The Consequences of Ignoring the Value of Aviation Training | A Costly Mistake

A friend once told me that his boss categorized aviation training into two types: those that ADDED VALUE and those that DID NOT CONTRIBUTE to the organization's financial goals.

One day, he shared that his boss refused to give him a raise because he was teaching the SMS (Safety Management System) course, which was classified as one that DID NOT ADD VALUE.

My friend decided to quit, and the company fell into chaos since that training, both initial and recurrent, was MANDATORY.

As these courses were compulsory, they were required by both the organization’s clients and the country's aviation authority, in compliance with the standards outlined in ANNEX 19.

Years later, I reconnected with my friend and asked if he ever found out how the company handled the situation after his departure. He told me that the company had outsourced the training to an EXTERNAL PROVIDER so that the operational staff could comply with all regulatory requirements from both the authority and the clients.

Moreover, he said he spoke with his former boss, who had been fired because his approach was not accepted by his superiors. The decisions he made, based on his philosophy of dividing training into those that ADDED VALUE and those that DID NOT, led the company to end up paying LARGE sums of money.

In conclusion, if a country’s aviation authority mandates compliance with a training program, IT MUST BE FOLLOWED as stipulated.

Although some of the regulatory requirements may seem BASIC, they are actually minimum yet essential.

Ultimately, one must be very cautious when forming opinions about what one DOES NOT KNOW. Sometimes, people know something about the subject but express a different opinion for reasons of CONVENIENCE.

Convenience is another matter that not everyone is prepared to deal with.

Thank you for reading until the end. I hope you found this helpful.

Special thanks:

This article was submitted by Mr. Elvoz Ero.