As I’ve written before, the failure of the FAA in the Southwest Airlines case and elsewhere seems to stem from a personnel problem. The safety inspection chain of command at the agency ignored and abetted an inspector who was consistently neglecting policies and procedures. This is not an indictment of the FAA’s collaborative approach to maintenance inspection. But at the hearing last week, Jim Oberstar and many others (GOP and Dem) criticized the “cozy” relationship between the airlines and the FAA and called for a return to the adversarial approach to regulation. Stung by congressional criticism, the FAA responded by swinging wildly toward austerity, the biggest example of which is this week’s American Airlines fiasco.
A WSJ editorial today pins the blame for the AA cancellations on Oberstar, whom it says the FAA is kowtowing to: “An industry-wide ‘audit’ commenced, and FAA inspectors set about finding something – anything – awry with an aircraft to show Mr. Oberstar and other Congressional overseers that the agency was up to the job of enforcing federal maintenance requirements to the letter.”
The editorial continues:
Mr. Oberstar and other Democrats in Congress would just as soon do to the Food and Drug Administration and the Consumer Product and Safety Commission and other “consumer protection” agencies exactly what they’ve managed to do to the FAA inside of a month’s time. . . .
The FAA fiasco gives us a glimpse of what the world would look like under this reregulatory assault. It would mean that every business misstep, no matter how rare, could potentially result in industry-wide repercussions. Congress would call for more rules and greater enforcement, in the name of “safety.” And regulatory agencies would respond with overkill. The cost of doing business would rise, and consumers would pay for it in higher prices, less convenience or both.
Whether any of this would in fact produce safer toys or food or medicines is beside the point for lawmakers like Mr. Oberstar, whose real goal is to augment Washington’s power vis-a-vis industry. But it’s worth noting that in the case of air travel, safety gains have accompanied less regulation, not more.
We don’t need to change the way the FAA inspects aircraft. We need to change its circle-the-wagons culture and to root out personnel problems. A single Douglas Gawadzinski, left unchallenged, erodes institutional effectiveness. He and his supervisors should be dealt with, all the way up to top safety honcho Nick Sabatini. At the House hearing, Sabatini took “responsibility” for the FAA’s safety lapses. If he means that, he should probably resign. His successor should work not on public appeasement gestures (after this week of cancellations, I suspect the flying public has had it up to here with “safety”) but on sound personnel management.
Evan Sparks's Aviation Policy Blog 
I totally agree with you Evan. An adversarial relationship will just make matters worse and cover up the real problems with the FAA. The system will slowly grind to a halt and there will be more bankrupty’s in aviation. I expect many aviation companies will look at the option of relocating outside the US, ie Canada.
The problem is personnel (at high levels) and an entrenched culture of cronyism and cover-ups. Even with efforts at being more “customer centric” nothing has really changed. That was just fluff for the politicians.
I’m am reposting my response to your April 3 article here for better visibility.
———–
The FAA has far-reaching influence in other agencies. This in part due to the “cross-pollination” of high level officials leaving the NTSB to work for the FAA and visa versa. [I expect the same occurs with other agencies and private companies as shown in the SW case.] Unfortunately, this situation has lead to the FAA influencing NTSB reports in an effort to cover up mistakes, etc. The NTSB has been a willing partner in altering facts and covering up problems. Again, the local NTSB officials try to do the right thing, but reports and facts are altered by high level officials in Washington.
An internal report was done by the FAA/NTSB which showed 30% of GA accident (NTSB) reports are incorrect. I would expect these stats are due to sloppy/inexperienced investigators in many cases and in others, where it was shown a goverment employee was at fault, a cover-up was instituted. Incorrect reports have dire consequenses on families, companies and interested parties. Of course, this report is internal only and will probably never see the light of day!
As usually occurs, the cover-up effort is much worse than the original offense. I am hoping some of these issues will be investigated and reviewed by hearings and the media.
Again, another reason to disband the FAA and start over.
————–
As much as I like to take shots at the airline Evan – sorry, but they just give us so much ammunition – this week’s chaos at American was caused by FAA over reaction.
They needed to cover their tails so that airline passengers and the Congress will think they are doing something.
Sabatini leaving might sooth a few feathers, but it doesn’t change much unfortunately.
The NYT yesterday endorsed Bobby Sturgell to be administrator which would only continue the process of clueless people at the top.
FAA issues are symptomatic of a government that no longer works.
And no one in Congress seems to know where to turn next for answers that will fix a deeply flawed system. It’s almost as if the frenzied personal pace we’ve all been keeping the past decade or two is beginning to catch up with us.
Rob Mark