Smoke without fire

Rather than a rumour growing out of an online forum, the claims were apparently authored by a known individual without the veil of digital anonymity. Who leaked the report to the media is also the subject of various claims, while the timing seemed to offer a sizeable window for dissemination before business hours recommenced on Monday June 11.

Unlike the leak, the claims were apparently in the hands of CASA for a couple of weeks at the time the headlines appeared. Except in the most blatant cases, due process always takes time, so there are no surprises that the media storm preceded any official response from the regulator. For those of us on the sidelines, the most obvious question is whether this was a genuine case of ‘whistle blowing’ or merely a poison-pen letter. This is something that the media could not answer.

Within any airline, or any company, one of its most valuable commodities is its culture. In turn, that culture is made up of many strands: a reporting culture that not only facilitates but encourages open reporting and raising of issues; a safety culture that embeds a philosophy of safe practices as the norm, interwoven with the previously mentioned means of reporting; and a culture that recognises that mistakes will be made and, other than in the case of rogue behaviour, will set about learning from those mistakes with a view to training and procedures rather than punitive measures.

Unfortunately, a company’s culture is intangible and difficult to quantify. In an era of audit and KPIs, culture does not necessarily show up on the radar. Like the air that we breathe, a positive culture is invisible but its absence can ultimately be terminal for an organisation. To appreciate an organisation’s safety culture, one must be embedded. Audits can highlight events and trends that may be indicators of the underlying culture, but they cannot grasp it fully. That takes substantial time and exposure at the grass roots level.

Consequently, it is important that people within an organisation have the ability to speak up when it is required, and are encouraged to do so. Equally, the first means of doing so should be through the established channels, be that a reporting system or a chain of command. Unsatisfactory responses can then be elevated to the next level. In this way, the process is fair for all concerned. The organisation has the right of reply and/or rectification and the complainant has the credibility that comes with a validated process. If safety dictates, it can always be escalated legitimately.

While a positive culture is a tremendous asset, a negative culture can be corrosive. If reporting is discouraged, or fear of retribution replaces a just workplace, things will only get worse. Our mistakes are where we learn and improve, and if they are buried rather than addressed, they are only set to be repeated. There is no denying that standing up and speaking up in these environments can take a great deal of courage.

Unfortunately, as our political arena highlights, leaked stories cause little more than chaos and lack credibility. These are followed by a swirl of claims and denials in a hostile case of ‘he said, she said’ played out in the media. Meanwhile, we sit on the sidelines and wonder if it’s all lies or whether the smoke is truly indicating fire. And just as every individual has the right to speak up, each company has the right of reply.

The cornerstone of aviation must always be safety. Sure, without profit, airlines will ultimately collapse, but safety must be the foundation. More valuable than the share price are the human lives that take to the sky. Any level of compromise or uncertainty at this base level ultimately plays out in other ways and these are the trends that audits can often identify – but not always and not immediately. For this reason, the door must always be open to raise concerns in the time between audits and inspections, and that door must be open to the most junior individual within a company.

Within days of the leak, the story has drifted from the headlines as the mainstream media had its sugar fix and moved on. We, the travelling public, are no better informed regarding the situation and lingering doubt is the only byproduct. If the leaked story was intended to genuinely highlight concerns or accelerate a safety process that had stalled, then it would appear that it hasn’t achieved its goal. The media lacks the persistence and patience and the public want names and faces. Without these it becomes yesterday’s news very quickly.

‘Leaked stories cause little more than chaos and lack credibility’