skill set that I employed to be a supportive FO helped me equally in being a supportive Captain. I just think it's really important to "air" any issues at the gate before calling in the cavalry. Not sure how many pro standards issues are dealt with a come to jesus meeting between the two crewmembers first.