Pilot Suspended for sticker

[eolesen]

Yea, I mean the FAA does allow the ONEWORLD stickers.

Yes, and somewhere in TUL engineering, there's a folder with all the specs on the sticker's placement, the type of material used for the sticker as well as the adhesive used to bond it to the aluminum.

And I'm sure that in that folder, there's a determination that it won't contribute to corrosion or have other adverse effects on the metal it's covering up, and that it's not a danger to the aircraft in the event it separates and becomes ingested by one of the engines....

If it's a sticker for use inside, it has to go thru a burn test to measure the toxicity of the resulting fumes...


Yes, it's overkill by any reasonable measure, but the FAA doesn't care if it's a curtain or a sticker. The same level of documentation has to exist in their tiny, bureaucratic mindset....

You probably don't see it because Engineering has to deal with all that crap long before it ever becomes a workcard, but when I was working in Cabin Service Planning, that was the drill every time we wanted to add something to the aircraft, including exterior markings.

 

[star power]

I'm not going to go dig thru the thousands of pages, Bob, but you know as well as I do that just about anything affixed to the airframe (other than speed-tape, perhaps) has to be approved in advance.

When we put the original oneworld decals by the doorway, it required the FAA's sign-off, and about 15 pages of paperwork. When we put new plastic placards on the overhead bins to indicate a powerport was in that row, we had to have the FAA sign off on the change (and that was in addition to getting the actual powerports approved). When we put the retrojet livery on the 757 back in 1998, we had to have the FAA's sign-off on that as well.

Yes, it's a trivial and silly requirement, but it's still a requirement. And a violation is a violation.

A "Oneworld" decal only needs a enginerrning release. its not part of a STC like the powerports placards are. the FAA could are less if the placard is istall or not, but when you put it in the STC documents and the FAA sign off on the documents then it a comformity issue.

The crew might of thought the "Oneworld" decal was frayed and need a little more adhesive.

what about those little duct tape dots, are they for lightingstrikes?

 

[Hopeful]

Yes, and somewhere in TUL engineering, there's a folder with all the specs on the sticker's placement, the type of material used for the sticker as well as the adhesive used to bond it to the aluminum.

And I'm sure that in that folder, there's a determination that it won't contribute to corrosion or have other adverse effects on the metal it's covering up, and that it's not a danger to the aircraft in the event it separates and becomes ingested by one of the engines....

If it's a sticker for use inside, it has to go thru a burn test to measure the toxicity of the resulting fumes...
Yes, it's overkill by any reasonable measure, but the FAA doesn't care if it's a curtain or a sticker. The same level of documentation has to exist in their tiny, bureaucratic mindset....

You probably don't see it because Engineering has to deal with all that crap long before it ever becomes a workcard, but when I was working in Cabin Service Planning, that was the drill every time we wanted to add something to the aircraft, including exterior markings.

Thank you...I was being sarcastic. As a mechanic for around 30 years, I am fully aware what and how a sticker is approved and where and how exactly it is placed.

The company has enough on the pilot for putting the sticker on the aircraft WITHOUT citing FAA regs. It is defacing company property that in itself makes him subject to discipline.
The company likes to shoot out of both barrels to send the message out.

And I don't think there is a sticker of the size in question that would do ANY damge if ingested in an engine.

 

[eolesen]

Thank you...I was being sarcastic. As a mechanic for around 30 years, I am fully aware what and how a sticker is approved and where and how exactly it is placed.

Sorry, the sarcasm didn't come across, but I'm guessing there are also a lot of people on this forum who don't know how much red tape there can be where the FAA is concerned. I spent three years as a liason with the DFW office, and they're about as narrow minded and binary as you can get when it comes to following their processes and procedures.

And I don't think there is a sticker of the size in question that would do ANY damge if ingested in an engine.

Totally agree. That was sarcasm on my part. I think the red tape is overkill, but as I said to Bob yesterday, you don't get a lot of leeway with the FAA on which FARs you follow and which you can ignore.

 

[Hopeful]

Sorry, the sarcasm didn't come across, but I'm guessing there are also a lot of people on this forum who don't know how much red tape there can be where the FAA is concerned. I spent three years as a liason with the DFW office, and they're about as narrow minded and binary as you can get when it comes to following their processes and procedures.
Totally agree. That was sarcasm on my part. I think the red tape is overkill, but as I said to Bob yesterday, you don't get a lot of leeway with the FAA on which FARs you follow and which you can ignore.

Agreed. But I do think this whole case is more about defacing AA' property than it is about FAA regs. He should not have done that.

 

[Wretched Wrench]

what about those little duct tape dots, are they for lightingstrikes?

"Duct tape dots?" Duct tape is cloth tape.

Do you mean the little round aluminum tape dots? They are to indicate that damage at that spot has been inspected, evaluated and entered into the aircraft damage log. This is so pilots and mechs who do walk-around inspections can tell new damage from old damage.

 

[Nor'Easta]

I wonder if it was a F.U.R.P. sticker?

 

[operaations]

harsh or not I think he got what he deserved.

 

[Bob Owens]

Surely there are other ways to get a point across.

Obvoiusly, judging by the actions of management, there arent.

 

[jetmechjer]

[quote name='Nor'Easta' post='507295' date='Jul 25 2007, 07:48 PM']I wonder if it was a F.U.R.P. sticker?[/quote]


THE F.U.R.P. BUTTONS ARE GREAT AND SUM UP THE FEELING OF ALL BETRAYED AA WORKERS!!! I HEAR THAT THE T SHIRTS, HATS AND BUMPER STICKERS ARE NOW AVAILABLE!! :wub:

 

[CO738]

I am not a big union guy, but I sympathize with AA capt.
The AA executive package is bonkers while AA employees have gotten a huge shaft over the past few years.
I am surprised AA doesn't have higher turn-over.

 

[Bob Owens]

but as I said to Bob yesterday, you don't get a lot of leeway with the FAA on which FARs you follow and which you can ignore.

And as I wrote to you not all FARs are created equal. The statement was made that he could have lost his certificate for violating an unnamed FAR, rubbish. Spitting on the sidewalk and premeditated murder are both violations of the law, however the penalty for violating those laws are not, nor should they be, the same. Putting a benign sticker on top of an existing benign sticker may (or may not) be a violation of an FAR but there is no way any rational person could feel that this act constitutes an infraction worthy of severe discipline on the part of the FAA or the company.

 

[skydrol]

The FAA issue is too funny. Some people think they can throw that around and you are supposed to quiver. If they would go to chapter 11 of the AMM and looked for the actual required FAA placards on the fuselage some would be suprised at how many placards AA chooses to put on their planes that are not required. Do you think the aircraft will not be dispatched for a missing illegible one world placard?

 

[767 mechanic]

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram on Thur or Fri had a picture of the PUP bucks sticker with Brundages face on it. His comments about becoming an executive and pay should be expected. If I remember correctly he was a pilot for alpa and negotiated the AA eagle contract with the flow through clause and I believe that Capt Randy Babbit (ECLAT) was also one of the negotiaters. I think this was a 16 yr contract. Does anybody know when this contract starts or ends? After the contract was signed Brundage went to work for AA as a stuffed shirt. I believe this has sellout written all over it.

 

[Bob Owens]

[

i]Dear Friends and Supporters,

By now, most of you have heard of StickerGate. In a moment of frustration, one of our pilots stuck a "Pupbuck" over a One World logo. He admitted error, apologized for the infraction and stated that it would not occur again. He was withheld from service without pay. This resulted in a $12,000 loss of income. Sue Gordon, spokesperson for AMR, claimed this was a violation of Federal Aviation Administration rules. The FAA sensibly responded that this was not an FAA issue.

Trebor Banstetter from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram asked Ms. Gordon, "What action, if any, would have been taken if the pilot had used a 'Go Rangers' sticker instead of a Pupbuck?" Ms. Gordon had no comment. Clearly, a 'Go Rangers' or 'Mavs Rule' sticker would not have elicited the same disciplinary response. Defacing company property or violating FAA Regs was not the issue.

Pup was the issue. And, Pup remains the issue.

Instead of addressing the elephant-in-the-room named Pup, an easier decision was made to kill the messenger by making an example out of him. Why not an advisory or Step One? Because it doesn't control the workforce like fear and intimidation.

While a momentary act of frustration is regrettable, the response was vindictive and heavy handed. Unjust discipline breeds resentment and distrust without bringing labor/management differences any closer to a resolution. AA's boot-on-the-neck style of management only inflames employee frustration and further stimulates such infractions, which are by no means isolated. It's no secret that the graffiti F.U.R.P. is scribbled throughout the system from London to Tokyo. So, why not address the issues that cause good, decent employees to uncharacteristically act out?

And in reality, what actual damages did the company sustain? Was there measurable damage either to the fuselage or to American's reputation? (Or, was it merely damage to the pride of a few senior execs who responded like petty tyrants?)

AA’s safety violations, as repeatedly cited by OSHA, cause greater damage to public perception, our reputation and the health and welfare of employees. Certainly, this deserves more attention than a Pupbuck. Within the last 3 years, AA had received identical citations for the same violations, knew these problems existed and didn't do anything to remedy them. OSHA publicly labeled these violations "willful." As a result, American faces $231,000 in fines with additional fines anticipated.

In contrast, it has not gone unnoticed that no action has been taken to hold Peggy Sterling, the VP of Safety & Security accountable. As the VP of Safety & Security, she bears the ultimate responsibility for these violations and fines. Was she suspended for weeks without pay or sent to bed without her bonus? Did AA report her to the Feds?

There would be no question about the fate of any other employee whose performance costs the company close to a quarter million dollar. Ironically, Ms. Sterling displayed an acute knowledge of “safetyâ€￾ when she safeguarded her personal assets in the Carty bankruptcy proof trust. Perhaps AMR execs should direct that same degree of focus on the safety of their employees.

The double standard in discipline highlights the hypocritical gap between the clubby elite the rest of the 'team'. In the AMR caste system of the 'Have and the Have-Mores'; others are dealt with differently. Retaliating against one pilot, while 'Bankrupt-Proof-Pegs' takes a powder, won't resolve AA’s toxic labor relations.

Does one's participation in a disgraceful trust bring with it a special kind of Executive Immunity?

Apparently so.

Bush may have Scooter. Hollywood may have Paris. But, after $231,000 in fines, AA still has their VP of "Safety" and "Security".

Patti Haddon
Pupoff[/i]

So the company ran to the FAA, again, and the FAA refused to do their dirty work.. But real infractions they try to bury.

It seems that due to the fact that the courts and the FAA nearly always sway in favor of AA that AA feels that they can use these institutions as they please. When the company took Local 562 to court in order to get an injunction their case was so pathetic that the court admonished them-no free upgrades for that Judge.

A couple of years back, when I was in office, and an outspoken critic of the company's labor policies, I was involved in a collision where the aircraft struck a stairs truck, someone from the company called the FBI and claimed it was a deliberate act of sabotage. The FBI dismissed the claim after an investigation, the agent was clearly annoyed to be sent on such a silly call.


If the FAA was doing their job they should question the capacity of these people to run a safe airline. Reporting a pilot for putting a sticker on an airplane, really, in the meantime they are really increasing the risks to passenger by having extended the periods between maintenance, in other words lowering maintenance standards. We have seen where that leads in the past such as when Aloha lost half the top of a 737 and UAL lost a 747cargo door due to unchecked corrosion. A few months back we all saw pictures of that engine that blew itself apart, it was only luck that it didnt happen on takeoff. Now a days we only see two engines on most aircraft, if anything they should get more maintenance, not less. Lets not forget how AA management, after getting rid of parts, reportedly said that mechanics have to learn to fix airplanes without parts. It seems that management is more concerned about a PUP sticker than real maintenance.

FM didnt want to bother looking up the FAR violation because he knew that he made a fool out of himself with his rediculous exaggerations. He comes here pretending to be a neutral outside observer when its clear that he is a management shill. The fact is the company over reacted. the FAA saw no infraction worthy of action and the pilot will likely get back pay in arbitration.

Once again, with a heavy hand , management screwed up.