Aviation Technicians and Ethics
Ethical Decision Making: Aviation Maintenance Technicians Follow More Than a Code
Carl Jones
Social Responsibility & Ethics Management – MGMT 325
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Mrs. Linda Flowers
14 January 2013
Ethical decision making and job performance are intrinsically intertwined when speaking in terms of aviation maintenance technicians. With the rapidly expanding need for commercial aviation and events leading to the downturn in the economy, airlines are facing increasing pressure to reduce costs and keep their fleets flying. It is essential that during periods of such economic restraint, corners are not cut and safety remains paramount in order to maintain safe skies. Every year aviation mishaps and accidents occur worldwide. Unfortunately some end in tragedy and unbelievably, most were due to an error in judgment, lack of ethics, and a failure to comply with the code of conduct. Human factors studies report that “accidents happen” but what needs to be realized is accidents are also avoidable. If aviation maintainers and inspectors were to adhere more closely to policy and observe the Aviation Maintenance Technicians Model Code of Conduct, the number of maintenance mishaps and accidents could be greatly reduced.
On September 11, 1991, flight 2574 bound for Huston broke up in mid-air due to improper maintenance and inspections. The crash was so bad the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) originally suspected a bomb was the cause. In the end after pulling maintenance records, the findings concluded the cause was maintenance related and avoidable. Air Safety Week (1993) summarized the event: Embraer 120 N33701 was pulled into the Continental Express hangar at Houston around 21:30 for scheduled maintenance that included removal and replacement of both left and right hand horizontal stabilizer deice boots. The second shift mechanics started working on the right hand deice boot. Although planned for the third shift, the 47
Carl Jones
Social Responsibility & Ethics Management – MGMT 325
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Mrs. Linda Flowers
14 January 2013
Ethical decision making and job performance are intrinsically intertwined when speaking in terms of aviation maintenance technicians. With the rapidly expanding need for commercial aviation and events leading to the downturn in the economy, airlines are facing increasing pressure to reduce costs and keep their fleets flying. It is essential that during periods of such economic restraint, corners are not cut and safety remains paramount in order to maintain safe skies. Every year aviation mishaps and accidents occur worldwide. Unfortunately some end in tragedy and unbelievably, most were due to an error in judgment, lack of ethics, and a failure to comply with the code of conduct. Human factors studies report that “accidents happen” but what needs to be realized is accidents are also avoidable. If aviation maintainers and inspectors were to adhere more closely to policy and observe the Aviation Maintenance Technicians Model Code of Conduct, the number of maintenance mishaps and accidents could be greatly reduced.
On September 11, 1991, flight 2574 bound for Huston broke up in mid-air due to improper maintenance and inspections. The crash was so bad the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) originally suspected a bomb was the cause. In the end after pulling maintenance records, the findings concluded the cause was maintenance related and avoidable. Air Safety Week (1993) summarized the event: Embraer 120 N33701 was pulled into the Continental Express hangar at Houston around 21:30 for scheduled maintenance that included removal and replacement of both left and right hand horizontal stabilizer deice boots. The second shift mechanics started working on the right hand deice boot. Although planned for the third shift, the 47
References: Air Safety Week (1993). Embraer 120RT Brasilia Crash. Vol. 4.1 Retrieved from: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19910911-0 Federal Aviation Administration, (2008). Human Factors Guide for Aviation Maintenance and Inspection (Ethics in Maintenance). Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Weinstein B., (2000). What Should I Do?. New York, NY: Berkley Publishing Group. National Transportation Safety Board, (1992). CONTINENTAL EXPRESS FLIGHT 2574 IN-FLIGHT STRUCTURAL BREAKUP EMB-120RT, N33701 (NTSB/AAR-92/04). Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Spinks M., (2010). Professional Aviation Maintenance Association Code of Ethics. Examiner.com. Retrieved From: http://www.examiner.com/article/professional-aviation-maintenance-association-pama-code-of-ethics