B747 CAPTAIN REJECTS ACFT WITH LEADING EDGE FLAP ACTUATOR ON MEL AND IS ADMONISHED BY A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE CHIEF PILOT'S OFFICE.

Narrative

DURING PREFLT I MADE A DECISION TO REJECT THE ACFT ASSIGNED DUE TO A LEADING EDGE FLAP ACTUATOR PROB. WITHOUT GOING INTO THE DECISION MAKING MATRIX IN THIS RPT; I DISCUSSED THE SITUATION WITH DISPATCH; AND THE FLT CREW; AND WE ALL DECIDED THAT THIS WAS A SOUND DECISION BASED ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES; EVEN THOUGH THE MEL ALLOWED FOR DISPATCH. ONBOARD THE ACFT; AFTER REFUSING THE ACFT FOR MAINT REASONS; A FO FROM THE FLT OFFICE APCHED ME. HE STATED THAT HE WANTED TO DISCUSS WHY I HAD REFUSED THE ACFT. WHEN I EXPLAINED IN GENERAL TERMS WHY I HAD; HE STATED THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THE ACFT TO BE LEGAL TO BE FLOWN ACCORDING TO THE MEL. I EXPLAINED TO HIM THAT I HAD A FUNDAMENTAL PHILOSOPHICAL PROB WITH HAVING TO EXPLAIN MYSELF TO A FO WHO IS IN A POS THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE STRICTLY ADMINISTRATIVE BY AGREEMENT BTWN THE ASSOCIATION AND THE COMPANY. I EXPLAINED THAT I RESPECTED HIM AS AN INDIVIDUAL BUT THAT BECAUSE OF THIS CONCERN; AND ADDITIONALLY THAT I FOUND HIS APCHING ME WITH INFO ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE ACFT SHOULD; OR COULD BE FLOWN ACCORDING TO THE MEL TO BE SECOND GUESSING MY DECISION; AND TO BE INTIMIDATION FROM MGMNT. WE HAD A LONG PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSION DURING WHICH I ASKED HIM IF HE TALKED WITH DISPATCH; OR IF OPS HAD TALKED TO DISPATCH. HE SAID NO. DURING THIS PERIOD AND BEFORE; A MAINT REPRESENTATIVE TOLD ME 4 TIMES THAT THE AIRPLANE WAS LEGAL TO FLY AND ASKED IF I WOULD FLY IT. I WASN'T QUITE SURE WHY AFTER I EXPLAINED TO HIM 1 TIME THAT HE FELT THE NEED TO PUSH ME 3 MORE TIMES. AN INDIVIDUAL; WHO I WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH; APCHED ME 2 OR 3 TIMES; THE FINAL TIME WHILE I WAS SEATED IN OPS WAITING FOR THE CREW DESK TO ADVISE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WAS PRESENT. WE WERE DISCUSSING WITH MY CREW THE VERY HIGH STATE OF STRESS; DISTRUST OF SENIOR MGMNT; DISTRS TO FLT CREWS; AND THE HISTORIC LOW MORALE OF ACR PLTS AND WHAT COULD BE DONE TO FIX THESE PROBS. THIS INDIVIDUAL; WHO I THINK WAS SOME KIND OF MAINT SUPVR; SEEMED TO BE ATTEMPTING TO GET THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO ACCEPT THE AIRPLANE CHANGED. WHEN A CAPT MAKES A DECISION THAT IS A SOUND DECISION BASED ON FLT SAFETY; IT SEEMS COUNTER TO COMMON SENSE AND SAFETY BEING OUR #1 PRIORITY TO SECOND GUESS THAT DECISION WITH THIS LEVEL OF VORACITY. I WAS TOLD THE ACFT WASN'T FIXED DURING ITS 19 HR LAYOVER BECAUSE OF A 'MANPOWER' PROB. TO ASK FLT CREWS TO FLY DEFECTIVE ACFT BECAUSE MAINT IS SHORT IS NOT THE ANSWER TO SOLVING THE PROB. FO'S WHO WORK IN THE FLT OFFICE AS ADMINISTRATIVE HELP SHOULD NEVER BE SECOND GUESSING A CAPT'S DECISION.