[SystemSafety] Comparison of Confidential vs Non-Confidential Reporting Systems

[Matthew Squair]

There’s also the risk perception factor in play. Way back when the fledgling comair industry realized that air travel was perceived as being much more risky than travel by car (I think the ratio is around 7 to 1) so they needed to work harder in terms of dropping accident rates. A strong regulator was seen as an essential part of the effort of convincing the public about air safety. There’s some US senate testimony by airlines from the time that they welcomed a regulator and in fact desired the industry to be regulated. 

Matthew Squair

MIEAust, CPEng
Mob: +61 488770655
Email; Mattsquair at gmail.com
Web: http://criticaluncertainties.com

> On 18 Oct 2018, at 1:13 am, Olwen Morgan <olwen at phaedsys.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Oct 17, 2018, at 8:59 AM, Tim Schürmann<tschuerm at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>  wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> One reason might be:
> There is only one "safe state" for aviation: "Not Flying/Moving", while
> other industries have more possible "exits" in case of a safety event.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Back in the mid 1990s I heard that in a telephone exchange serving the City of London financial sector, the Telco found that safety measures (mainly against fire) were most strongly justified not by the potential cost of compensating families for lost loved ones but on account of the huge rate at which revenue was lost in the event of outage.
> 
> Perverse incentives can cut both ways.
> 
> Olwen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The System Safety Mailing List
> systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20181018/27cee368/attachment.html>