Human factors – mandatory for bureaucrats?
At a recent firefighting conference, AAAA raised the issue of non-aviation qualified personnel – mostly government agencies – seeking to mandate certain operational aspects of aviation that clearly compromise safety.
The best example is a government tender that requires operators to fit and monitor five radios as well as a mobile phone while on duty – completely ignoring the research that indicates the significant contribution of human factors and especially distraction on flight safety.
This content is available exclusively to Australian Aviation members.
A monthly membership is only $5.99 or save with our annual plans.
- Australian Aviation quarterly print & digital magazines
- Access to In Focus reports every month on our website
- Unlimited access to all Australian Aviation digital content
- Access to the Australian Aviation app
- Australian Aviation quarterly print & digital magazines
- Access to In Focus reports every month on our website
- Access to our Behind the Lens photo galleries and other exclusive content
- Daily news updates via our email bulletin
- Unlimited access to all Australian Aviation digital content
- Access to the Australian Aviation app
- Australian Aviation quarterly print & digital magazines
- Access to In Focus reports every month on our website
- Access to our Behind the Lens photo galleries and other exclusive content
- Daily news updates via our email bulletin
At AAAA’s human factor training courses, pilots are confronted with the shortcomings of short term memory, how appropriate concentration may be compromised by inattentional blindness, and how distraction – even very small distractions – can hijack the pilots’ attending to vital flight safety actions.
And yet non-aviation qualified personnel consistently inject their lack of knowledge into the aviation operational environment and operators are essentially powerless to resist if they want the work.
The insidious and often subtle intimidation that occurs in many government processes leads industry to the ‘don’t make waves’ conclusion. Why would anyone jeopardise their economic future in a tough industry when standing up for safety is so often interpreted as ‘biting the hand that feeds you’?
The only safe way forward for operators in this situation is to ensure they have a strong and professional industry association to help them by representing their interests and shielding them from recriminations. Sometimes that may not be enough and the courts and various ombudsmen and appeal mechanisms are there for that reason, but often it is simple ignorance that causes the problem and a well represented association can break the deadlock.
There are many operators in Australian aviation who have allowed themselves to be in the position of having no-one to represent their interests – much of it driven by the ‘short arms and long pockets’ syndrome – a truly short-term vision for their company.
Many of these operators think they are saving money by not supporting an association but that logic is upset every time a government agency inflicts another cost or restriction on their business.
The range of issues the aviation industry needs representation on is staggering. From the current tax review to OH&S regulation, from the aviation white paper to the insurance legislation review and the raft of CASA issues from the current firefighting review to the man-made obstacle working group – our industry needs strong representation.
AAAA and a few other professional associations are at the table in these discussions, but there are a lot of people and interests simply not represented – whose voice is not being heard.
Bottom line – if you are not a member of an association you are either a freeloader or simply not heard. Your business is particularly exposed to changes – including increased costs and more regulation – beyond your control or influence.
At a recent meeting with John McCormick, CEO of CASA, AAAA was pleased and encouraged with what appears to be a more practical and result orientated approach from our aviation regulator. After so many years of failed regulatory reform across most areas AAAA is hopeful that the work of so many dedicated individuals will not be wasted.
The hopefully sensible outcome on radio calls at non-towered aerodromes now being proposed by CASA is a good example of improving safety without introducing unnecessary regulation – an outcome that would not have happened without strong associations.
The point is that associations are there working for members every day with high level access to policy makers. They ensure members’ views are strongly and sensibly put and that government is both educated about industry needs and capabilities and held to account for its actions.
And there are a range of other benefits from belonging to an association – professional development, training, access to recognised programs and accreditations and contact with your peers so you are not left feeling the world is against you and you have no support.
The more members and resources an association has, the more it can do for members – like AAAA’s standard ops manual that is pre-approved by CASA, or our training and conference program that delivers top speakers to members, or our lobbying, education and technical advice work with government.
With no helicopter association in Australia and few groups other than AAAA interested in aerial work activities and smaller commercial operators, the time is right for all operators to reconsider their lack of representation if they are not already members of an association.
If you want your voice to be heard, then put your hand in your pocket and support your sector’s association.
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make Australian Aviation a preferred news source on Google.
Click here to add Australian Aviation as a preferred news source.