AlanM wrote:I was just going to comment on the inability of so many people (incl some ATCOs) on what Just Culture actually says and means.
“Just Culture is a culture where front-line operators or other persons are not punished for actions, omissions or decisions taken by them that are commensurate with their experience and training, but in which gross negligence, willful violations and destructive acts are not tolerated”
My italics. The bit that people often forget.
All very well, but all these definitions require the opportunity for the distinction to be drawn and which AlanM sets out so well, is it a or b, and in order to decide is it a or b the evidence needs to be considered by both parties as well as both parties having the opportunity to present their case, and usually with some form of peer review. Just culture is hardly just culture if determined from one parties perspective. We all know where this gets us, automatic regulatory action without much or any evidence of process. It does seem the process is better set out, but I am not sure this wasnt the idea in the past. The reality was you could write something up and you could ask for the evidence, but that was about it. Perhaps this process will now be more robust and which I suspect we would all welcome.
Pivotal to the action would seem to be what "if safety infringement measures were taken". I wonder what exactly this is intended to mean and why it is necessarily significant?