Duty of Care and Aviation Support

This week’s article addresses the issue of Duty of Care, by an employer to their employees, with particular reference to aviation; for the avoidance of confusion, this does not refer to travel with recognised international carriers approved by their applicable National Aviation Authority and operating in accordance with IATA rules. This article is aimed at the contracting of local aviation assets in support of a businesses activities in-country.

So what is what is duty of care?

  • The employer’s responsibility to their employees for their health, safety and security during the execution of their normal business activity. This obligation has been extended to employee’s dependents when on an international assignment.
  • This duty of care extends through the employer to their suppliers of goods and services contracted to support their normal business activities.

A large number of countries are introducing legislation and case law precedence, expanding the employer’s Duty of Care responsibilities, these changes are increasingly in favour of the employee.

So why are Mackenzie Morgan getting involved in this difficult area of employment? What can we contribute to the debate? In response, I will ask you the companies working world-wide; can you be assured that the supplier of aviation assets is a fit and proper organisation? Are their aircraft/helicopters maintained in an airworthy condition? In this article we will not differentiate between fixed and rotary wing suppliers, it applies equally.

We have used as the statistical basis of this article CAP 780 Aviation Safety Review -2008, issued on 11 November 2008. From the CAP a reportable accident, based on ICAO guidelines can be simplified to damage to an aircraft or injuries to the aircrafts occupants. In the period reviewed under CAP 780, there were 1420 accidents, worldwide, to aircraft operating in a public transport role and with a weight greater than 5700kg. In that figure almost 50% of all reportable accidents occurred during either take-off or landing; when the aircraft and operating crew are under the greatest stress. There have been almost 5800 fatalities, with in-excess of 76 000 injuries in that period.

As headline figures these are frightening enough, looking at the various regional variations of the accident rate, is possibly of more use and interest; we may highlight a region where you are actively operating in. What these figures do not show is the economic cost of accidents or the cost of non-reportable accidents/incidents where production is lost or delayed because of the late delivery of manpower or material.

In the period of the study the rate of fatal accidents in Africa, the Middle East Central and South America is grater than twice the European rate and even higher than the rate in North America. Of the causal groups identified in fatal accident investigations, flight crew have been implicated in 67% of all accidents. Other significant causal groups are engines, aircraft performance and control, fire and aircraft system failures. There are a further group of circumstantial or contributory factors, the most significant aspect in these circumstantial factors is the failure of company or regulatory infrastructure identify or correct system deficiencies.

So as employer, contracting locally for aviation support to your operation; the local transfer of manpower, re-supply missions and casevac from remote locations, what can you do? The use of local aviation support should be addressed by your Risk Management system, and mitigated against, for one-off or limited duration/capability a desk-top audit of approvals, and recent history, against an applicable form would suffice. Where the relationship is for an extended period or is for a highly intensive period, the establishment of a remote location, a formalised audit and audit programme, against a recognisable standard will be required. Issuing applicable non-compliances, corrective actions and the completion of follow-up audits will be necessary to ensure that all risks are reduced to be as low as reasonably possible.

Mackenzie Morgan has a range of solutions that can be employed by organisations required to utilise locally contracted aviation support, we can:

  • Develop a training package and desk-top audit programme for those organisations with limited aviation support requirements;
  • Develop a far more rigorous programme to provide procurement staff and line management with an appreciation of aviation and a tool-kit to enable them to better assess the capability and or deficiencies of the service provider;
  • Finally, we can provide that oversight for organisations with a significant reliance on local aviation support.

I think I have now answered the question I posed at the beginning of this article. Please feel free to contact us and discuss your needs with respect to gaining knowledge of aviation matters.

As always I really appreciate your feed-back on the articles posted.

Bookmark and Share

5 Responses to “Duty of Care and Aviation Support”

  1. [...] Duty of Care and Aviation Support | Mackenzie Morgan – Aerospace … [...]

  2. [...] Duty of Care and Aviation Support | Mackenzie Morgan – Aerospace … [...]

  3. [...] Duty of Care and Aviation Support | Mackenzie Morgan – Aerospace … [...]

  4. Colin Childs says:

    Hi Malcolm, have you seen the Nimrod Review Report looking into the loss of the RAF Nimrod MR2
    Aircraft XV230 in Afghanistan in 2006? It’s very interesting and sobering and includes some names you will recognise (Mike Eagles etc). It’s a very comprehensive review and challenges management actions right to the top of the engineering management chain. A worthwhile read for anyone with safety-management responsibilities.

    http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc0809/hc10/1025/1025.pdf

  5. Malcolm Cox says:

    Hi Colin

    I have not seen the detail, only excerpts from it, many thanks for the link, I will read it and comment later.

    Malcolm

Leave a Reply