PRIA and the PRD Safety SCAM

A Tool of Retaliation

“Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996″ (PRIA). PRIA now authorizes the mandatory gathering and sharing of this specific information, which enables a hiring air carrier to make an informed decision before extending a firm offer of employment to a pilot applicant.”

PRIA, now the PRD, is just another aviation smoke and mirror scam to make people think the industry is improving safety. Instead of improving safety, this system is allowing airlines to retaliate, and harm pilots by falsely asserting the pilot was terminated for poor performance. This system is a tool of retaliation and airline management is also utilizing it for extortion to get pilots who report safety to resign or they will never fly again because of the false reports in their PRD.

The truth behind the PRIA and PRD history must be told.

PRIA BACKGROUND

The PRIA came into existence because during “1987 and 1994” US air carriers suffered 7 fatal commercial airline accidents that were, “attributed, in part, to errors made by pilots who had been employed without background safety checks.”

Airlines said that reviews of the pilots’ records identified prior safety violations and training problems. But did they? And were the training problems within the company that they currently were employed but the company chose not train to proficiency?

I want to ask every pilot this question: Does the past predict the future? We all know humans make errors. If a teenage pilot fails their private, commercial and even their instrument checkride due to an inconsequential error, or something they did not understand, but they are trained and learn, is that something that should haunt their career? And does that actually reflect later performance?

Isn’t the responsibility for the airline to train their pilots? To identify weakness and if the pilot is unable to perform, remove them from the flight line? That’s how it should work. A 16-year-old who flies greater than 100 feet off his steep turn and fails a check, does not equate to deficient performance when he is 50-years-old getting a B787 type rating. Current airline training is all that should count in this assessment. Look at the reverse. A hot shot pilot of the past, no failures, does that mean the airline doesn’t have the responsibility to train and assess on the current airline?

The seven accidents they say were pilot error and previous failures? I will challenge that on all of these accidents. Did prior performance have anything to do with what transpired? I say no.

(1) Northwest Airlines Flight 255 (August 16, 1987): A McDonnell Douglas MD-82 crashed shortly after takeoff from Detroit Metropolitan Airport due to the flight crew’s failure to set the flaps and slats properly for takeoff. It killed 154 of the 155 people on board and two on the ground. 

Pilot Error, yes…but due to past failures?

(2) Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA) Flight 1771 (December 7, 1987): A BAE-146-200 crashed in San Luis Obispo, California, after a disgruntled former employee shot the crew and a passenger, causing the plane to dive. All 43 people on board died.

The CREW were shot! How was this due to past performance?

(3) Delta Air Lines Flight 1141 (August 31, 1988): A Boeing 727-232 crashed on takeoff from Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport because the crew failed to configure the wing flaps and slats correctly. Fourteen of the 108 on board died.

Yes… pilot error. But these guys were distracted with a flight attendant in the cockpit during taxi then talking about their layover. They were non-professional and not focusing on the task. I challenge this had anything to do with a previous failure in another life? This more than likely was their first airline job out of the military.

(4) Pan Am Flight 103 (December 21, 1988): This Boeing 747-121 was destroyed by a bomb over Lockerbie, Scotland. All 243 people on board were killed, along with 11 on the ground.

Pilot Error? This was a bomb!

Where did past failures have anything to do with this?

(5) United Airlines Flight 232 (July 19, 1989): A McDonnell Douglas DC-10- experienced an engine failure that led to a total loss of hydraulic control, but the crew managed a partial landing at Sioux City, Iowa. Of the 296 people on board, 111 died.  

Pilot Error? These guys did an amazing job bringing that plane in and saving lives! There was ZERO pilot error, but exceptional performance. The plane broke.

(6) USAir Flight 427 (September 8, 1994): This Boeing 737-300 crashed while approaching Pittsburgh International Airport due to a rudder control system malfunction. All 132 people on board perished.

An aircraft malfunction that the pilots had not been trained for?

How is that their fault? How is this attributed to a past experience failure?

(7) American Eagle Flight 4184 (October 31, 1994): An ATR-72-212 crashed in Roselawn, Indiana, after accumulating severe ice, leading to a loss of control. All 68 people on board were killed. 

They flew into icing conditions. Why? Dispatched? Lack of understanding?

Was this really due to a previous pilot failures? Yet, look at the numbers of aircraft flying into turbulence today and sending passengers to the hospital. Blame the past and not that airlines are not training properly.

Instead of solving the problem, the industry decided to tell the public that the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA), would require airlines to check the full history of a pilot’s past safety records and therefore accidents like those listed would not happen. It’s not the bombing, or shooting, or lack of weather training, etc… They are attributing these accidents to the pilots past.

When asked, all carriers stated they did not see the pilots’ previous records. Duh, it was over 35 years ago! And, pilots of those days came from the military. I doubt background had anything to do with the actual accidents. This PRIA is fluff and propaganda. The Atlas pilot who crashed Flight 3591 had multiple non-disclosed failures in past, but wasn’t it’s Atlas training’s responsibility to determine if he could fly their aircraft? They released him to the flight line.

Not-unlike SMS, this is just another marketing tool to pretend someone is doing something about accidents. But it gets better…. Or worse as the case may be. They changed PRIA to the PRD.

PRD

The transition from the Pilot Records Improvement Act (PRIA) to the Pilot Records Database (PRD) was driven by the Pilot Records Database Act of 2010, which focused on “modernizing” the pilot “hiring process” by creating a centralized, “electronic” system they say “to improve safety by making it easier and more comprehensive to review a pilot’s complete safety history.”

The PRD electronic system simply replaced the PRIA manual system. PRD Records are retained for 99 years or until the pilot dies and someone sends the FAA a death certificate.

Let’s BLAME Colgan Crash for everything!

First, the industry said they increased flight hours because of Colgan. However, both pilots had more than 1500 flight hours. But… that was their excuse to pretend there was action for the airline’s training failures. Then, they decided to blame Colgan for the PRD, too.

Simply put, the PRD replaced an old system with an electronic system. However, the excuse was the Colgan Captain, Marvin Renslow, failed several checkrides before and during his employment at Colgan Air.

Okay, he had failed three checkrides before being hired and only disclosed one on his application. However, while at Colgan, he failed “two” more. Which is worse? Before Colgan or while at Colgan? This accident flagged an industry training issue, and nobody looked into or changed and improved training and/or checking standards. They blamed the past, not the present.

That crash had NOTHING to do with his failing a commercial license in a Cessna years earlier, but everything to do with substandard performance as identified by failing two checkrides at his airline. Yet, they still put him on the flight line.

PRD and RETALIATION

The PRD can destroy a pilot’s career. Terry Hand filed an ASAP report and TransMedics retaliated against him, instead of improving the training and addressing the issues they fired him. While I assert Terry’s performance was exceptional after a human factor’s error, the company terminated him and placed in his permanent record the reason as “Performance.”

I listened to a recorded meeting where a Delta Regional Director convinced a Pilot to resign because if that pilot fought the (false) accusation, they would be terminated and the PRD record would reflect the termination, even though it was false. However, if the pilot did not fight the accusation and simply resigned, Delta would not put anything in the record.

PRD is now a negotiation tool to convince pilots to leave.

There is another case where the captain reported numerous safety concerns over a week period of time, and then they messed with him in the simulator. Not even coming close to running the FAA approved checkride syllabus. Day two, the rationale for failure was so off the wall, I had to laugh. But it wasn’t a laughing matter because to “school” this pilot for reporting safety concerns, they told him he had to sign a document and go back and fly as a first officer. One would assume if his performance was good enough to be a pilot in the right seat, he did not have a performance issue. For the general public, the standards of performance are exactly the same for captain and first officer. Both must meet performance standards and be able to operated the aircraft. Both are responsible for the outcome of the flight.

This airline told the pilot, “If you don’t sign this document, you will be terminated.” He did not sign the letter because he was given a bullshit checkride. So, they terminated him. The airline put in his PRD that he was terminated for performance. Wait! The only thing he did not perform properly was the signing of a letter and refusing to return to a first officer position. During trial, I wonder how this airline will address that they planned to allow a pilot who had “poor performance” operate their aircraft.

Today a pilot called and his company requested he resign, or they will terminate him and state the reason in his PRD was performance. He has no performance issues. They won’t even tell him why they are terminating him. He simply wrote a concerning letter to the company regarding a management pilot violating regulations and operational procedures impacting safety during is line training. Of course that’s why they want him gone. He ruffled the wrong feathers. This PRD threat is nothing less than extortion.

PILOTS CHECK YOUR PRD

My advice to all pilots and anyone who has received a false rationale for termination is to file a libel claim against the company and the individuals who ordered and submitted the false statement in your file. Take your performance to a public trial and let them decide. Once we start holding management employees “personally” accountable, maybe they will change their evil ways.