Aviation's margin of safety, regulatory capture and FAA Whistleblowers Alliance

Two letters to the editor printed in today's Washington Post reminded me of a meeting I attended in May of the FAA Whistleblowers Alliance. FAA Whistleblowers Alliance meetingOne of today's letters was from the Potomac TRACON local of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. The other letter, by FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt, extolled the virtues of the FAA's Partnership for Safety program which seeks "to encourage employees to speak up when they see a mistake or a safety issue." He adds, "Voluntary reporting is a key element of our safety culture . . .." I am glad that we agree on the need to have employees come forward with safety issues.  I cannot help but think, though, that such programs would be more effective if all federal employees felt secure that they would be protected from retaliation. When federal employee whistleblowers have their cases limited to the Merit System Protection Board (MSPB) which rules in their favor in only 1.7% of the time, they would face a strong incentive to shut up and save their careers. To me, this is a good reason to support the House version of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA), HR 1507, to assure all federal employee whistleblowers that they can have access to our customary legal process of jury trials.

FWA margin of safetyAt the FAA Whistleblowers Alliance meeting, Gabe Bruno (standing in photo) spoke about regulatory capture. It is the phenomenon in which government agencies tend, over time, to align themselves with the industry they are supposed to regulate. He is a former FAA manager, and now an AIR21 expert. He was thinking about the FAA.  I think about MMS and the Gulf oil spill. Gabe Bruno also spoke about the margin of safety. He handed out the chart pictured here (follow this link for a PDF version). The point is that we have aviation regulations to keep every day operations safe, and as far away as possible from the conditions that cause disasters. This is the margin of safety.  Every time anyone violates a regulation, suppresses a maintenance need, or intimidates a whistleblower, we move one step closer to a catastrophe. Our margin of safety gets narrower. When Congress makes whistleblower protection laws stronger, we have a wider margin of safety. People have less fear of retaliation and are more likely to speak up. We might not know when or how, but over time, the wider margin of safety will save lives.  Gabe Bruno also passed out a 2008 letter from the House Transportation Committee that reveals some of the regulatory capture problem at FAA, and two of his letters to the FAA about what that agency can do now to increase our margin of safety.

Peace Warriors visit NWC

I just had a delightful visit this morning from the Peace Warriors.  They are a group of middle and high school students from the Southeast neighborhood of Washington, DC.  They are spending the summer learning about how individuals can make a positive difference through nonviolent action. Today they learned about famous whistleblowers of history, like John Woolman (who blew the whistle on the slave trade) and modern whistleblowers, like Bunny Greenhouse (who blew the whistle on unlawful Halliburton contracts for the Iraq War). They learned how today's whistleblower advocates make their demands for better laws and treatment for whistleblowers, in part by signing up for our Action Alerts. Here are the Peace Warriors at the offices of the National Whistleblowers Center:

Peace Warriors 2010-07-07

Whistleblower Bobby Maxwell tells CNN about slipshod MMS inspections

Last month, CNN's Special Investigations Unit released a story about Bobby Maxwell's experience as an inspector for the U.S. Department of Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS). Deepwater Horizon explosionThe main point of the story is how MMS was infused with a "culture of corruption," and its slipshod inspections missed opportunities to prevent the Deepwater Horizon explosion. The story also mentions that Maxwell is in the fifth year of a whistleblower lawsuit against Kerr-McGee. In that case, Maxwell won a $7.5 million dollar verdict against Kerr-McGee. After a judge threw out the verdict, he appealed. In 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit agreed that Maxwell had a right to pursue his fraud case and reinstated the verdict. No doubt, Maxwell's status as a wistleblower, especially a whistleblower who has won his case, empowered him to speak out about the dangers of MMS' alignment with the oil companies instead of with the environment.  No doubt, Maxwell raised his concerns years ago, but no one was listening until 11 workers lost their lives and the ecology of the Gulf of Mexico was ruined by this disaster. Maxell's story makes obvious how we would all benefit from giving our federal employees strong whistleblower protections. To me, this is the reason why our Senators must scrap the poison pills in their current version of the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA), S. 372, and adopt the strong House version, HR 1507. Follow this link for more information about helping environmental whistleblowers.