Safety - AVIATION versus PERSONAL
Safety First
When we talk about 'SAFETY FIRST' there is a hierarchy of safety considerations.
In flight, we would normally do whatever we can to avoid turbulence because it has the potential to injure people on board. However, if we happen to be running out of fuel, that consideration takes a back seat to the need to get the aircraft on the ground. Obviously, crashing and killing everyone on board is a worse outcome than a few sustained injuries caused by the rough weather.
The ‘AVIATION SAFETY’ in the title ‘Civil Aviation Safety Authority’ (CASA) is predominately referring to the safe operation of aircraft, that is, avoiding crashes. CASA has no interest in whether Bob from Head Office has an unexpected twitch that causes him to spill his coffee. However, if Bob was a pilot and his hand spasmed just prior to touchdown, that data would be captured and analysed extensively.
The Law
The CIVIL AVIATION ACT states CASA's functions.
CASA has the function of conducting the safety regulation of the following, in accordance with this Act and the regulations by means that include the following:
conducting comprehensive aviation industry surveillance, including assessment of safety-related decisions taken by industry management at all levels for their impact on aviation safety.
The entire focus of Vaccine Mandates in airlines has been on PERSONAL safety. They have been driven by Workplace Health and Safety policies in response to public health directives.
But what assessment has been done to determine their impact on aviation safety?
Many of us have continuously raised the risk to AVIATION safety, but this has not been addressed at all. The policies have been produced by Human Resource departments, with no understanding or consideration of AVIATION safety.
Any element within a new policy which could potentially affect the safe operation of aircraft should have taken priority when assessing its risk. Being vaccinated contributes nothing toward safety in the terms of the function of CASA. However, ignoring the potential risk to AVIATION safety introduced by mandates, is negligent.
Terminating qualified professionals who reported that risk, is criminal.