Risk Management

[Brent Bergan]

Does your operator use Risk Management? How do you incorporate risk management into your mission and has it worked for you? Or, is it a paper work exercise attempting to replace common sense? Is risk management a good thing?

[Skids Up]

We're trying to use it, but yes, it is a paper substitute for common sense, but since there is not much common sense anymore, you need the paper trail.

 

It does force people to think, and when you have to write it down, it makes it more real. Unfortunately, some of us "older" members of the industry tend to write it off as a waste of time, but if taken seriously, I believe it does work.

 

It's been a bit of a learning curve, and the material always will expand to fill in any spare time you might have, but I'm hoping that when it "gets going", it will be good. It helps make people accountable for their words and actions too.

 

It helps to get away from the "We've always done it that way..." syndrome too.

 

It is all a part of the whole SMS culture, which is becoming a way of life as well.

 

KW

CASO

[T tail]

Are you both talking about writing down all the risks before you accept a flight??? I apologise for my ignorance

 

 

TT

[Skids Up]

Not before every flight, but before you start a new area/type of work.

 

If you haven't done before..:

 

and go into seismic...

 

or go logging...

 

or go overseas...

 

or buying a new type/model of helicopter...

 

etc, etc

 

[BDVI]

We use it in our operations and our pilots hone their skiils as risk managers everday. Operations use it slighly differently from a pilot POV. We look at it as a tool to recognize, identify and engineer out potential problems(software & hardware) before the pilot has to excersise his/her skill sets to negotiate a potential threat.

 

It's kinda like a footbal coach writting a play book for his players. Everyone assocatied needs to be able to identify potential problems before your players hit the field and then know what the play is going to be before the kick off. Should another player do something not anticapted by your player he then becomes a risk manager, not unlike your pilot.

 

We have sussesfully used risk managment in every aspect of our orginization and it pays huge dividens.

 

This is a great forum add on, and i think it could be used as a unique tool to help our industry mature into what i know it can be.

 

IMHO

BDVI.

[Brent Bergan]

For us in the Coast Guard, the Commandant has required the use of an ORM, or operational risk management program for each unit. As such, each air station has their own system and requirements. For Air Station Miami, we complete ORM forms for each SAR (search and rescue) or LE (law enforcement) launch. The forms take into consideration such items as; time for planning, event or what we'll be doing for the launch, assets available (pilots, crew, rescue swimmer, aircraft, fatigue levels including flight time, crew mission time, pilot proficiency etc), communications, environment (night launch, sea state, winds, cloud coverage and ceiling).... acronym of course PEACE... and each factor is given a number range. The numbers are totaled and that number tells you how high your risk level is, low, medium or high. The risks are then compared to the gains of the case, and then the decision is made to go, not go, or mitigate the risks (ie wait till morning). If the risks are too high, then the "risk decision" is made at a higher level, and the decision to launch is pushed up to the command level.

 

We don't want to make a paper work burden for our pilots, but by having a risk management program, it assists our pilots in critical decision making when it comes to responding to a significant case with challenging conditions. These forms also give pilots a means to quantify the risks from any given case.

 

Thanks,

 

Brent

[ACME]

Risk and safety management are concepts we are all trying to incorporate into our daily work lives. But even in today's world where these concepts should be a given for any operation there are still those out there that think it is something that only deserves lip service and they are better off relying on luck to get them through the day. I am replying to this forum out of frustration and also to briefly outline my recent experience which proves self regulation is an unworkable concept.

 

I am an AME just returned home from withdrawing my service from a company that chose to ignore a situation I was faced with. On my previous tour I had recognized the pilot was having personal and drinking issues that were a concern to safety. I brought this to the attention of the chief pilot and was assured the situation was being monitored and safety was not an issue. I had just returned to the field to begin a second 3 week tour with an operator I had set up a summer schedule with. Events unfolded very quickly within the first day including the client coming to me to express a very serious safety concern related to alcohol consumption and lack of proper rest on the pilots part. The intention of passing on this info was to see action taken to remove the pilot from the position and not cause difficulty for the company involved. I immediately informed management of the problem. Since they could not confirm an official problem existed then I must be the problem. Well the long and short of this situation is I was told I was not welcome to carry on if i did not like this and if I had a problem I should work it out with the pilot. I was left no choice but to leave as no one accountable in the company would take appropriate action. I was asked not to take it to the SMS level as it would be dealt with by a stern talking to the pilot. I did end up writing an SMS report but still that goes to a company employee and with such complicit behavior amongst all management up to the owner level I have little faith in the SMS process doing the right thing. I tried calling the local Transport office and out of all the phone numbers called there was no answer. What is going on in aviation today?

 

HELP

 

ACME

[Blackmac]

ACME:

 

Go to HEPAC.ORG and see the preliminary proposal submitted to TCCA re the SMS program. You will see that what we proposed gives the AME's and Pillots control of the SMS system, including auditing the operators in the helicopter industry as required. In other words proper control of your safety envionment, no matter who you work for. We have requested authority to suspend an OC if we deem it neccessary.

 

I worked exetensively with the USAF Survey & Auditing Team on behalf of the Canadian TC and the US DOD. The DOD had contracts with Canadian supplier's for air service. If the operator was not operating acording to TC standards, he was put on suspension of use. This of course effected the bottom line of revenue. It's amazing how fast they change their modus operendi.

 

The Canadian government has a Standing Offer agreement with most F/W & R/W operators in, I wrote the regulations pertaing to the SO. At anytime and end user was not comfortabe with an operator, the operator was not used. The reasoning had to be valid. As I was also a certified TC audior, I would, if the carrier complained, subject him to an audit. Anything found was reported to TC.

 

There is no dollar factor on life and that was what we were trying to mitigate.

 

Management should have no say in SMS other than to carry out a safe operation as SMS dictates.

 

This is a proven concept and if you don't beleive me contact the USAF Team at Scott AFB and tell them I said, HI.

 

Don McDougall

 

PS: Sorry for spelling errors, spell ckeck not working.

[Skids Up]

You will see that what we proposed gives the AME's and Pillots control of the SMS system, including auditing the operators in the helicopter industry as required. In other words proper control of your safety envionment, no matter who you work for. We have requested authority to suspend an OC if we deem it neccessary.

 

Not sure if this is a good thing. You don't have to look back to far to see that we can't agree on a single thing. How are we going to decide whose OC to pull?

 

• Just because you don't like the condition of the company truck?
• Just because you have to "bunk together" once or twice?
• Because someone did a river run?
• 'insert issue here'

 

All things come back to safety and we, (pilots & engineers) will "control" it?!?

 

 

Management should have no say in SMS other than to carry out a safe operation as SMS dictates.

 

Management has to have a say. They pay for it.

 

It is the employees that will set the safe work environment. If they refuse to do a job (see ACME's post) then things have to be done. Management will either lose the job, lose their employees, or worse, lose an aircraft and passengers.

 

No one can dictate safety. You either choose to do a safe job or not. If you cannot change management's response to an issue, then you may have to move on as ACME did.

 

SMS allows for the reporting, the accountability, and the responsibility of all involved. If it isn't safe (and there is a while new topic on what is or isn't safe) don't do it. The bottom line will affect more changes than anything.

 

I do believe that more and more customers are seeing safety as a way of doing business. Allowing a pilot who is not acting professionally to remain on the job is not a safe way to do business in anybody's book.

 

Even in a "tight employee" market, that won't be tolerated for very long.

 

If your SMS is, or becomes, a "me" against "you" or a "us against them" or a "I'm right and you're wrong" system, then it's doomed before it starts.

 

Maybe I'm a bit naive, but that is how I see it and ours seems to be working (as a team) so far.

[Guest Bullet Remington]

Not sure if this is a good thing. You don't have to look back to far to see that we can't agree on a single thing. How are we going to decide whose OC to pull?

 

That's gott abe a pilot thing!! I haven't seen a driver concurr with anything that didn't have a diorect postive im[pact ( read as in more money0 for one direct individual. Things will always be this way as long as it is a ME! I'm the pilot mentality!1

 

• Just because you don't like the condition of the company truck?
• Just because you have to "bunk together" once or twice?
• Because someone did a river run?
• 'insert issue here'

 

This is a joke right?? Surely you could have listed something a little more relevant to the topic!! (See my me cheap shot above!!)

 

All things come back to safety and we, (pilots & engineers) will "control" it?!?

 

Yes, Yes we will!1 We are the folks in the field who operate the system !

 

 

Management has to have a say. They pay for it.

 

HUH? Your may wish to re-read your own statement as listed below!! And from me, No they don't have a say! They don't pay for it, again the people in the field pay for it!! Out off all the áccidents"in the past 5 years, how many "owners"bought the farm?? They're all still sitting flat, fat and happy!!

 

It is the employees that will set the safe work environment. If they refuse to do a job (see ACME's post) then things have to be done. Management will either lose the job, lose their employees, or worse, lose an aircraft and passengers.

 

This has already been stated, and you unwittingly confirmed just what was stated! Namely, management will have NO sya in SMS.

 

No one can dictate safety. You either choose to do a safe job or not. If you cannot change management's response to an issue, then you may have to move on as ACME did.

 

Again, you confirmed the statement, "Management will have no say.

 

SMS allows for the reporting, the accountability, and the responsibility of all involved. If it isn't safe (and there is a while new topic on what is or isn't safe) don't do it. The bottom line will affect more changes than anything."

 

So... can you define what is or isn't safe?? Jasus H. Keerist, you drivers can't even agree on the canyon run, it would be superb entertainment seeing a room full of you trying to agree on a SMS program!! Especially as a management team!!

 

I do believe that more and more customers are seeing safety as a way of doing business. -- That's a fact jack!

 

Allowing a pilot who is not acting professionally to remain on the job is not a safe way to do business in anybody's book. So do you mean as in act like yáll do here??? C'mon let's get the canyon run issue cleared away and discuss this!! FOR example, who decides what is a "professional pilot"? Is there any other kind??

 

Even in a "tight employee" market, that won't be tolerated for very long.

 

If your SMS is, or becomes, a "me" against "you" or a "us against them" or a "I'm right and you're wrong" system, then it's doomed before it starts. You mean like this post?? Like the canyon run?? Or let me see, like the Hepac thingy??

 

Maybe I'm a bit naive, ( I'm NOT touching this comment, bt I want you to know that to do so hurts almost as much as NOT making a cheap comment about the photo of your girlfriend's or wife's feeble excuse for a dog!!! ) but that is how I see it and ours seems to be working (as a team) so far.

 

So who makes it work? How does it work and who are the key contributing players making it succeed??