Only Capital Matters?

An IIT-Kharagpur Civil engineering graduate, who then went on to pursue his passion in aviation started his career

with IndiGo (Inter Globe Aviation Ltd.) by initially being the first officer from the period of Aug 2011

–

Dec 2014 3

years 5 months and climbed up the ladder by serving as a Captain for the period of

Dec 2014 - May 2019, who then went on for a change and joined Air Asia and served as a pilot in the airlines for 1 year and four months before he got suspended from its employer.

So why did an almost newly employed person with a clean record and no past complaints (as long as it’s previous

employer’s stand in media is concerned) risked his job which he for the record has the passion for and changed his

stream for? As regards to few conversations reported a few senior officials have pointed out that few of his

allegations might be correct while the others can’t be vouched for.

And what were these allegations?

Gaurav Taneja in his YouTube video has been mentioning three prominent issues which has landed its previous employer in soup.

The fear of taking a sick leave

In the YouTube video where Taneja details the circumstances around his suspension, the AirAsia India pilot talks about an environment that discouraged pilots from taking a sick leave despite being unwell. This is a job that is responsible for about 200 people's lives and needs a high level of physical and mental fitness.

Pilots from other airlines agreed with Taneja. "Pilots do fear asking for a sick leave, as it may lead to punitive action,"

said by a pilot with over 20 years of flying experience. The punitive action may be in the form of a lower bonus, at the end of the year. "On any other job, one could go to work despite feeling a bit under the weather. As a pilot, I can't afford to do that," says the pilot cited above. At the same time, added another aviator, the management also takes notice if a pilot is repeatedly taking sick leave or takes off on festivals despite being roistered to fly. One does not know the factors around Taneja's allegations, and only the investigation by DGCA can throw light.

SOPs not being followed

Taneja alleges that the airline was not strictly adhering to the SoPs issued by the government, on flying amidst COVID-19 times. Though the pilot doesn't get into the details on which SoPs were not being followed, one gathers he was talking about the procedures to be followed within the aircraft. Taneja alleges that he was forced to delay a flight by 40 minutes because SoPs were not being followed. Is it the responsibility of the pilot-in-command (PIC) to ensure

SoPs are followed in the flight, or should he just leave it to the ground handling team?

It's a topic that seems to have different views.

"Pilot becomes responsible for the aircraft only once the doors are closed. Otherwise, he should let the ground handling team manage it," says a senior executive from the industry. Country's largest airline IndiGo, another senior executive pointed out, details in its manual that the PIC assumes command of the flight the moment he signs the aircraft acceptance, and he is responsible "for the safe execution of the flight and for the safety of the occupants...and orderly conduct of the flight”.

The 'flight' is the key word here. The manual defines 'flight' to represent the period between 'doors closed' and 'doors open.'

Amit Singh, an industry veteran and Fellow of London's Royal Aeronautical Society, points to the Civil Aviation Regulations - which advises airlines on several aviation aspects. "The pilot-in-command shall be responsible for the safety of all crew members, passengers and cargo on board when the doors are closed," says the CAR.

So going by the CAR, is Taneja technically responsible for the SoPs that are to be done before the doors close?

A senior pilot agreed with the CAR guidelines, but added that when it comes to the COVID-19 SoPs, the policy may

differ from airline to airline.

On Taneja's concerns, one will have to wait for the investigations to reveal if he was following the protocol laid down by the company, or not.

Flap 3 or Flap 4 Flaps are installed on an aircraft's wings and are mainly used to create a drag in the speed of the plane while landing or taking off. This in turn can reduce the distance required for landing and take-off. Flap 3 saves fuel - about 8kg - a reason why nearly all airlines advise their pilots to use this mode, rather than Flap 4. But in the case of AirAsia India, alleges Taneja, the airline had made it mandatory for its pilots to use Flap 3, for 98 percent of their landings. In one particular month, Taneja says, he had done 10 landings, out of which seven were done using Flap 3, thus making it only 70 percent. Two of the landings, says Taneja, were in Imphal where landing is complicated and thus he used Flap 4. Should he have compromised on passenger safety to save fuel, he asks. Again, industry has differing views on this. "AirAsia India isn’t wrong in asking him to do a F3 landing to conserve fuel. It’s done the world over," says a senior pilot with a private airline. At the same time, pilots point out that few airlines put a target to using Flap3. "It's an advisory. There are better ways to save fuel. In fact, if you plan your descent properly, a pilot can save more than 100 kg of fuel," says a senior pilot. Amit Singh says the solution may lie in wording the advisory. "If the airline wants its pilots to consistently perform FLAP 3 landings instead of Flap Full, then what should the policy read? As per my understanding, the policy should be: “Normal flaps for landing is Flap 3 but, at the discretion of the pilot in command, up-to a maximum of 2 percent landings can be performed with Flap Full. "People tend to avoid risk when a positive frame is presented but seek risks when a negative frame is presented," Singh says in his blog Mind fly. One can't say if a different framing of the advisory would have prompted Taneja to react differently. At the same time, it's an interesting thought. Can policymakers bring in more positivity to their regulations? The style

While the three issues raised by Taneja have set off a debate in the industry, executives have also discussed the method the senior pilot has used to air his grievances. Few employees take to social media to raise allegations against their employer. And that, say experts, may not be the ideal way. Although Taneja in his video did clearly state that he tried addressing the issue internally via all communication mediums both online and offline only to be caught in the medical ruckus created by its employer in order to make him lose his credibility which in turn would have made his license null and void. But thanks to the power of social media and his loyal followers who made sure this issue gets appropriate coverage and kept it trending on all social media platforms. The tweet went viral, following which the DGCA began a probe into the allegations & later in June, issued a show- cause notice to Captain Uppal, Captain Neema & the CEO of the airline. Meanwhile, on June 26, Captain Taneja was terminated by the airline. ``He was terminated following an inquiry conducted by officials, including Captain Neema, the very person against whom Capt. Taneja had made allegations,’’ said advocate Yeshwant Shenoy, one of Capt. Taneja’s lawyers. But just suspending of these top officials won’t change things as it is directly related to the company so in my humble opinion the company is failing to address the elephant in the room. This incident has put a direct spotlight on how weak are our Whistle-blower Protection Act although given a heads-up for the same in 2014 by Loksabha the bill failed to make it to Rajyasabha sighting that the bill still needs more upgrades which also is caught in direct conflict with the Right to Information Act. In 2014, Transparency International (TI) released “Whistle-blower Protection Laws in G20 Countries,” a report detailing the strengths and weaknesses of the countries’ whistle-blower programs. ​ Despite promises the entire group of nations made to strengthen their collective fight against fraud and corruption, the report shows that most have a very long way to go in protecting whistle-blowers sufficiently in the private and public sectors. Even in countries where whistle-blower protections have been legally implemented, the stigma of blowing the whistle can still be severe. Given how interconnected today’s world is, this pressing issue needs to be more effectively addressed. As the report points out, “Whistleblowing is now considered to be among the most effective, if not the most effective means to expose and remedy corruption, fraud and other types of wrongdoing in the public and private sectors.” The best country who has successfully implemented the whistle-blower’s Act is Iceland. After Iceland’s devastating economic crash in 2008, the country’s commitment to rooting out fraud has made it famous for being uniquely whistle-blower-friendly. This shift was bolstered by a strengthened national interest in free speech, anonymity for whistle-blower’s and the transparency of corporations and the government. Many other countries suffered repercussions after the financial crash, but Iceland’s approach to holding the instigators of the crash responsible was especially assertive. Four bank executives were convicted for their role in the rampant financial misconduct that crashed Iceland’s economy. Anti-corruption advocates often look to Iceland as a role model, because the nation has had more success than many others at showcasing whistleblowing as a legally and socially protected right. Whistle-blowers can still be burdened by the stigma that they lack loyalty to their country or company; Iceland’s approach demonstrates whistleblowing as the ultimate act of loyalty. Yes, indeed the way forward for our country with regards to this path sure does look thorny when the current superpower USA as well is facing a ripple effect as far as the whistle-blowers are concerned, but Iceland being a small country in its own should be our silver lining to bring about the upto the mark bill on table and make sure that it is executed with all due respect.

NISHITA PATIL