INFLT ENG SHUTDOWN MANDATES A DIVERSION TO ALTERNATE. COMPANY DISPATCHER HAS OTHER SUGGESTION RATHER THAN USE OF NEAREST SUITABLE ARPT.

Narrative

SHUT #2 ENG DOWN DUE TO START VALVE OPEN LIGHT ILLUMINATED. LANDED AT THE NEAREST SUITABLE ARPT. ALL PROCS AND CHKLIST ACCOMPLISHED APCH AND LNDG UNEVENTFUL. AT OUR COMPANY THE DISPATCHERS ARE 'MGMNT' AND THE CAPTS ARE 'LABOR.' WHILE ON THE APCH TO BUF THE DISPATCHER (BY SELCAL) DISTURBED THE CREW TO 'SUGGEST' THAT WE DIVERT TO AN ARPT 100 MI FURTHER THAN THE FIRST SUITABLE (SYR) - I ASSUME IT IS BECAUSE THERE WAS MAINT AT THE FURTHER ARPT. I DECLINED AND LANDED AT BUFFALO. AS IT TURNED OUT - HAD WE CONTINUED THE EXTRA 100 MI WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE HAD A COMPOUND EMER - HYD FAILURE. THIS WAS AN UNRELATED FAILURE FOUND ONLY AFTER LNDG. DISPATCHERS SHOULD NOT BE MGMNT. I BELIEVE THIS DISPATCHER'S MOTIVES WERE BASED ON PROFIT ALONE AND NOT SAFETY OF FLT. I RECEIVED A CALL 2 DAYS LATER BY ANOTHER MGMNT TYPE TO 'ASK' WHY I DID NOT FOLLOW THE DISPATCHER'S SUGGESTION. ONLY AFTER THE HYD FAILURE WAS MENTIONED WAS THE CONVERSATION POLITELY ENDED. WHAT IF I WAS NOT SO 'LUCKY' AS TO HAVE THAT OTHER 'EMER?' I BELIEVE I WOULD HAVE BEEN REPRIMANDED BY THE COMPANY.