A B767-300 DISPATCHER EXPRESSED DISMAY WITH HIS COMPANY'S OPS; IN GENERAL; AT ZZZ.
Synopsis
A B767-300 DISPATCHER EXPRESSED DISMAY WITH HIS COMPANY'S OPS; IN GENERAL; AT ZZZ.
Narrative
I RECEIVED A CALL FROM ZZZ MAINT WANTING TO DEFER THE L SELCAL HF (PLACARD 2321B). I INITIALLY AGREED TO DEFER IT; BUT REVIEWING MORE ABOUT THE PROB; I LEARNED THAT THE ENTIRE HF SYS WAS INOP. I REFUSED TO ALLOW ZZZ TO DEFER BUT MOMENTS LATER; THEY DID DEFER. I RECEIVED A CALL FROM MAINT OFFICE WITHIN MINS OF THE DEFERRAL SAYING HE HAD CALLED ZZZ AND TOLD THEM TO FIX IT ALSO. HE ALSO STATED THAT THE ITEM WOULD BE CLRED SHORTLY AND WE WOULD BE READY TO GO VERY SHORTLY. THE CAPT OF THE FLT THEN CALLED AND SAID THE HF SELCAL CHKED OUT OK FINALLY AND HE WAS READY TO GO IF I COULD GET ZZZ TO RESTART THE BOARDING PROCESS. I OBSERVED THE MEL ITEM TO BE CLRED BY ZZZ'S MAINT OFFICE. I CALLED THE LOAD PLANNER FOR THE FLT SINCE I DID NOT KNOW THE CORRECT ZONE CTL NUMBER AND WAS XFERRED TO SOMEONE WHO SAID SHE WAS THE CORRECT CTLR. I SAID THE MAINT ISSUE HAD BEEN RESOLVED AND WE WERE READY TO GO. SHE ASKED ME WHO HAD THE AUTH OVER THERE (MEANING DISPATCH?) TO REFUSE AN AIRPLANE. I TOLD HER I DID. SHE REPLIED THAT SHE DIDN'T KNOW THAT (MATTER OF FACTLY) AND I HUNG UP. I THEN SAW THAT A DI DELAY WAS ASSIGNED. I ALSO RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM THE B767 CTLR WHO SAID THAT I HAD TO ISSUE A REFUSAL FOR THE DEFERRAL IF I EXPECTED TO GET IT FIXED. I TOLD HIM THAT MAINT HEADQUARTERS TOLD ME THAT IT WAS DEFERRED ONLY BECAUSE ZZZ'S MAINT HAD STARTED THE PROCESS AND THAT THEY WOULD BE REMOVING THE ITEM SHORTLY BECAUSE THE CAPT SAID IT WAS FIXED. I TOLD MY BOSS ABOUT WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED AND HE CALLED ZZZ AND TALKED WITH THE SUPVR WHO ALLEGEDLY TOLD MY BOSS HE UNDERSTOOD WHAT TRANSPIRED BUT COULDN'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE COULD REFUSE AN ACFT THAT THE CAPT SAYS IS OK TO CONTINUE AND HE REFUSED TO CHANGE THE DI CODE. HE ALSO STATED THAT ZZZ SAID THIS WOULD REQUIRE A 3 HR FIX AND THAT I SHOULD CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE ROUTING. I TOLD MY BOSS THE ACFT WAS READY TO GO NOW AND THAT MAINT HEADQUARTERS TOLD ME IT WAS GOING TO BE A VERY QUICK FIX. I CALLED THE SUPVR AND I TOLD HIM I WAS FILING THIS RPT ABOUT THE INCIDENT. HE BECAME INCREDIBLY UPSET. THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT I HAVE THE AUTH TO REFUSE ACFT FOR MAINT ISSUES WHETHER OR NOT THE CAPT AGREES AND I DON'T EXPECT TO HAVE STATION OPS OR CUSTOMER SVC REPRESENTATIVES TELLING ME OTHERWISE. NOR DO I EXPECT TO BE YELLED AT AS WE ALL HAVE AN EQUAL INTEREST IN DEPARTING ON-TIME. IT IS UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNSAFE. IT IS MY OPINION THAT ZZZ MAINT DID NOT WANT TO FIX THIS PROB TO BEGIN WITH. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE CAPT KNEW THE SYS WORKED BEFORE EITHER I OR MAINT HEADQUARTERS BUT THIS IS IRRELEVANT TO THE PROCESS. THIS APPEARED TO OCCUR ALSO ON THE NEXT FLT OUT OF ZZZ; WITH A WINDOW SQUEAL PROB THAT WAS NOT WORKED UNTIL DEP TIME. THIS RPT WAS FILED AS A RESULT OF A CONTINUING CONCERN WITH ZZZ OPS AND MAINT POLICIES REGARDING OPERATIONAL AUTH AND THE DEFERRAL PROCESS. I FOUND IT UNUSUAL THAT DESPITE ME SAYING NOT TO DEFER AN ITEM; THAT BECAUSE MAINT WAS ALREADY IN THE DEFERRAL SYS; THAT THE ITEM MUST GET DEFERRED AND THEN CLRED.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.